People need to understand that the stuff like meditation that's popular right now and gets taught is just a very small subset of Buddhist practice. Real Buddhist teachings go much further. Same for yoga. Yoga is meant to be a way of life but what most Westerners see is just a form of aerobics with a few spiritual words sprinkled in.
Ironically, the biggest evidence of this here might be the idea that the ego should be kept as small as possible. Whether or not it's a real thing, it still needs maintenance (arguably a huge benefit of meditation), and there's probably a healthy size (though I hate this spatial metaphor; people are far more complex than that).
> When students were evaluated in the hour after their yoga class, they showed significantly higher self-enhancement, according to all three measures, than when they hadn’t done yoga in the previous 24 hours.
I wonder, is this what ego means in Buddhism? Also, is this what ego historically meant in Buddhism? For a long time, people in Buddhist communities would call you crazy if you meditate. Having followed one theological course on Buddhism at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, I am convinced that whenever you study meditation, you need a theologian specialized in Buddhism next to you in order to see if you're comparing the same constructs.
I also wonder if only meditation is supposed to have an effect on diminishing the ego, according to Buddhism. Buddhism in general is much more than only meditation. It's probably analogous to teaching people to pray and through prayer they'll figure out the 10 commandments. The result is interesting in the sense of how meditation affects someone from a western culture (someone like me). But it is dangerous to imply that this applies to Buddhism. They could've easily circumvented that by putting the scientific terms in the title.
Even if yoga or meditation had diminished your ego (whatever you choose it to mean), would that make you less likely to answer affirmatively to a statement like, "Compared to the average, I'm relatively free from bias"? If you really were selfless, wouldn't you always answer "yes"? Or would you answer "no" because "the average" has no meaning once you realize oneness with everything? I'm not convinced it's a useful measure.
There may be other better questions on the inventory, but that's the example given in the article. I also noted that they didn't mention practitioners having scored higher on narcissism, but only on "self-enhancement". (I haven't read the actual study, so this could all just be bad reporting.)
The Onion nailed the West's current interest in yoga twenty years ago[0], and it's only gotten worse. It's amazing how much money you can make as long as you divorce religion and spirituality from a practice optimized over a thousand years by religious and spiritual experts. Sort of like having an amazing search light but not the slightest idea where to point it or what we are searching for would look like.
I'm not really interested in buddhism, but have practiced meditation. I have to say meditation itself brings a great calmness, especially for my anxiety, and I was quite skeptical when it was recommended.
I think meditation should be examined outside of the scope of eastern mysticism, it need not be associated with it.
The methodology seems strange. Questionnaires were compared based on whether yoga students had just done yoga, vs not in 24 hours (but presumably do yoga regularly). So essentially, there's a statistically significant correlation with time from last session, but it doesn't say anything about correlation with frequency of sessions.
And as usual, correlation is not causation. Was there a control group with another physical activity? Reading? Solving Sudoku puzzles? One could also postulate a perfectly reasonable-sounding theory that people's egos get bigger with any activity where there's a surge in endorphins, regardless of whether that activity is yoga or not.
There is a big difference between ego and narcissism.
Many people have low self-esteem, which means that they are constantly doubting themselves, feeling less worthy than others, feeling destined for failure, feeling too timid to take reasonable risks, etc.
Meditation helps to restore correct ego functioning in humans, creating a balanced perspective where the self can thrive and does not inflict self-harm by allowing impulses of self doubt and fear to hijack a person's productive effort.
The idea that selfless humans are simply humans with very low self esteem is absurd, and this article suggests that the two are equivalent.
Humans who possess the virtuous quality of being good team players and contributors to society are quite likely very good at goal directed behavior and do not wallow in the emotions of self-inferiority and fearfulness that low self-esteem individuals do.
Think about the stereotypical low self esteem douche who goes around insulting others to make himself feel better. That person is not a model of selflessness and virtue. It takes a deep well of inner confidence and belief in the value of one's own worth to be mentally strong and courageous enough to stand up to injustice or ridicule and to make the world a better place.
The issue of self esteem is confounded by millennia of religious dogma that tells people that "selflessness" is virtuous, when in fact quite the opposite is true. Virtue comes from the channeling of one's desire and one's life force toward noble ends, not by suppressing one's confidence and simply letting others (such as religious or political leaders) tell us that we are worthless and that they know what is best for us.
