Tips on seated meditation

 

I'm working on a book on Buddhism; I guess this is my first public announcement of that.  These ideas I'm sharing here aren't directly about all of that scope, but it definitely overlaps.  I recommended in an online group that someone try out meditation in order to help them with memory and mental focus problems, along with getting their sleep in order, and exercising.  

That was in a Reddit thread here, in an interesting group about "biohacking."  Lots of those people take a lot of new and even relatively experimental supplements or drugs, but it also relates to other kinds of scope, basics, like adjusting sleep, diet, and exercise inputs.  I don't take random supplements or drugs, but it's interesting hearing about all that.

That person asked for tips or starting points on how to meditate, and I commented this:

Sure, along with the usual framing limitations. I tried practicing on my own a long time ago, and then did formal training when I was ordained as a Thai Buddhist monk, for two months, but all that is still limited. And there are different forms of meditation, etc.

Keeping it simple could help. It's probably best to try conventional seated meditation, "cross-legged," because that form is functional, but if you have a problem you could try in a chair instead. Not the lotus position, that most people's legs won't do, ordinary sitting. I'm going to explain why you might have problems, and how to work around them. That's beyond having a "bad hip" or whatever else; that is whatever it is. People carry tension in their bodies and it's essentially almost unnatural to try to remain motionless. It makes the tension in your body intensify, creating a feedback loop of feeling tense, feeling stress from tension, and so on. I'm only talking about sitting cross-legged for 10 or 15 minutes, early on; nothing too taxing. Still, it will probably feel unfamiliar.

Watching your breathing and relaxing it makes all the difference. Your breathing actually connects fairly directly with your mental state. Usually the link goes one way, and happiness or stress causes relaxed stomach breathing or tense, choppier, faster, upper chest breathing (respectively). You can practice and make it go the other way; you can adjust your breathing to adjust mental state. To meditate you only need to relax a bit, pay some attention to your breathing, and acknowledge random trains of thought as they come up, and let them go. In the very beginning your mind will be a bit noisy, but it will settle some. You can practice mental calmness while you walk too; that will help.

A limited amount of shifting around won't change anything, repositioning yourself. Later less will be required. If you can get to where you can do 15 minutes and it isn't a problem you can keep going, but beyond a half an hour things get harder, and there's no need to push it. Definitely set a timer, otherwise you'll keep guessing how long it will be, or looking at a clock. You can sit on something, a thin mat, a pillow, whatever, but it will be helpful to learn to let your body structure shift to a comfortable position, versus making a thicker cushion do the work. You are calming your body and mind at the same time. Your body's weight should settle into how your skeleton rests; that's a part of it.

Why do it? It seems reasonable to ask, even important to. It's not a wrong answer just to see what comes of it. It will relax your mind and give you more patience and focus throughout your day, but the process is slow enough that if you watch for it you'll be disappointed. Over a month of practicing every other day there might be some change. It takes more mental focus and causes more stress than it seems it might. That mostly drops out not so long in, but it's like how people are when they first try out running. They suck at it, and it's unpleasant. Later you can relax into it and it's familiar. You figure out what works for you.

I would avoid music, or any background noise, but some is fine. Your own mind will be noisy enough. There's a tipping point past which it's a lot more comfortable. In some training forms they might do more with breathing (just breath from your stomach, in a very relaxed fashion, a bit on the slow side). One approach alternates walking and seated meditation. I'd just sit, not too much, daily if it works out to. No need for too much pressure; skipping a day won't matter. If you feel very tense, sweat a lot, or feel pain you just need to relax more. It will bump your body temperature a little, the extra effort, more than it seems that it would. You don't have to be good at it, or put a lot of time in, or experience a quiet mind, for it to feel pleasant. Maybe just more so after you finish.

The rest of what I'm writing, the book that I mentioned, isn't mostly practical guidance like that, but one section is roughly exactly that, those ideas.  Then it's funny how the audience that you imagine or speak to changes how you frame and communicate the ideas, so the form wouldn't be identical.

The rest is about other interesting experiences with Buddhism, and about my own take on what Buddhism is supposed to be, how core teachings can be put into practice.  A long time ago I experienced a high degree of disruption in my life and looked into all sorts of explanations of what the human condition was all about, and how to make positive changes, and within a couple of years I gradually focused almost entirely on Buddhism.  It works.  Earlier on I was reading philosophy, psychology, random New Age oriented themes, whatever I ran across.

I have two degrees in studying philosophy and religion (and one in industrial engineering); that's related.  That came later though; it was more a part of trying to communicate what I had learned, over many years of study and practice, which ultimately didn't work out.  Now I'm trying again, and if communicating through writing a book doesn't work out I can live with that, but I feel compelled to try.  It could help people.

no need to make that face, but this is basically it

Tea Tracks Beng Long and Wa Long sheng pu'er

 

A tea friend, Jan, started his own vending business some years ago, based in the Netherlands, and he just sent some samples for me to try.  It's mostly pu'er, it seems; perfect for what I like.

