🧘‍♀️🚑🧵 Meditation risks, safety, goals, methods

1️⃣ Risks, safety, emergencies
2️⃣ Methods, goals, results
3️⃣ Recommendations
1️⃣ Risks, safety, emergencies

Save this link in case of emergencies (you or someone you know is having trouble with meditation that affects your ability to function normally for more than a little while after stopping meditation): cheetahhouse.org/get-help-intro
Being a sciency kinda guy, I'd like quantitative evidence.

Much of the academic and clinical work on negative effects of meditation has been done by Willoughby Britton and her colleagues. See her site for details! vivo.brown.edu/display/wbritt…
The science so far isn't as sciency as I'd like, so I won't quote any numbers. However, its general conclusions match what I've seen in decades of meditation practice and informal conversations with thousands of meditators.
Meditation is not entirely safe. In the worst case, it can cause disabling psychiatric breakdowns lasting years. That is very rare.

Mild emotional disturbances, confusion, and odd sensations are common, and not usually a problem.

cheetahhouse.org/symptoms
Meditation has a "dose-response effect": generally, the more you do, the more intense the results will be, whether positive, negative, or just weird.

If you do 15 min/day, you'll probably have mild positive effects, and are unlikely to be hospitalized (although that can happen).
In a group retreat of 12+ hours meditation per day for months, many to most will experience some negative effects at least briefly, and it's pretty normal for one or two people to have a major mental health crisis.
Usually, if it is producing negative effects, stopping meditating stops the problem. I am not an expert or teacher, so I rarely give advice, but this is my one main recommendation:

Just stop until the problem goes away. Take a break. You can come back to it later.
Meditators may be reluctant to stop even when it has impaired their ability to function: because it feels good, because they think "no pain, no gain," because they mistake dysfunction for incipient "enlightenment," or because their teacher tells them to push through.
It is sometimes true that pushing through what looks like imminent psychosis can produce spiritual breakthroughs. It can also lead to months of psychiatric hospitalization. Do not attempt this without intensive guidance from an expert. (How do you know who is qualified?)
2️⃣ Methods, goals, results

Anecdotally, some meditation methods are safer and/or more effective than others. Afaik, there is no good quantitative data on this. There is lots of vehement religious opinion, though.
As an engineer, I take a first-principles, mechanistic approach to meditation methods.

What is this method supposed to accomplish? What are its prerequisites? How is the method supposed to get you from here to there? Is it plausible that would work? What might go wrong with it?
Western teachers usually say "meditation" is supposed to make your life better, and also possibly someday you will become "enlightened." This is all very nice and super vague, and the lack of precision is harmful. It (deliberately) obscures the actual goal and risks.
Different meditation systems are not different methods for accomplishing the same thing. In their Asian origins, they were each engineered to achieve specific, very different conceptions of enlightenment, taking you in entirely different directions.
Most currently popular meditation methods derive from "Sutrayana," one branch of Buddhism. These methods include secular mindfulness, vipassana, and (with asterisks) Zen. vividness.live/sutrayana
🚨🚨🚨 We interrupt this broadcast to bring you a message from the MEDITATION EMERGENCY NETWORK 🚨🚨🚨

A bunch of twitter replies say "I don't believe meditation has any risks."

Please check the medical studies on this and take their warning seriously. journals.plos.org/plosone/articl…
Bibliography of academic/clinical studies of harmful effects of meditation: brown.edu/research/labs/…
To be clear, I meditate sometimes, sometimes intensively. I accept the risks, and believe meditation is usually beneficial.

The point of this thread is not “don’t meditate,” it’s “understand how to decrease the risks and increase benefits.”

I’ll be back after making an omelet.
... aaaaand, we're back.

Sutrayana—mainstream Buddhism—has a precise logic, which you probably already know, and have decided to ignore and forget because you don't like it.

vividness.live/sutra-vs-tantra
😫 Existence is unrelentingly awful. There is nothing of any worth in the world 🌏. You can't fix that, even the slightest bit, and you can't escape, even in death ☠️, because you will just be reborn, probably as an intestinal parasite.🐛
The best thing would be to cease existing. How can you prevent rebirth?🐣

What *causes* rebirth? 💫

(I know you don't believe any of this, and I don't either! I promise it is going to explain how and why mainstream meditation works, and why it's risky, though.)
In life, we can't stop ourselves doing things that cause suffering, because we're compelled by emotions, thoughts, perceptions, involvements, and our sense of selfness.

Same after death: we choose rebirth because of all the emotionally-compelling loose ends left over from life.
If in life we can end our emotions, thoughts, perceptions, involvements, and sense of self, we won't have loose ends after death.

We'll have developed the skill of not making stupid suffering-causing choices (like rebirth), and will retain that after death.