>The issue of self esteem is confounded by millennia of religious dogma that tells people that "selflessness" is virtuous, when in fact quite the opposite is true. Virtue comes from the channeling of one's desire and one's life force toward noble ends, not by suppressing one's confidence and simply letting others (such as religious or political leaders) tell us that we are worthless and that they know what is best for us.
This mode of thinking is echoed in some Stoicism books I've read. Both "Meditations", and "A guide to the good life" include similar entries.
I really enjoy seeing the parallels between western(?) Meditation/mindfulness practice, and Stoicism. I do believe the meditation we predominantly practice in the west is at least slightly different from the more traditional eastern Buddhist meditation practice. But I do believe that is to be expected, the cultures are fairly different so the adaptation process was bound to create some offshoots.
There was a submission a while ago[0] that I believe does a great job of summarizing some of the cultural changes that meditation practice went through in the west, and how it contrasts to the more traditional eastern practice.
Yea, I found this positioning odd too. Many people in my life could use some more, err, self love and maintenance. This is hard to balance right, but that's something meditation would help with massively.
"To advance this perspective, millions of people around the world practice yoga and meditation."
I don't think this is true though. I don't think most people who aren't Buddhist do Yoga for renouncing the material world, but just for getting in shape and perhaps relaxing. I think the premise here is wrong.
Totally agree. I had to stop reading after reading:
"These findings suggest that spiritual Buddhist practices like yoga and meditation may not do what proponents typically say they do"
I think comparing yoga/mediation in the context of our current society versus how a Buddhist practices is very apples and oranges.
The data is fascinating, but the conclusion that this is somehow apposed to Buddhism is just absurd. A healthy sense of self worth does not stand in the way of eliminating the view of a separate, persistent self for the betterment of all beings.
I think many here are mistaken that yoga/meditation are of Buddhist origins. They are in fact of Hindu origin.
Yoga mainly focuses on 1. Exercises that stimulate the base of the spine, and 2. Breathing technics. If you imagine the brain as a flower and the spine as a stalk/root; a flower needs stimulation at the root for it to blossom. The focus on breathing is to get more oxygen to the brain. Combinedly these two help improve the potential of your brain.
Yoga does not necessarily make you a good person. It just enhances the knowledge/potential of your brain. You can use that advanced knowledge to become a good person or a bad person.
This immediately reminded me of Chögyam Trungpa's book "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism".
Wikipedia: "He uses the term [Spiritual Materialism] to describe mistakes spiritual seekers commit which turn the pursuit of spirituality into an ego building and confusion creating endeavor, based on the idea that ego development is counter to spiritual progress." [1]
Very interesting read, a good friend of mine gave it to me early on in my path on meditation. I think it's really a necessity for anyone seeking deeper meaning beyond using yoga & meditations as an ego pursuit.
>> Though yoga and meditation were originally intended as ways to calm the ego, many non-Buddhist practitioners do these activities with an eye to self-improvement or calming personal anxieties.
I have noticed meditation being pitched more and more as a self-help/productivity tool/cure all for a range of issues. Is the main difference between 'traditional' (for lack of a better word) and Western meditation just the motive behind it, or is there something else Westerners are missing?
Every major religion has some kind of meditative tradition, but the vast majority of people in all religions don't perform "meditation" in the Western sense. Even Buddhists, the vast majority do NOT practice meditation, it's only certain sub-groups that have developed various kinds of meditation practices that are commonly used in the West today. We think, for instance, of insight meditation, loving-kindness, body-scanning, and such techniques in the West.
To study these in India, Vietnam, Nepal, or elsewhere, you'd likely receive a lot of learning from the reading of texts, ancient or more recent, which is not as widely received by Westerners in today's meditation craze. Go to the Apple Store, you'll see over a dozen meditation apps, though I doubt any would explain jhana or the four-noble truths of Buddhism. Yet, here or abroad, most people will not know those ancient texts or the techniques you've been practicing for months on end.
I don't think westerners are missing anything, at least not anything more than people who live in places where Buddhism is typically practiced. I'm western, I live in Thailand, I'm a meditator, and I often feel like some Buddhist scholar compared to Thai people. I think many people feel Buddhism is sort of re-blooming in the west, of course with its own style. There are a bunch of highly respected western monks now, even in the Thai forest tradition.
