Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Meditation’

There is a simple technique, a part of Yoga, which can be used as a stress busting technique and to add positively to our overall happiness.

This is called the `Sukha Pranayama’. Sukha means happiness, pranayama means control of Prana. Prana is an esoteric concept of Hinduism, for now we can take it to mean control of breath.
So Sukha Pranayama means the exercise of controlling our breath which gives us happiness.

It is really very simple. We can do this at any time and place, any number of times we wish to do during the day.

It consists of sitting up straight so that our back is very straight. Preferably we should sit in the Padmasana posture, a Yoga pose which is actually quite simple and consists more or less of a cross legged sitting position. We can sit in this way, but it doesnt matter if we are sitting in a chair in the office or lying down in the bed. This is not a strenuous exercise and any posture will do, the only essential is that our back should be straight. This is considered necessary for the flow of `Prana’ along our spine.

We then breathe in slowly in and out. We should draw the breath in first as slowly and evenly as we can. There is no need to put stress on ourselves by drawing it too long, this is not a test. We should just try to be comfortable. After drawing it in, we then expire in the same way, slowly and evenly.

The main point of interest is not the breathing in or out but the gap in between the two breaths. This period is called `Kumbhaka’ and it is very important for Pranayama, in fact this is the most important period in Pranayama. The aim is to prolong this period between the two breaths.

In Hindu logic and Yoga, it is always the gap between two opposite movements which is the most important, such as the gap between the night and the day. Such moments are considered to be very `still’ movements, and hence the closest to the Absolute. Thus the dawn and the evening are considered to be the most conducive for Yoga.

In breathing, it is the Kumbhaka which is considered the most important. As our breaths become slow and even, the kumbhaka also will become prolonged, but we should not exert ourselves over this and try to prolong it artificially. The movement at all times should be natural.

Our mental state during this Kumbhaka is the vital part of Sukha Pranayama. The aim is to put ourselves into a happy state during this moment, as it is the calmest moment in our movements.
To do this, we are encouraged to think of anything which makes us happy. For Bhakti yogis, this would mean thinking about God and the love of God. But by no means is it confined to this. We can think of anything which makes us happy – some time spent with our family, watching the sunset at the beach, a particular song or piece of music, etc. It could even be a risque joke. It does not matter what it is as long as it is something which gives us happiness.
Filling our minds with this happy thought, we then gently let out our breaths.

This is all there is. We need to repeat this as many times as possible, as often as possible. The time and place does not matter. Any time is a good time for at least one exercise of Sukha Pranayama.

This simple exercise is enough to radically transform our lives. We will find our minds getting lighter and happier, and we will be more easily able to bear the griefs and worries of life in the world. This exercise should form an important part of our arsenal to tackle the world.

~

P,J,Mazumdar is the author of “The Circle of Fire”, a book on Advaita Vedanta and Yoga.

To read further on Advaita Vedanta philosophy, please go here for an overview of the basic principles and logic of Advaita:

-> Advaita Philosophy

To read more articles on various aspects of Hinduism, Enlightenment, Upanishads, etc. from the website thecircleoffire.com, please click here:

-> Advaita Vedanta Yoga

You can look up the book on Amazon here: The Circle of Fire.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Work for work’s sake

Another important teaching of Hinduism is Karma Yoga. Karma Yoga is a guide to a way of living life and has a whole philosophy and structure beyond it.

But its most important teaching can be summarised and followed without worrying about the whole aspect of this path.

This teaching is: work for work’s sake, ie, while working, pay attention to the work itself and not to the results that it may bring about.

This is a very important lesson. When doing something, we are usually not concentrating on our work itself. Our minds wander off, or we may be thinking of the results of the work that we do.

But, Karma Yoga says, we can only be sure of the work that we do and not of the results. There are an infinite number of factors that can affect the results of our work, so that we can never be sure of the results. The results are not in our hand.

Therefore it teaches us not to think of the results. At any time we should be thinking only of what exactly we are doing at that moment and of nothing else. The action that we are doing may be something like our professional work, our studies, etc. or it may be simple household work, or something like eating or taking a shower.

Whatever the work is, karma yoga says that we should be paying attention only to the work that we are doing. This is specially important when we are doing something critical.

By paying attention to the work itself, we can be assured that we will do the best work possible under the circumstances. When our concentration is on the work itself (more…)

Read Full Post »

Meditating on Beauty

Another way to attain inner peace and fulfillment, in Hinduism, is to meditate on beauty.