Phew! The way out!
So there's a two-step recipe for ending existence.

Renunciation: withdraw from the physical & social worlds, avoid anything that provokes any emotion, end all activities (ideally up to and including eating).

(That's STEP ONE, before you meditate.) vividness.live/renunciation-i…
Step two: meditation.

Kill any remaining emotions, thoughts, sensations, and your sense of self.

The methods for this are surprisingly effective... and are the historical basis for current secular mindfulness, which is *pretty much the same thing*.

vividness.live/theravada-rein…
Likely risks of mainstream meditation methods: dissociation, depression, derealization, pathological spaciness, and depersonalization.

Those are precisely the *goals* of the practice, as traditionally understood: the end of involvement, emotions, perception, thought, and self.
So why is a practice engineered to turn you into a zombie often beneficial in small doses for normal people?

Because we do suffer from insurance paperwork, political outrage, clutter, self-defeating thought-loops, and tedious unresolvable self-esteem issues. (Line those up...)
Stepping back temporarily from busyness, upset, complexity, trying to figure stuff out, and neurotic self-involvement is a great relief. And "mindfulness" (and vipassana and Zen, etc.) can do that.
There's two problems. One is that the dose-response effect is somewhat unpredictable. Rarely, someone does their first 10 minutes of mindfulness & loses their sense of self and contact with reality.

Which was the original goal of the practice! But absolutely not *their* goal!
The other risk is that you meditate intensively and turn into a drooling zombie. You could do that because the world *does* seem unrelentingly awful, and being a zombie seems better.

Probably a bad choice. Great group discussion here; h/t @drossbucket

lesswrong.com/posts/qmXqHKpg…
You can turn yourself into a zombie by not understanding that different Buddhisms have extremely different ideas of what "enlightenment" means.

For some, it's avoiding rebirth through becoming a zombie; for some others, it's becoming an immortal sky god.

vividness.live/epistemology-a…
If you fantasize about becoming an immortal sky god (and who doesn't?), and pursue that with a method designed to turn you into a zombie, and practice more and more intensively when it doesn't seem to be working yet...

you will definitely turn yourself into a zombie.
🧟‍♀️ Oh, here's some more first-person explanation of why you might choose zombification, and what it may cost you.

If meditation is heading you in this direction, make sure it's what you want, and get help if not.

lesswrong.com/posts/qmXqHKpg…

mhollyelmoreblog.wordpress.com/2016/06/25/dis…
3️⃣ Recommendations

These apply if you meditate fairly seriously, meaning half an hour or more per day for a year or more. If you meditate casually, the risks are small, and the differences between methods are not that important.
My main recommendation is to get clear about what you want from meditation, what method might lead to that, & what unwanted side-effects it might have.

This will take serious personal inquiry plus external research, due to clouds of motivated vagueness.

vividness.live/what-do-you-wa…
There's been a century-plus of deliberate obfuscation of the functions of meditation. At this point many/most meditation teachers have no idea what the methods they teach are for or how they are supposed to work. (This is bad.)

vividness.live/the-making-of-…
Clarifying what you want is also difficult, partly because it depends on what is available.

You'd probably rather become a sky god than a zombie, but as a sciency kinda guy, I don't believe the methods that are supposed to turn you into a sky god are likely to work.
Figuring out what the objectives of different meditation methods are requires—unfortunately—learning some theory and history that is not clearly set out anywhere.

Especially not if you are considering methods deriving from different religions. I can talk only about Buddhism.
I said most modern meditation systems derive from Sutrayana, which aims to escape the world into non-existence or into celestial godhood.

It contrasts with Vajrayana, which is about human functioning in the actual world.
vividness.live/approaching-va…
The aims and methods of Vajrayana are, on the whole, more compatible with what most people want nowadays, and on the whole seem more realistic.

vividness.live/sutra-tantra-a…
I wish I could say that Vajrayana also seems safer, but I can't. First, we have no quantitative data on which methods are more dangerous. Second, it's traditionally considered *more* dangerous.

OTOH, the "danger" of Sutrayana is that it works as advertised....
Traditional presentations of the goals of Vajrayana are esoteric, abstract, incomprehensible at first, and often obviously impossible, so clarity about whether you want to practice it takes work.

vividness.live/tantra-result
The risks of Vajrayana are, again, closely related to the goals: narcissism, aggression, sexual acting-out, and delusional psychosis.

(That's what you get if you develop the "form aspects" of Vajrayana and neglect the "emptiness aspects.")
Vajrayana is subdivided into Tantra and what might be called the "essence approaches," which are Mahamudra and Dzogchen.