I think it's just easy to get confused about this stuff. There's the goal, there's how the goal is supposed to be accomplished, there's what you actually do every day, and there are various related practices. It's easy to get confused and think that the things that are happening are the point, like that calming down is the point, or that rapture is the point, or even that bowing to monks a certain way or donating things to the temple is the point.
The reality, at-least for me is that it is a productivity tool. After meditation, I just do things I normally would procrastinate on like its not a big deal. Chores don't seem like chores etc.
I wonder if doing any form of work or exercise would increase someone's ego...?
I've been performing an experiment the last two years were I don't really do anything outside of work. I just sit on the couch being a fat piece of shit. No exercise. No Yoga. No mediation. I think it has helped me keep my ego under control, and foster a healthy amount of self hatred.
This is actually an interesting subject. There is a Dao "master" who chiefs a temple in California and he wrote his dissertation on how meditation is actually bad for you. I believe he is featured on the "What's this dao all about" podcast but he doesn't go too far into the subject there.
Why is this surprising? Any spiritual practice is a way to better ones "self". My yogi friend put it well: the difference is with yoga and meditation the goal is to get rid of things, while in "the west" we generally associate happiness with having more things.
It's surprising because 'selflessness' and thinking highly of oneself are a somewhat inconsistent.
I wish I had the source for this but I read somewhere the first obstacle to the path of enlightenment is the self righteousness of the aspirant ... i.e. as soon as someone starts learning higher truths, their sense of ego expands, which is kind of the opposite of the point.
This is like saying working out and gyms make the 'ego bigger'. Maybe those who want to 'improve themselves', be fit may already have bigger egos and a self focus to start with. A study on gym goers would produce identical maybe worse results.
Sweeping assumptions on large groups and immeasurable concepts like ego are rarely credible because you will never have the kind of data to justify any blanket claims.
This seems more like a 'fetishisation' of the other based on a lack of understanding, and often there is no desire to understand, just label and dismiss. Why would anyone even do a study like this?
Western "Buddhism" is totally messed up, and you can see this from the strange behaviors of its practitioners. The majority of Buddhists in the West aren't a part of a community with a living Buddhist tradition, and they don't read or write in a language that has evolved with the particularities of the Buddhist religions. American Buddhists, in particular, don't have an idea of "initiation," "dharma transmission," and "religious community" which are so important to the Buddhist practitioners in Asia. It makes complete sense that this type of meditation doesn't work well.
I am not familiar with the Pali or Hindi languages, but, for example, in Chinese, there are over 20 words that all mean "karma", and the language has taken on many loanwords and native associations as a result of Buddhist influence. In the West, this type of transformation was brought forward by Christianity, not from Buddhism. When you read a Buddhist sutra translated into English, you get six-syllable Latinate constructions that sound more like a neuroscience paper than a living religion, such as "contingently-originated phenomenon", which is actually just two syllables in Chinese. I am sure that there's even more ingrained Buddhist ideas if you are a native Pali speaker.
I've come to believe that community practice of a thing isn't necessarily any better. For example, Buddhism is the dominant tradition in Myanmar. But that didn't stop the burning of hundreds of Rohingya villages.
Meh... China has a living Buddhist tradition, and I've hardly ever seen anyone meditate at all – mostly people seem to approach is as a karmic quid-pro-quo to bring themselves good fortune and avoid illness. I'm not sure that's really a superior version of Buddhism.
It starts with the unbelievably blunt (and imo, true): "the self is an illusion." Then is proceeds to go on about how this illusion can be either magnified or diminished by doing certain things!
What!? How can something that doesn't exist be manipulated?
I know "I'm" being a bit dense on purpose here, but really!
Orthodox Christianity has a very rich contemplative history. In particular, understanding concepts like the nous do quite a bit to illuminate our more modern idea of ego and the false dialectic of big vs. small / null ego.
So if meditation and yoga don't help the average person in this way, perhaps we need to change the meaning of MAGA to Make Acid Great Again. LSD induced ego death could be our new national high school graduation ritual.
[+] [-] maxxxxx|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drb91|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sp332|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JackFr|7 years ago|reply
https://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/iyengar-inventio...
[+] [-] nyolfen|7 years ago|reply
https://vividness.live/2015/09/23/buddhist-ethics-is-a-fraud...
especially this one:
https://vividness.live/2015/10/05/buddhist-ethics-is-adverti...