Satyam-Shivam-Sundaram, is a Hindu saying. It means, the Truth is Shiva, and Shiva is beauty. In our appreciation of beauty, we can find the highest truth.

Meditating on something beautiful is an important meditation used by many Raja Yogis in their search for truth. Thus they would meditate on a crystal, precious stone. This was a quite common form of meditation. Or sometimes it might be just a simple intricately shaped stone picked up from a stream.

Swami Vivekananda recounts meeting a sage who resided besides a grand waterfall, and from dawn to dusk would gaze on the waterfall saying, ‘ how beautiful! how wonderful!’ This was his meditation.

Now meditating in search of the ultimate truth may not be possible for all of us as we would hardly be able to make all the sacrifices required for this.

Yet we can achieve something at least of the inner fulfillment that can be achieved by such meditation. For this we just need to learn to appreciate beauty.

This beauty is all around us. It is around us in the flowers, in the trees, in  paintings and sculptures. Even the commercially made knick knacks we keep in our drawing rooms have a whole story to tell of beauty.

The secret is to meditate on this beauty. Meditation is nothing but thinking, when we think intensely and continuously of something, that itself is meditation.  When we recieve a bouquet of flowers, we say, ‘how beautiful!’, then put it in a vase and forget about it.

But we can easily turn this into a meditation on beauty. Every single flower is beautiful, and the secret of its beauty is locked up within it. We can take up a single flower and gaze on it, and examine each of its intricate parts, noting the beauty inherent in every part. This itself is meditation. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Sukha Pranayama

There is another simple technique, a part of Yoga, which can be used as a stress busting technique and to add positively to our overall happiness.

This is called the ‘Sukha Pranayama’. Sukha means happiness, pranayama means control of Prana. Prana is an esoteric concept of Hinduism, for now we can take it to mean control of breath.

So Sukha Pranayama means the exercise of controlling our breath which gives us happiness.

It is really very simple. We can do this at any time and place, any number of times we wish to do during the day.

It consists of sitting up straight so that our back is very straight. Preferably we should sit in the Padmasana posture, a Yoga pose which is actually quite simple and consists more or less of a cross legged sitting position. We can sit in this way, but it doesnt matter if we are sitting in a chair in the office or lying down in the bed. This is not a strenuous exercise and any posture will do, the only essential is that our back should be straight. This is considered necessary for the flow of ‘Prana’ along our spine.

We then breathe in slowly in and out. We should draw the breath in first as slowly and evenly as we can. There is no need to put stress on ourselves by drawing it too long, this is not a test. We should just try to be comfortable. After drawing it in, we then expire in the same way, slowly and evenly.

The main point of interest is not the breathing in or out but the gap in between the two breaths. This period is called ‘Kumbhaka’ and it is very important for Pranayama, in fact this is the most important period in Pranayama. The aim is to prolong this period between the two breaths.

In Hindu logic and Yoga, it is always the gap between two opposite movements which is the most important, such as the gap between the night and the day. Such moments are considered to be very ‘still’ movements, and (more…)

Read Full Post »

In trying to form a metaphysical explanation for the world, we can argue through these four steps which lead ultimately to the Advaita Vedanta conception of god.

1. The world is a non-absolute or relative reality.

2. There is an absolute principle which exists beyond the world.

3. This absolute principle also forms the basis for existence of the individual consciousness.

4. The individual consciousness can ‘touch’ this absolute consciousness for a mystical experience.

4 Steps to Brahman

4 steps to God/Brahman/Absolute

1. The world is a non-absolute or relative reality.

This is something which is pointed at by quantum mechanics, relativity, etc. which all show that the world does not have an absolute reality. Of course, this has also been argued quite effectively by Advaita Vedanta and also western philosophers like Hume. Advaita Vedanta has always said that the world is only relatively real. This was considered a play of words by other philosophers or something which was too high to understand. But now modern science through Quantum Physics and Relativity has said exactly the same thing.

Because science has proven this step of logic of Advaita Vedanta, there is often a tendency to say that science has proven Advaita Vedanta in total. But I would not like to claim this. In my view, it is only this first step that has been proven till now by science, the further steps of Advaita Vedanta philosophy are something which science has not gone into as yet, although we can hope that perhaps this too will happen someday.