I've written a lot about Tantra, mostly as a theoretical exercise. It's not a feasible starting point for many people. vividness.live/tantra-base
Within the essence approaches (both Mahamudra and Dzogchen), there is a series of four meditation methods, "the four yogas" or "four naljors." That's mainly what I practice, fwiw.
The overall aim of the four naljors is to relate to pattern and nebulosity as inseparable... which happens to be what all the "books" I write are about. metarationality.com/nebulosity
I would like to say that the four yogas system is risk-free, but we don't know that.

It can be disorienting, but I don't know of anyone having serious negative consequences; & it's hard to think what bad aspects of "recognizing the inseparability of form and emptiness" could be.
My Vividness site used to have a page, from 2014, on teachers of modern Vajrayana. It started by saying there aren't exactly any, but here's some you could look into, with various caveats, and also that I didn't know much about most of them.
I took it down last year after noticing that several teachers had blown up (sex or other scandals) or fizzled (retreated into esoteric bubbles).

This leaves me with little confidence for recommendations, and considerable concern for the future of the religion.
I few months ago my spouse @_awbery_ cofounded a meditation community which teaches primarily the four naljors system. I'm confident they are sane, kind, and competent. (Obviously, I'm biased; investigate for yourself if this sounds attractive!)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with David Chapman

David Chapman Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Meaningness

1 Feb
I was misleading and probably caused harm by being polite and indirect instead of saying “this popular thing looks bad to me” explicitly. I regret this and intend to be less polite in future. But the opposite error is also harmful…
Many turn to meditation as a less grueling, less expensive, more popular alternative to psychotherapy or psychedelics. And in small doses it's usually beneficial.
What no one tells you is that the mainstream meditation methods were explicitly designed to turn you into a zombie. That's what their inventors said they wanted. And if you practice them seriously, that's what happens.
Read 6 tweets
29 Jan
@slatestarcodex .@glenweyl’s “Why I Am Not A Technocrat” is also very good and worth reading if you haven’t already.

I think there is much less disagreement here than it may seem. Both essays are quite complicated, so sorting this out point-by-point would be difficult, but…
@slatestarcodex @glenweyl Both essays take what I would call a meta-systematic, meta-rational position (which is why I admire both of them). They seem to agree on a core understanding (one that is, I think, very important and NOT widely recognized):
Read 12 tweets
28 Jan
Syllabi for 3️⃣ extremely interesting computer science courses taught this spring by Barath Raghavan at USC...

They assign some of my essays as readings, which is how I know about them, but that's not the main thing

raghavan.usc.edu
1️⃣ Computing for Social Good.

Getting a CS degree to increase ad clicks may not be that!

OTOH, one must "differentiate between nice-sounding-but-ineffective tech-for-good solutions and those that have a chance for real impact."

With a practicum!

raghavan.usc.edu/2021-spring-co…
2️⃣ Robust Systems Design and Implementation.

Everyone knows the usual CS curriculum is weirdly detached from the realities of building good software systems.

This is not the usual.

raghavan.usc.edu/2021-spring-ro…
Read 4 tweets
28 Jan
Extraordinary collection of first-hand experiences with science fraud, straight from the trenches, in response to @JoeHilgard's recent post.

Mostly in hard science (chemistry, molbio), not psychology/socsci and medicine, where we already knew

news.ycombinator.com/item?id=259227…
The science reform movement ~3 years ago was "it's definitely not about fraud, that hardly ever happens, it's about inadvertent errors, or at worst sloppiness."

Increasingly it's "it's about fraud."
Rubbish science is one manifestation of the pervasive characteristic of current society, bullshit in the sense of Harry Frankfurt: communication whose function is purely social performance, so that no one cares whether it is true or functional.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullsh…
Read 4 tweets
12 Dec 20
Everything you learned in school about how to write, and most of what you learned in most jobs, is WORSE THAN WRONG.

Here's why your writing sucks, and how you can fix that:
You learned that the function of language is to state facts. [*Cough* rationalism...] FALSE!

Language is the way we do relationships. Writing puts you in relationship with readers.

Relationships are shared caring. Do you care about your readers? Do they care about your text?
DO I CARE? is what the reader asks when reading your title. When reading your first sentence. When reading your first paragraph. Unless the answer is HELL YES, they'll close the tab.

There's another hundred open. And there's the stuff in Pocket, and a subreddit to check, and
Read 13 tweets
11 Dec 20
Does “enlightenment” mean a permanent no-self state, someone asked in email? It depends who you ask… also, is that something worth pursuing? vividness.live/2012/09/13/epi…
Here @OortCloudAtlas answers to “what does ‘deconstructing yourself’ mean.”

A more sophisticated story than the Buddhist “no self” theory, which is ultimately about avoiding rebirth by not existing…

Starts 50:00.

Rest is worth listening to as well!
@OortCloudAtlas Oh yeah, relevant Meaningness chapter.

Come for the enlightenment, stay for the aardvarks. meaningness.com/self
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!