Monthly Archives: January 2014

The MWS Podcast: Episode 11, Monica Garvey

In this episode Monica Garvey talks to us about Family Mediation, an integrative, non-confrontational and progressive approach to family disputes that aims to be forward looking and solution focused. Monica talks to us about how the issue of children are tackled in mediation, the role of Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, strategies for overcoming dogmatic positions and the power of an apology.


MWS Podcast 11: Monica Garvey as audio only:
Download audio: MWS_Podcast_11_Monica_Garvey

Previous podcasts:

Episode 10: Emilie Åberg on horticultural therapy, agnosticism, the Quakers and awe.
Episode 9: T’ai Chi instructor John Bolwell gives an overview of this popular martial art.
Episode 8: Peter Goble on his career as a nurse and his work as a Buddhist Chaplain.
Episode 7: The author Stephen Batchelor on his work with photography and collage.
Episode 6: Iain McGilchrist, author of the Master and his Emissary.
Episode 5: Julian Adkins on introducing MWP to his meditation group in Edinburgh
Episode 4: Daren Dewitt on Nonviolent communiction.
Episode 3: Vidyamala Burch on her new book “Mindfulness for Health”.
Episode 2: Norma Smith on why she joined the society, art, agnosticism and metaphor.
Episode 1 : Robert M. Ellis on the skill of critical thinking.

Discussion groups start on Sunday

A reminder that our new series of online discussion groups using Skype starts at 18:00 GMT on Sunday 26th Jan. All welcome, regardless of your level of experience or location. Please see this page for more details, and fill in the very brief form at the bottom to let me know if you’re joining us.

Robert

Meditation 2: Should I sit or may I stand?

Since Meditation 1, members have been actively discussing meditation, and writing about their own practice preferences and experiences. Interest was raised by podcast 9 in which John Bolwell talked about martial arts, their relevance to middle way philosophy, and as a meditative practice.  In this blog I offer a digest of the interesting and sometimes contentious issues raised by John’s podcast (and the comments that ensued), and I shall go on to describe the basics of my own current practice, why I’ve adopted it, how I experience it, and what I believe it offers as an alternative to sitting meditation, or as a complementary adjunct.

Meditation is quite likely to conjure up an image of someone sitting (or squatting) on the ground, cross-legged, with hands loosely placed in the lap, or rested palms downward on the thighs.  The eyes are closed or half-closed, the head is erect, the back straight.  The facial expression is enigmatic, or might be described as calm or ‘serene’, with a half-smile on the lips

Images like this are nowadays quite commonplace, and I feel justified in claiming that most people would associate meditation with sitting in the posture described.  I am slightly troubled by this.  It’s as if the image has become a ‘brand’;  indeed, the image of someone ‘meditating’ has been used widely to sell commodities ranging from air-fresheners to disposable nappies.  It’s not the commodification of meditation that concerns me, it’s the imperative that – for me –  the image seems to imply:  This is the way you meditate.   You sit.  On your bottom.  On the floor.  There is no reliable alternative.  This method enjoys authoritative sanction.  From the very top.

Rightly or wrongly, I associate this dogmatism with mainstream Buddhism.  I think I may not be alone in this respect, at least in its application to practice.  It ought not, I think, cross over to migglism, where the development of new forms of practice seems to be part of our agenda.

About three years ago I came across the practice called “standing like a tree”.  It’s a form of qi gong.  It’s widely practised and written about, but it’s not a practice that has been much associated with Buddhism here in the West.  As John Bolwell claims, qi gong is as much a meditative practice as it’s a kind of strengthening or health-giving exercise.  With just over two years of pretty consistent practice using the method,  I think that its meditative possibilities match those of sitting, and in some respects I think they’re broader and deeper.

How to do it?  Stand with feet slightly apart, knees unlocked.  Let arms fall to their sides.  Enjoy the feeling of standing.  Allow the body to move, supported by the softening feet and ankles, and imagine your feet taking root in the earth (floor, pavement etc.), so that your weight, and any tension or heaviness you experience, drains down into the earth.  From the knees up, feel energy rising up to the sky.  Allow your body to relax and to soften, but also to move, to breathe, and to feel.

Let the body balance itself, aligning itself with the earth through its centre of gravity.  You can’t do this by thinking about it, any more than you can think a key into fitting itself into a lock.  By letting the body move subtly, in a thousand different tiny adjustments, it finds its own alignment with the earth, and becomes (as it were) weightless, and effortlessly self-supporting through the spine (see image immediately below).  This requires patience, and letting go.  Alignment is recognised by an unmistakable sense of “fit”, like the feeling of a key fitting into a lock it’s designed to open.

alignment and effortless poise   Aligned, relaxed, effortless poise*

Then, gradually explore breathing, moving and attending, bringing these components of experience together. How? It depends on you, your body, and your patterns of holding yourself.  Just keep mixing your breathing, moving and attending – in relaxed and exploratory ways – until it takes very little or no effort to stand; no more than it takes to sit.  Patterns of holding gradually (over many sessions) give way to new freedoms, of thinking, feeling and responding.  And new insights emerge as energies ‘trapped’ in habitual holding patterns are released, and integrated.

The ‘full’ exercise combines this process of relaxation, attending and moving with careful re-positioning of the arms, in new postures, which give rise to subtle experiences of the re-direction of energy throughout the body.  As Robert points out elsewhere, the experience of ‘energy’ is subjective; one cannot categorically or dogmatically say that this is the experience of ‘energy’, but the word conveys the subjective experience for some.

More detailed instructions are available from George Draffan’s website at www.NaturalAwareness.com, and I acknowledge my adapting some of the material above, and my own development through using it, to George, with deep gratitude.

It’s suggested that it takes about 100 sessions to get used enough to the practice for it to communicate its value, and it’s recommended that you start with short sessions, no more than five minutes, building capacity and commitment gradually, in small increments: “little and often” is the watchword.  The practice can be combined (if you wish) with sitting meditation or, if you choose to do so, it may supplant sitting as your principal practice, leaving you the option of sitting as an adjunct if you wish it. I have no aversion to sitting, although I grouse about its being, or seeming to be, the default practice for meditators.

‘Standing like a tree’ doesn’t require, nor does it recommend, closing one’s eyes.  I meditate usually with eyes open and unfocussed (or relaxed).  I don’t find that this interferes with attention, nor does it necessarily distract me.  It’s my experience that balanced attention to experience is best achieved when all sensory modalities are accessible.  This is perhaps a matter for individuals to discern for themselves; and I don’t think closed eyes should be seen as the default position, as it seems to be generally and unquestioningly accepted.

‘Standing like a tree’ lends itself, unlike sitting, to practice in everyday situations.  Most of our waking time is spent erect, in some kind of motion, and in situations that require the kind of otherwise unaware alignment with the earth that makes purposive and useful action possible.  In this important sense the practice may be more congruent with everyday life and human behaviour.  Sitting meditators often lament the apparent ‘gulf’ they experience between ‘time on the cushion’ and life in general.  Standing like a tree may bridge that experiential gap.

I recognise that the method I’ve described briefly above may seem alien to some, and unachievable by others (including people who have difficulty standing, or those who are physically incapable of doing so unaided).  I offer it tentatively, and respectfully for consideration.  I’m open to further questions and observations.  I admit to no special level of expertise in the matter, either from a practical or from a theoretical point of view.  All the opinions expressed are my own, based on and within the limits of my personal experience and understanding.

* picture copied from Google images

The following pictures (taken by my wife) are of me, in each of the five positions making up the  ‘full  standing-like-a-tree set’, and in the suggested sequence.  Not all are in any sense strictly necessary, and each may be maintained for as long as one wishes to, and is able to comfortably.  Reading from right to left, starting at the top, are shown: the start position, arms to their sides (this position is returned to briefly between all changes of position, and at the end); “big belly” position; “balloon at chest” position; “pushing balloon at face” position; “standing in the stream” position.  In my own daily practice I maintain each of these positions for between 5 and 10 minutes, usually (not always) without any tiredness.

SLAT 1 SLAT 2 SLAT3 SLAT 4 SLAT 5

Critical Thinking 3: Assumptions

All arguments, whether inductive or deductive, begin with assumptions (also known as premises). An argument may be deductively valid (that is, if its assumptions are true then its conclusion must be true) but rendered irrelevant or unhelpful in practice by unacceptable assumptions. For example:

The Pope is a secret Hindu.Pope Benedict XVI Agencia Brasil

If the Pope is a secret Hindu, he can’t really be a Catholic.

Therefore, the Pope isn’t really Catholic.

This is all entirely valid: if the assumptions are correct, then the conclusion is too. However, the assumption that the Pope is a secret Hindu is, to say the least, implausible. An argument is only as good as its assumptions, and it’s important not to be seduced by the slickness or the complexity of an argument into taking its assumptions for granted. Unfortunately there are a great many philosophy books, for example, that I’m confident are not worth spending time reading because, although their arguments are rigorous, they are based on unacceptable (and to my mind, insufficiently examined) assumptions.

Assumption-spotting is perhaps the most crucial practical skill in Critical Thinking. The key issue here is whether what you think may be an assumption is actually necessary to the argument. If you assume that someone is making an assumption that they are not making, then obviously this is unfair. If an assumption is present, then it would have to be true for the conclusion to be true. For example:

John is out.

His coat is missing from the peg.

Here, it is being assumed that John must take his coat when he goes out. It is also being assumed that he only has one coat, and that the coat is not missing because someone has stolen it, or for some other reason.

However, if someone were to claim that “John is a man” was an assumption here, this would be incorrect. John does not have to be a man for the conclusion to be correct. John could be an alien or a polar bear and the conclusion would still be  fine.

Assumptions can be classified into explicit, implicit, and background types. An explicit assumption is stated in the argument: in the above example, this is “His coat is missing from the peg”. We assume the accuracy of this information in the argument. Implicit assumptions are not stated, but nevertheless must be true for the conclusion to be true. So, in the above example “John must take his coat when he goes out” is an implicit assumption required to reach the conclusion. “John has only one coat” is also an implicit assumption, but of a kind we would call a background assumption. It has to be correct for the conclusion to be correct, but it doesn’t play a direct role in the reasoning. Rather, it is taken for granted.

The distinction between foreground and background assumptions is not hard and fast – it will vary with the context. Some more sceptical types will be more inclined to question background assumptions than others! However, it is helpful to recognise that some assumptions are more immediately important in the context than others. “The universe exists” is a background assumption in almost all arguments, but not one we need bother discussing most of the time.

Exercise

Identify the assumptions in these arguments. If possible, distinguish between explicit, implicit and background assumptions.

1. The upper decks of double-decker buses are best avoided. I’ve often found them to be full of rude teenagers playing loud music with no concern for the feelings of other passengers.

2. The 2003 invasion of Iraq was illegal because it was motivated only by a desire for oil.

3. Naomi had better watch out! There’s a polar bear behind her!

4. Since there has been no snow in southern England so far this winter and it’s now the middle Of January, we can conclude that it will be a mild winter throughout the UK.

5. Richard III’s body was found under a car park in Leicester, and he fell nearby in Bosworth Field, so it is only right that he should be re-buried in Leicester.

 

Picture: Pope Benedict XVI by Agencia Brasil (Wikimedia Commons)

The MWS Podcast: Episode 10, Emilie Åberg

In this member profile Emilie Åberg gives us a bit of background about her life, why she’s studying psychology and her plan to be a horticultural therapist, her views on agnosticism, the Middle Way, integration, the Quakers and dogmatism. She also talks about awe and why she feels the cultivation of this emotion is an important factor in her life.


MWS Podcast 10: Emilie Åberg as audio only:
Download audio: MWS_Podcast_10_Emilie_Åberg

Previous podcasts:

Episode 9: T’ai Chi instructor John Bolwell gives an overview of this popular martial art.
Episode 8: Peter Goble on his career as a nurse and his work as a Buddhist Chaplain.
Episode 7: The author Stephen Batchelor on his work with photography and collage.
Episode 6: Iain McGilchrist, author of the Master and his Emissary.
Episode 5: Julian Adkins on introducing MWP to his meditation group in Edinburgh
Episode 4: Daren Dewitt on Nonviolent communiction.
Episode 3: Vidyamala Burch on her new book “Mindfulness for Health”.
Episode 2: Norma Smith on why she joined the society, art, agnosticism and metaphor.
Episode 1 : Robert M. Ellis on the skill of critical thinking.