John,

Thanks for the response (in which I find some really pithy and interesting points).  That is a pretty good article you linked as well.

Here are a few random thoughts:

Regarding dissociation and meditation:

In the linked article, she lists the following definition of dissociation:  ‘In psychology, a defense mechanism in which a group of memories or mental processes are separated from the rest of a person's mental processes to avoid emotional distress.’ 

At first glance, this definition might seem to be almost synonymous with the word ‘meditation’.

But since meditation is such a general word, and only for the sake of the rest of this conversation, please let me use the word  ‘meditation’ in the following specific way:  ‘The solitary practice of sitting quietly, with inward focus that allows one’s awareness to transcend the everyday waking state experiences of the five senses (that link us to the exterior phenomenological world outside), internal senses and feedback (conditions, appetites and needs), cognitive activity (largely imagination, recollection and conceptualization) and emotions (both acquired as responses to cognitive structures and hard-wired).’

My ‘definition’ of meditation clearly resonates with ‘dissociation’ in that memories and mental processes are separated from the rest of the mental processes to avoid emotional distress.  And it seems that a certain amount of dissociation has done me great good in the past, allowing me to put aside limiting mental processes and fixation on memories (at least temporarily), thereby allowing new experiences and processes.  But then you get up from meditation and proceed with life’s activities.  My own experience with meditation is that the disagreeable memories and ‘mental processes’ were not wiped out, but put in abeyance during meditation.  New processes and perspectives developed, which tended to ‘transcend but include’ the more limited ones and more complete internal operational systems come into being.  Memories weren’t lost but processes clearly changed.

Also, my experience with meditation is that it entails sort of a ’boring’ into the subterranean layers of the subconscious and some very unpleasant experiences can come up.  Not for the faint of heart.  Meditation can brutally reveal some vicious psychological shit that can be disconcerting as it passes through the system.  The important thing is to let is pass through.  But in my own experience, this phenomenon diminishes and gets worked through with continued practice combined with discrimination.  I experience my own meditation practice as an evolving and deepening proccess.

But if someone takes up a legitimate and long-term practice of meditation and expects only happy, warm and fuzzy…. look out.  Also, I don’t view meditation as a panacea for all ills or to take the place of therapy or any form of personal growth.

I’ll take your comment about the ‘Mahatmas’ not being trained in psychiatry one step further; some were certifiable nutcases and if outside of the Maharaji shelter and still in America, would probably have been locked up.  I personally cared for some of these guys during my tenure (and could write a book on the subject).

The whole Knowledge deal is set up and kept in place in a manner that breeds dependency and limits personal growth in many directions, not to mention that it is founded on a lie.

Regarding the ‘verification’ of subjective experience:

I’ve got to get to work now, but I’ll say that I am not sure that subjective experience of the internal truth type (better difinition required) ever gets verified in the way we think it should.  What can be ‘verified’ seems to be what truth / reality / essence is not. 

And for something to be verified there has to be an object and a subject to verify the object.   I think that at the core is the subject (ourselves) is pure, essential awareness, and in the case of awareness, how would it verify itself???  I am not saying that it can’t, but is a pretty good riddle.

‘All-knowingness’ is way over my head, dog.

See you later,