[+] [-] madeuptempacct|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] mettamage|7 years ago|reply
I wonder, is this what ego means in Buddhism? Also, is this what ego historically meant in Buddhism? For a long time, people in Buddhist communities would call you crazy if you meditate. Having followed one theological course on Buddhism at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, I am convinced that whenever you study meditation, you need a theologian specialized in Buddhism next to you in order to see if you're comparing the same constructs.
I also wonder if only meditation is supposed to have an effect on diminishing the ego, according to Buddhism. Buddhism in general is much more than only meditation. It's probably analogous to teaching people to pray and through prayer they'll figure out the 10 commandments. The result is interesting in the sense of how meditation affects someone from a western culture (someone like me). But it is dangerous to imply that this applies to Buddhism. They could've easily circumvented that by putting the scientific terms in the title.
[+] [-] calt|7 years ago|reply
That's the correct question to ask, and the short answer is "no."
Non-self means that there is no sperate, unchanging self. You are a constantly changing phenomenon that has arisen due to causality.
You can see how the two might be correlated, but it's loose at best.
[+] [-] rfugger|7 years ago|reply
There may be other better questions on the inventory, but that's the example given in the article. I also noted that they didn't mention practitioners having scored higher on narcissism, but only on "self-enhancement". (I haven't read the actual study, so this could all just be bad reporting.)
[+] [-] tacon|7 years ago|reply
[0] https://www.theonion.com/monk-gloats-over-yoga-championship-...
[+] [-] d0lph|7 years ago|reply
I think meditation should be examined outside of the scope of eastern mysticism, it need not be associated with it.
[+] [-] lhorie|7 years ago|reply
And as usual, correlation is not causation. Was there a control group with another physical activity? Reading? Solving Sudoku puzzles? One could also postulate a perfectly reasonable-sounding theory that people's egos get bigger with any activity where there's a surge in endorphins, regardless of whether that activity is yoga or not.
[+] [-] theredking|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] olfactory|7 years ago|reply
Many people have low self-esteem, which means that they are constantly doubting themselves, feeling less worthy than others, feeling destined for failure, feeling too timid to take reasonable risks, etc.
Meditation helps to restore correct ego functioning in humans, creating a balanced perspective where the self can thrive and does not inflict self-harm by allowing impulses of self doubt and fear to hijack a person's productive effort.
The idea that selfless humans are simply humans with very low self esteem is absurd, and this article suggests that the two are equivalent.
Humans who possess the virtuous quality of being good team players and contributors to society are quite likely very good at goal directed behavior and do not wallow in the emotions of self-inferiority and fearfulness that low self-esteem individuals do.
Think about the stereotypical low self esteem douche who goes around insulting others to make himself feel better. That person is not a model of selflessness and virtue. It takes a deep well of inner confidence and belief in the value of one's own worth to be mentally strong and courageous enough to stand up to injustice or ridicule and to make the world a better place.
The issue of self esteem is confounded by millennia of religious dogma that tells people that "selflessness" is virtuous, when in fact quite the opposite is true. Virtue comes from the channeling of one's desire and one's life force toward noble ends, not by suppressing one's confidence and simply letting others (such as religious or political leaders) tell us that we are worthless and that they know what is best for us.
[+] [-] Zyst|7 years ago|reply
This mode of thinking is echoed in some Stoicism books I've read. Both "Meditations", and "A guide to the good life" include similar entries.
I really enjoy seeing the parallels between western(?) Meditation/mindfulness practice, and Stoicism. I do believe the meditation we predominantly practice in the west is at least slightly different from the more traditional eastern Buddhist meditation practice. But I do believe that is to be expected, the cultures are fairly different so the adaptation process was bound to create some offshoots.
There was a submission a while ago[0] that I believe does a great job of summarizing some of the cultural changes that meditation practice went through in the west, and how it contrasts to the more traditional eastern practice.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16891276
[+] [-] drb91|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] spinach|7 years ago|reply
I don't think this is true though. I don't think most people who aren't Buddhist do Yoga for renouncing the material world, but just for getting in shape and perhaps relaxing. I think the premise here is wrong.
[+] [-] KennyCason|7 years ago|reply
I think comparing yoga/mediation in the context of our current society versus how a Buddhist practices is very apples and oranges.
[+] [-] checker659|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 131012|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] poisonarena|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] calt|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sessy|7 years ago|reply
Yoga mainly focuses on 1. Exercises that stimulate the base of the spine, and 2. Breathing technics. If you imagine the brain as a flower and the spine as a stalk/root; a flower needs stimulation at the root for it to blossom. The focus on breathing is to get more oxygen to the brain. Combinedly these two help improve the potential of your brain.