2. There is an Absolute Existence beyond this worldly existence.

Let us take an example. Take a candle which burns from wax and dissipates into smoke and heat. Now as the candle changes its form, we know that there was one thing which was constant, it was the matter in the form of molecules and energy. It was this matter-energy which was initially in the form of a candle, later in the form of dissolved wax, smoke and flame and finally dissolved altogether into the air as smoke. So in this, it was matter-energy which was the constant, the absolute reality behind the ‘fuzzy’ reality of the candle. I am using the word ‘fuzzy’ here to show the non-absolute reality of the candle, in that it can change its form and disappear.

Now, we know from physics that matter and energy are two ends of the same spectrum of existence, they are like two sides of the same coin. They are equivalent, and this equivalence is determined by E=MC2. So this suggests that there must be something which is common to both. Now we know that matter and energy has opposite properties in the present universe. So that which is common to both must be neither but something from which both can be manifested, hence it must be something which has the absoluteness which can manifest both these contradictory properties. It has to be something which is ‘beyond’ both matter and energy, which lies at the base of matter and energy. (To read more on matter-energy equivalence, please go to my website article, Mass-Energy Equivalence.)

Similarly, we know that time-space is connected to matter-energy, it is related only to this, and time-space is relative. So that from which matter and energy is manifested has also time-space manifested at the same time. So the absolute is something which lies ‘beyond’ time and space, something from which time and space are manifested. It is this Absolute which is the Brahman or the Absolute Principle of Advaita.

Lack of absolute reality as in Quantum Physics and Relativity means not in the sense that the world or particles do not exist, but that theories like quantum physics ascribe opposing properties to particles which are paradoxical and  which cannot be explained by the present theory in itself . To explain such phenomenon, quantum physics would have to define something beyond the phenomena itself, a theory at a deeper level, just as relative mechanics lies beyond Newtonian mechanics, particles lie beyond atoms, etc. In this way,  physics would have to go on defining more and more general theories till one day it comes to a theory of an Absolute Field. The theory of an absolute field of Brahman would be consistent by explaining such phenomena. (To read more on the interplay of Advaita for quantum physics, please go to my article, Advaita Vedanta and Quantum Physics.)

As can be seen from this definition, the Brahman here is not a creative God, it is not a God to whom we can pray or ask for blessings. It is a principle only. In fact, any scientist can believe up to this point and still consider himself or herself an Atheist. It is only when going beyond this stage that Advaita Vedanta becomes a spiritual path and not a physical explanation for the world.

The alternative to this explanation is that ‘there is no Absolute beyond this worldly existence’ This is an alternative conclusion and is also a valid conclusion. This is the Buddhist conclusion. Starting from here, Buddhists go on to explain that since there is nothing permanent, sorrow also is not permanent, hence can be got rid of following the eight fold path and so on. Some atheists can also follow this conclusion and follow alternative paths of their own system of ethics and philosophy.

There is really no third conclusion, once we accept that the world which we experience has relative reality, (more…)

Read Full Post »

Positions taken on determinism in modern times invariably have to contend with the fact that indeterminism has been proved quite comprehensively in the quantum world.

Determinism however is maintained for the world at large by saying that quantum indeterminacy is a strange little phenomenon that is confined only to quantum events and has no relevancy at all for our macroscopic world. Quantum indeterminacy is thus boxed in in a safe little world of quantum events and is not allowed to intrude into the discussion about determinism at large.

But when there is indeterminacy at any level, it is bound to cause the hole chain of determinacy to collapse. Determinacy involves arguments regarding cause and effect, a chain of cause and effect tightly following each other. After Hume of course, the very mention of a cause and effect relationship ought to raise a red flag. Determinists would argue that when an ocean wave crashes on the shore, each bubble is ultimately dependent on factors involving the formation of the wave and there is no random event even here. Thus events since the big bang itself have ensured that a particular wave would crash at a particular shore causing a particular amount of bubbles.

However, quantum indeterminacy can and does intrude into this cozy chain of cause and effect.

For example, when we take a kettle boiling and ultimately blowing off its lid, we have an example where activity at the quantum level intrudes ultimately into the macroscopic world. As the temperature of the water rises, the electrons absorb energy and buzz around, jumping from lower to higher orbits, and ultimately the atoms in the steam vibrate with a great deal of energy. As these atoms vibrate, they vibrate as molecular phenomena and the element of indeterminacy is present in their interactions, until the point when the vibrations burst off the lid.  When the kettle blows off its lid, the angle is determined by randomness. No determinism in larger events outside determine this and quantum fluctuations certainly play a large part. The final vector of force which acts on the lid is the sum of all the random vectors of each molecule, and this is entirely random.

