meditate or no meditate?

[Guest guest]

There are a lot of gurus and teachers for whom meditaiton--i.e.,

sitting still and watching breath or chanting or visualizing

something or " bare witnessing " --is the basis of their message, the

sine qua non--which is High Dutch for " otherwise forget it, Jack. "

The idea is to sit quiet til the sensory and motor nerves dry up, so

to speak, and the energy that was flowing into them goes backwards

into the spine and up to the higher chakras, in heart, and between

the brows and at the crown of the head.When this happens the body

ceases to be felt at all and the distractions thereof no longer

hinder strong focusing.It is only then, in this bodiless state, that

one can be said to be in meditation and only then that the mind is

fit to find the truth. I always felt this position was unassailable

and always tried to get such a mind.Rarely have I ever come anywhere

near it in its' purity.But whenever I have had a bit of a

concentrated mnd I have tried to use the concentration to see what I

could see.I can count on the fingers of one hand--and have four left

over--the times I have seen anything that wowed me.And that time I

am not at all sure I had much concentration to go with.Still I think

that this is probaly what happens--over many lives sensory-motor

energy gets more and more disengageable from the nerve beds until in

one life the disengagement happens easily and " at will " --which means

whenever " it " wants to.Then you get a yogi, at least, if not a

saint. But all this is said against a background of knowing that

all this stuff happens of itself and is in that sense a matter of

grace and nothng but.Snuff.