Yoga does not necessarily make you a good person. It just enhances the knowledge/potential of your brain. You can use that advanced knowledge to become a good person or a bad person.
[+] [-] cypherpunks01|7 years ago|reply
Wikipedia: "He uses the term [Spiritual Materialism] to describe mistakes spiritual seekers commit which turn the pursuit of spirituality into an ego building and confusion creating endeavor, based on the idea that ego development is counter to spiritual progress." [1]
Very interesting read, a good friend of mine gave it to me early on in my path on meditation. I think it's really a necessity for anyone seeking deeper meaning beyond using yoga & meditations as an ego pursuit.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutting_Through_Spiritual_Mate...
[+] [-] sertsa|7 years ago|reply
While anecdotal, my experience with interacting with most western followers of "eastern" practices is that they just use them to feed their egos.
[+] [-] protonimitate|7 years ago|reply
I have noticed meditation being pitched more and more as a self-help/productivity tool/cure all for a range of issues. Is the main difference between 'traditional' (for lack of a better word) and Western meditation just the motive behind it, or is there something else Westerners are missing?
[+] [-] WhompingWindows|7 years ago|reply
To study these in India, Vietnam, Nepal, or elsewhere, you'd likely receive a lot of learning from the reading of texts, ancient or more recent, which is not as widely received by Westerners in today's meditation craze. Go to the Apple Store, you'll see over a dozen meditation apps, though I doubt any would explain jhana or the four-noble truths of Buddhism. Yet, here or abroad, most people will not know those ancient texts or the techniques you've been practicing for months on end.
[+] [-] b6|7 years ago|reply
I think it's just easy to get confused about this stuff. There's the goal, there's how the goal is supposed to be accomplished, there's what you actually do every day, and there are various related practices. It's easy to get confused and think that the things that are happening are the point, like that calming down is the point, or that rapture is the point, or even that bowing to monks a certain way or donating things to the temple is the point.
[+] [-] redmaverick|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ghostbrainalpha|7 years ago|reply
I've been performing an experiment the last two years were I don't really do anything outside of work. I just sit on the couch being a fat piece of shit. No exercise. No Yoga. No mediation. I think it has helped me keep my ego under control, and foster a healthy amount of self hatred.
[+] [-] bytematic|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tinbad|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sonnyblarney|7 years ago|reply
I wish I had the source for this but I read somewhere the first obstacle to the path of enlightenment is the self righteousness of the aspirant ... i.e. as soon as someone starts learning higher truths, their sense of ego expands, which is kind of the opposite of the point.
[+] [-] throw2016|7 years ago|reply
Sweeping assumptions on large groups and immeasurable concepts like ego are rarely credible because you will never have the kind of data to justify any blanket claims.
This seems more like a 'fetishisation' of the other based on a lack of understanding, and often there is no desire to understand, just label and dismiss. Why would anyone even do a study like this?
[+] [-] jdtang13|7 years ago|reply
I am not familiar with the Pali or Hindi languages, but, for example, in Chinese, there are over 20 words that all mean "karma", and the language has taken on many loanwords and native associations as a result of Buddhist influence. In the West, this type of transformation was brought forward by Christianity, not from Buddhism. When you read a Buddhist sutra translated into English, you get six-syllable Latinate constructions that sound more like a neuroscience paper than a living religion, such as "contingently-originated phenomenon", which is actually just two syllables in Chinese. I am sure that there's even more ingrained Buddhist ideas if you are a native Pali speaker.
[+] [-] stretchwithme|7 years ago|reply
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2017/0928/Is-Rohingya...
[+] [-] girzel|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eludwig|7 years ago|reply
It starts with the unbelievably blunt (and imo, true): "the self is an illusion." Then is proceeds to go on about how this illusion can be either magnified or diminished by doing certain things!
What!? How can something that doesn't exist be manipulated?
I know "I'm" being a bit dense on purpose here, but really!
[+] [-] throwaway080383|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drb91|7 years ago|reply
It is a trash article, though.
[+] [-] pera|7 years ago|reply
https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/420273/2/online_supplement.pdf
Did they practice some other form of physical activity?
[+] [-] rgrieselhuber|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aesclepius|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jrs95|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dick_sucker2|7 years ago|reply