These systems also work in other macroscopic events. In analyzing volcanoes, we can infer that there must have been millions of such ‘kettle pot’ phenomena deep inside and these random phenomena finally decided when the volcano was going to go off and on which side the lava would flow.

Similarly, the direction taken by a spark when two quartz are rubbed together, determines a fire in a forest.

Also, in a wave crashing on a shore, we can infer millions of such miniature ‘kettle pot’ events which would ultimately determine the events, so that the bubbles would truly be random.

Thus randomness in quantum events cannot be confined to quantum levels only. This randomness no doubt determines events in the macroscopic world too, and so maintaining a position of determinism for the macroscopic world when we know that it does not exist for the quantum world is untenable.

If you wish to read more on this topic,  you can look up my book, The Circle of Fire- the Metaphysics of Yoga. You can also look up topics on the relation of science and Advaita Vedanta like Advaita Vedanta and Quantum Physics on my site, www.thecircleoffire.com

Read Full Post »

Determinism would seem to be seriously challenged by quantum theory, which has proved randomness in as far as quantum events are concerned. This is however rejected by determinative thinkers who hold that determinism still holds at the macroscopic level.

Thus a determinism adherent would hold for example that if we could have a sort of supercomputer, he would be able to predict every bubble in a wave or every toss of a coin.

So a determinism adherent would say that in a macroscopic case, say a billiard ball hitting the side of the table and bouncing back, we could predict exactly by knowing the angle at which the ball hits the table and its initial velocity, the resultant angle and velocity after hitting the table.

But is this so? In fact, this is not really true and randomness still enters the picture. The path of the ball is not in fact totally predictable but has random fluctuations in its path, but these fluctuations are of a quantum proportion and therefore are not measured in macroscopic measurements.

If we take the toss of a coin for example (ignoring for the moment the question of whether the toss is actually random or not as it is not relevant right now), we can see that we get a probability factor of 50-50. It is because the toss is random that we get this probability. If we get two heads in a row for example, it does not mean that the third throw has a higher chance of turning up tails, the chances for it are still 50-50. however, because it is random and the chances of both are equal, in a large amount of throws, the two cancel each other and we get this 50-50 probability. If we throw it a hundred times, we have a good chance of getting a 50-50 result or a 49-51 result, we would not expect a 45-55 result. If we throw it a thousand times, we would get even less fluctuations proportionate to the number of throws, for example, say, 495-505. the fluctuation of 5 would be significant in 100 throws but of much less significance when compared with a thousand throws. Similarly, if we throw a million or a billion times, the fluctuations would be even further dampened compared to the total overall throws.

A chance observer presented with the results of only a billion throws at a time and not individual throws would say that there is a determinism which dictates that the coin would fall equally on both sides each time. He might be tempted to say that, if a coin shows head at one throw, it is virtually certain that the next throw would show tails. But of course he would be wrong, there is no determinism here, it is a pseudo-determinism based on randomness at its heart.

Similarly, we can consider a giant insurance company. Some peple would die early and some would die late, but most people would die around a certain age, and a mean age can be calculated, say 72 years. A manager in such a company can make his calculations for his offers taking the age of 72 and would be correct. But based on this, no man can remain sanguine that he would die at 72 and no other age.

Such processes where the overall result can be predicted on the basis of probability even though the individual processes are random are called stochastic processes.

Now, we can take take the case of a billiard ball. We know that the surfaces of both the billiard ball and the side rails of the table edge are in fact composed of billions of atoms with their electrons. Now, according to quantum theory, the electrons are not at a fixed position but can appear randomly at certain points when they interact with other electrons. So when it is considered at the level of quantum events, there is no predictable outcome, instead we can predict a number of outcomes and give their probability. So when the electrons of the billiard ball hit the electrons of the side rails of the table, there are in fact a huge number of random events taking place. But the randomicity adds up, as in the case of an insurance company or the toss of a coin, to give a path which is weighed heavily in favor of the most probable path and which is the macroscopic path of the ball.

But here, the most important point is that there are still random fluctuations in the path. Despite the ball going in the most probable path, the elements of randomicity would not usually add up perfectly and so there are always random fluctuations in the path. This is similar to the event of throwing, say, a million tosses of the coin. We would not expect always an exact 500,000-500,000 heads or tails, and there is bound to be a minor fluctuation of say,10 or 20 throws or even a bit more on either side. So also in the case of the ball, there is a minor fluctuation in the path and it does not follow strictly the laws of macroscopic mechanics, there is always a strong likelihood of deviations from the path. These deviations, moreover, are derived from the deviations of the electrons in their path and (more…)

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: