Great article that was recently brought to my attention  

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/tricycle.org/magazine/buddhism-and-psychotherapy/amp/

I personally needed meditation in the background, but therapy was also needed. I look at them as both helping each other. Meditation can have a lot of denial in it. Therapy helps you understand your emotions and that understanding helps relieve stress. Crying and accepting that others opinions should not be taken so seriously helps to relieve the tension further. Developing other forms of pleasure that add variety to your life is healing as well. Intrinsic motivation is the most healing.

Nicely put, Richard Zen. I agree.

edit: this is a general reply, not reply to chris marti



Hmm... I actually think the article was kinda crappy.

1. Oversimplification of therapies and medtiation practices - false dichotomy
2. Bizarre idea that buddhism doesn't promote better thinking and actions (8 fold path is mostly about thinking/actions)
3. Very narrow idea that "letting go" is the point of meditation... sure, but really it isn't letting go, so much as "seeing clearly". 

Frankly, it's a polemic and disempowering article.

Yeah I don't agree with the article, and like most articles they don't have enough knowledge of more advanced practices. But I still stand with mixing psychology and meditation. It's okay to enjoy orgasm, good food, and interesting hobbies as long as you don't narrow down those things to one addiction. Meditation also helps with those transition moments between activities when the brain does a small grieving. Breathing and letting go during those times is SO helpful.

My favourite part of Buddhism is just watching the mind bend away from the object and noticing the pain there. It's illustrative. Seeing also the desire getting satisfied and then a slight boredom arising. Again following the breath relieves both stress and boredom. It puts you back into Flow.

Hmmm, I didn’t read it that way at all! I think making a distinction between the psychological ego self and the realisation of nonself is actually very pragmatic and helpful. Meditation and therapy both have their place, but expecting meditation to be able to magically solve all problems (as opposed to alleviating the suffering that accompanies the problems) is misguided. If I have a migraine, I take a painkiller. I don’t sit there and meditate hoping to alleviate the suffering that accompanies the physical pain. I’ll take whatever help I can get! ;) 

I agree; I’ve found both to be useful. In truth, western secular meditation is now so enmeshed with therapeutic culture that it’s often difficult to separate them. Meditation teachers often use psychological and therapeutic terms. But I think it’s worth making the distinction ... 

A meditation (Kundalini) migraine CAN be made into rapture/bliss. I would start with dropping aversion/fear/resistance, questioning how the mind is labeling that experience as unpleasant, catch that and turn it into neutrality, ignore that when it is neutral by shifting attention from felt-sense to visual/sounds, gain confidence then after awhile, go through Anapanasati to power that to become rapture/bliss. I think this is a worthy exercise... ;)

Interesting you mention that, because the last time I had a migraine (last week; they're pretty rare, but I think a yoga pose - kurmasana - triggered a neck sprain which contributed to the last one) there was definitely a morbid curiosity regarding "what would happen if I just let this run its course." In truth I have tried this before and lasted up until the nausea part and just chickened out and taken a painkiller. Last week I was not able to wait it out as I was an hour's drive away from home and would not have been able to drive with the migraine. Ah, the life of a householder! ;)

Nevertheless, good point and maybe I will have the courage to try that next time!

I would like to try therapy. 

Preferably with a female and enlightened therapist.

 

I can highly recommend Santina: http://insanyoga.com/gestalt-therapy/ 

I both agree with the point that the artificial dichotomy has its potential downsides as well as the point about the Western meditation world being pretty hyper-psychologized, and walking that line and knowing when to step to which side is clearly part of the art of the practice.

I hope that article is part of a much deeper discussion that investigates both points of view.

Clearly, the Buddha advocated for mental health, the removal of distracting thoughts, in cultivating skillful mind-states, in investigating the causes of both skillful and unskillful thoughts, mental patterns, and actions to come up with something much better and to craft a mind and life that was to be praised by the wise and that reduces suffering. His frameworks were in some ways very different from those of Western psychology, but the emphasis clearly is there.

Simultaneously, there is clearly the point of view that one simply observe and investigate what arises, be it skillful, not skillful, neutral, or otherwise, as demonstrated in the Greater Discourse on Mindfulness, as well as suttas such as One by One as They Occurred, and numerous other places.

Clearly, the trick is to have both options and learn when to apply both of these skillful options, with there likely being more disagreement about when to apply each than whether or not either is as good idea, as both clearly are.

I was heartened by the article despite its flaws, as I think that conversation in the McBuddhist world is long overdue. May it spark skillful debate and promote good outcomes.

Great point Daniel: 

“Clearly, the trick is to have both options and learn when to apply both of these skillful options, with there likely being more disagreement about when to apply each than whether or not either is as good idea, as both clearly are.”