I don't understand why you're saying this. The technique wasn't primarily to resolve issues with spouse; it was to fight panic attacks.
> I suffered from panic attacks in my youth.
Does it now make sense?
He didn't said that. His wife his just frustrated that he can do this, I'm pretty sure he never told us he did this to annoy his wife on purpose or escaping.
He tunes out his wife
> if I so choose
Willfully
> It drives my wife crazy
And often enough that it’s an issue.
He hasn’t shown up again in this bizarre thread, heck he’s probably doing it right now!
> but if I so choose, I can completely zen out within 30 seconds and enter a state of total relaxation.
Sometime peoples just want to have own time and relaxing in their own preferred way
> In this state I may acknowledge her talking to me but have little or no memory of any conversations after.
It happened to his wife to come and start talking to him in this state, but him being able to acknowledge her without remembering the conversation causes her great frustration.
>> He hasn’t shown up again in this bizarre thread, heck he’s probably doing it right now!
Given the number of totally unjustified judgmental, misread based responses, no wonder one would shy out. Assuming that checking for answers it the sane behavior in the first place.
Good for him if he managed to get serious crippling condition under control, that's a hard feat deserving respect.
Not a fan of self-illusion claims about talking to god, that's not even how major religions are made from scratch (communication with God in my view is 2-way process, and no judaism/christian/muslim god ever talks back, but I get that it was probably not meant literally), but that's just an agnostic's nitpick when seeing righteous religious folks who claim weird stuff in my view.
If someone has to refrain from express themselves or taking better care of what and how they say it, it's moralists reframing words of other people, without even thinking of asking questions beforehand.
> no judaism/christian/muslim god ever talks back
Agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
Houston, we have a problem: faith is a fundamental aspect of consciousness and culture, not just religion.
Definitely not - it was completely clear from the start that OP had panic attacks since childhood.
TL;DR, being able to stop a panic attack or otherwise unproductive emotional response is a great skill to have. If the other party takes that personal then that's something they need to work on themselves.
Or it prevents the conflict from escalating. Panic and anger are connected, so if he found a way to be calm and stop the conversation, I guess this is way better than having the conflict in a mode of distress. So later, when both are calm, the issues can get resolved.
That is a secondary consideration to preventing further antagonisation, provocation, and escallation of the situation itself.
That said, there seems to be an underlying interpersonal conflict, and possibly incompatibility, here.
Possible, but I would not judge so much, from the little that was shared. Op just shared what worked for him, to prevent panic attacks. And he shared that their are downsides as well, that frustrates his wife. The rest is speculation.
The whole thing has been oversold in the same way that cannabis, etc. were. It's just a thing, utterly detached from artificial spiritual goals, and we should let people use it how they want.
Also, is "facing your suffering" really "religious bullcrap"?
I'm saying that using techniques taken from religions to avoid your suffering is spiritual bypassing. Please explain how that is "religious bullcrap"
A more rational take on these teachings is that historically they were a tool of pacifying the masses to accept their abject poverty and squalor without revolting and imploding the social hierarchy. They make no sense in a post-scarcity world.
This is what I mean by religious bullcrap.
Facing your suffering is the only way to understand truly how to solve it.
You can keep running from it if you want but it will just catch up to you.
It hasn't been only "discovered" there, definitely not... and even if so, religion or whatever is the truth and noone dare to use it differently ( what OP even not said), bad cultural appropriation or what?
Yes, Buddhist teachings often address the topic of passing judgments. Here are a few key points:
1. *Mindfulness and Awareness*: One of the central practices in Buddhism is mindfulness meditation, where practitioners are taught to observe their thoughts and feelings without attaching or reacting to them. This includes not judging oneself or others.
2. *Right Speech*: One of the Eightfold Path's components, Right Speech, emphasizes speaking truthfully, avoiding slander, and abstaining from speech that can cause harm or discord. Implicit in this is the avoidance of judgmental or harmful speech about others.
3. *Metta (Loving-kindness)*: Metta is a form of meditation where one cultivates loving-kindness towards oneself and others. This practice helps to reduce negative and judgmental thoughts towards others.
4. *Dukkha (Suffering)*: Recognizing that all beings are subject to suffering (dukkha) creates a sense of compassion and reduces the tendency to judge others harshly.
5. *The Nature of Thoughts*: In Buddhist teachings, thoughts are seen as temporary, fleeting, and not necessarily a reflection of reality or truth. By understanding this, practitioners are less likely to cling to or act upon judgmental thoughts.
6. *Non-self (Anatta)*: The concept of non-self teaches that there's no permanent, unchanging self. When we judge others, we often do so based on perceived fixed identities. Understanding anatta can reduce these fixed views and judgments.
7. *The Parable of the Poisoned Arrow*: This story illustrates that it's more practical to address problems directly rather than waste time in assigning blame or judgment.
It's worth noting that while Buddhism teaches the importance of not passing harmful or unnecessary judgments, it also emphasizes the importance of discernment or "wise judgment." This refers to understanding things as they truly are, recognizing wholesome from unwholesome actions, and making wise choices in life. It's a balanced perspective, avoiding harsh criticism or negativity, but also not being so non-judgmental that one lacks discernment.
ChatGPT can be used in arguments and debates as a tool to provide information, generate ideas, and assist in the exchange of opinions. However, it's important to remember that ChatGPT is a machine learning model and not a human. It lacks personal beliefs, emotions, and the ability to engage in moral or ethical reasoning.
Here are some considerations when using ChatGPT in arguments:
Fact-checking: ChatGPT can be used to verify facts and provide accurate information. It can be a valuable resource for finding data and statistics to support your argument.
Idea generation: ChatGPT can help you brainstorm ideas and arguments, providing different perspectives and viewpoints that you might not have considered.
Counterarguments: You can use ChatGPT to explore counterarguments to your position. This can help you anticipate and address opposing viewpoints effectively.
Ethical considerations: Be cautious when discussing sensitive or controversial topics. ChatGPT's responses are based on the data it was trained on, which may reflect biases present in the training data. Be aware of potential biases in the information it provides.
Support, not replacement: While ChatGPT can be a useful tool, it should not replace critical thinking and informed analysis. It's essential to critically evaluate the information it provides and use it as a supplement to your own knowledge and judgment.
Respectful communication: Remember to engage in respectful and constructive discourse when using ChatGPT in arguments. Avoid using it to generate disrespectful or offensive content.
In summary, ChatGPT can be a valuable resource in arguments and discussions, but it should be used thoughtfully and responsibly, with an understanding of its limitations and potential biases. It should complement your own reasoning and research rather than serve as a substitute for them.
1. *Mindfulness and Awareness*: - While mindfulness meditation promotes non-reactivity, it doesn't necessarily mean one shouldn't make judgments. It's about recognizing thoughts and feelings without becoming overwhelmed by them. In daily life, judgments are sometimes necessary for decision-making and discernment.
2. *Right Speech*: - The principle of Right Speech doesn't mean avoiding judgments altogether. Instead, it's about speaking truthfully and kindly. There are instances in Buddhist scriptures where the Buddha himself made judgments about the actions and intentions of others, but he did so with compassion and clarity.
3. *Metta (Loving-kindness)*: - Cultivating metta doesn't mean withholding judgments; it means approaching situations with an open heart. One can have loving-kindness and still recognize unwholesome actions in others or oneself.
4. *Dukkha (Suffering)*: - Recognizing suffering in all beings fosters compassion, but it doesn't negate the need for judgments. Compassion and judgment are not mutually exclusive. One can understand someone's suffering and still judge their actions as unskillful.
5. *The Nature of Thoughts*: - Although thoughts are temporary and fleeting, they can still have real-world consequences. Recognizing the impermanent nature of thoughts doesn't mean we shouldn't make judgments; it means we should do so with awareness and care.
6. *Non-self (Anatta)*: - Understanding the concept of anatta can indeed reduce fixed views and judgments. However, it doesn't mean that judgments based on observed actions and consequences are invalid.
7. *The Parable of the Poisoned Arrow*: - This parable encourages direct action over unnecessary speculation. But this doesn't mean one should never judge or evaluate situations. It's about prioritizing immediate needs over theoretical or philosophical debates.
In summary, while Buddhism encourages a non-judgmental attitude in many respects, it doesn't advocate for a complete absence of judgment. Instead, it emphasizes the importance of "wise judgment" or discernment. The goal is to strike a balance between understanding and compassion on one hand, and the necessity of making judgments in our daily lives on the other.
And to go even further, it is capable of seeing the second persons harsh response as a valid interpretation of Buddhism.
The second person's critique leans towards the idea that spiritual practices should not be used as an escape mechanism from the challenges of daily life, but instead as tools to confront and understand them. From a Buddhist perspective, there are teachings and examples that support Person 2's viewpoint:
1. *Mindfulness of Daily Activities*: - In the Satipatthana Sutta, the Buddha outlined the practice of mindfulness in everyday activities, such as walking, eating, and even breathing. This is not about escaping reality but being fully present in every moment, regardless of its nature.
2. *Engaged Buddhism*: - Thich Nhat Hanh, a Vietnamese Zen monk, introduced the concept of Engaged Buddhism. It emphasizes applying Buddhist teachings in social and political realms, confronting societal issues rather than retreating from them.
3. *Avoiding Spiritual Materialism*: - Chögyam Trungpa, a Tibetan Buddhist teacher, warned about "spiritual materialism", which is the use of spirituality to bolster one's ego or escape from real-life challenges. Truly embracing Buddhist teachings means confronting and understanding one's ego, not using practices to inflate or escape it.
4. *The Middle Way*: - The Buddha's teaching of the Middle Way is about avoiding extremes. While it's beneficial to experience deep calm, it's also essential to remain engaged with the world and not use this calm as an escape mechanism.
5. *Facing Mara*: - In Buddhist texts, before attaining enlightenment, the Buddha faced Mara, a demonic figure representing temptation, doubt, and fear. Instead of escaping or avoiding Mara, the Buddha confronted and acknowledged these challenges, showing the importance of facing difficulties head-on.
6. *The Parable of the Two Arrows*: - In the Sallatha Sutta, the Buddha describes the parable of the two arrows. The first arrow represents the unavoidable pain or discomfort we might experience, while the second arrow is the additional suffering we inflict upon ourselves through our reactions. Escaping or ignoring the pain (like "zenning out" during uncomfortable situations) might mean that we're not addressing the root causes of our suffering.
While Person 1's practices might offer personal relief and spiritual experiences, Person 2's critique, based on Buddhist teachings, suggests that using meditation solely as an escape can be a form of avoidance. True Buddhist practice encourages confronting and understanding the nature of suffering and reality.
All this considered, maybe we should craft our own thoughts instead of letting robots interpret complex social nuances so we can post drive-by hot takes online with minimal effort. At least bowsamic is posting their own thoughts.
"No, they do not talk of that".
Therefore, your rebuttal is invalid.
It drives my wife crazy, but if I so choose, I can completely zen out within 30 seconds and enter a state of total relaxation. In this state I may acknowledge her talking to me but have little or no memory of any conversations after.
Finally, I’m a religious person and prayer is a mechanism for me to communicate with God. Combining transcendental meditation with my communications with the higher power is a very mind blowing experience for me.