As usual I've written notes without looking at details, and since these names don't ring a bell I only knew that it was sheng pu'er.  They're pretty good, so it's interesting going back to see what they actually are:

Beng Long 蚌龙 2022 (21.80 Euro for 100 grams; $24.20 USD)

Beng Long is a village in Menghai, Xishuangbanna. This tea is made from 50 - 70 year old trees, that grow on an elevation of 1800m in a good natural environment. The tea has been stored as Mao Cha for a year in Jinghong before being pressed into small 100g cakes.

We tried this tea multiple times as Mao Cha (unpressed Puerh) and felt it being great as a tea for traveling or a daily drinker.  

Taste:  Probably one of our more upfront bitter teas giving a good energy.

Trees:  50 - 70 year old tress growing in a natural environment

Origin:  Beng Long (village), Menghai, Xishuangbanna, Yunnan, China

It really is kind of bitter, but that might be toning down some after 2 years.  This "daily drinker" theme is interesting; that must mean different things to different people.  This tea is a lot better than that price implies, and if someone takes "daily drinker" to mean decent factory tea this is lots better than that.  But then all that is in the notes.

Wa Long 瓦竜 2022  (65.40 Euro for 100 grams; $72.55)

Wa Long is a village in the Man Zhuan area (close to Yi Wu, Xishuangbanna). This tea is made from mostly from ancient tree (gu shu) material. The trees are growing in a national forest in a very good environment.

This tea starts out with gentle floral notes and gets a bit more bitter over time. It has a mind clearing and relaxing effect.

This tea has been stored as loose leaf tea (mao cha) for one year in Jinghong before being pressed into 100g cakes.

Taste:  Gentle floral notes

Trees:  Old and ancient trees (gu shu) growing in a natural environment

Origin:  Wa Long (village), Xishuangbanna, Yunnan, China

Harvest:  Early spring 2022

I tried both together; in a sense that's to compare versions directly, but also just to write half as many reviews and still cover the same amount of teas.  Getting around to doing the notes and editing once on a weekend is enough.

The price difference is interesting; this costs three times as much, and references the all too familiar gushu theme.

Review:

Beng Long on the left, in all photos

Beng Long #1:  that's quite intense; I didn't see that coming.  I let these brew a little longer than I typically do, even for a first round, maybe 20 seconds, and this got started really fast.  The proportion is quite high for these too.  The sample looks to be right at 10 grams, which is a lot.  But then I didn't want to brew 6 or 7, a more optimum tasting amount, and have 3 or 4 left over.  Maybe I should have?  Or brewed 5 and 5?  That would make sense.

I've been brewing versions that are hard to separate as much as this looser form, or samples pressed as coins; I guess that's why this outcome seemed unexpected, even though if you brew a maxed out proportion for 20 seconds that's what happens.

Bitterness stands out, and sweetness, but there is interesting range beyond that.  It expresses unusual vegetal character, and beyond that quite a bit of complexity.  It's probably as well to wait a round to do a list though, to let it get going, and to describe it brewed lighter.

Wa Long:  this is interesting for brewing so dark.  Two years isn't long enough for that kind of transition, even for teas stored here, in the hottest and wettest place imaginable.  Leaf appearance looks mixed in color; maybe parts are oxidized, or some parts a little over-roasted (from pan-frying), or both.  It could be a novel experience, seeing how all that unpacks.  Warmth is interesting in this.  Of course there's substantial bitterness up front too, that stands out more, but this includes a lot of complexity, and depth.  Again I'll do a fast second round and describe both then.

Beng Long #2:  much better balance.  Bitterness is really something in this; it's one of those teas in the higher end of the range for that.  I'm relatively open to those but it can be a challenge, especially for a combined tasting.  As is common bright and even somewhat complex floral range adjoins that, and decent sweetness.  

It sounds like I'm describing a broad regional standard character, doesn't it?  Was that Lincang?  My mind is not retaining information like it had 20 years ago.  The funny part about that is when something sticks it really does, and when it doesn't it's as if there's a system glitch about never holding onto that information range.  If someone's name isn't sticking hearing it a few dozen times won't help.

Not much of a list.  Bitterness, sweetness, and floral range stand out, and the vegetal note is pretty standard, like flower stem, or tasting a tree bud.  It's good, for that kind of style.

Wa Long:  this is tracking in an unusual direction instead.  It includes a lot of that same range too, it overlaps, the bitterness, sweetness, and floral range, but the warm tones are not just different, they're a bit unique.  This reminds me of loving Vietnamese sheng that's atypical (not that this is; some flavor range is unique, and for those I'm talking about something else, a more unusual character).  For those Vietnamese teas some others who tried them didn't like them, seeing them as yeasty, too oxidized, not properly balanced by bitterness and astringency, and just odd.  This is basically in a typical range, with one part novel, some of the flavor.  

It's not breaking down to a description well, at this point.  It's a little towards a warm wood range, or even spice, but it's not distinct yet.  It may cross over through some dried fruit range as it transitions, or go much heavier into spice.  We'll see, and I'll write more of a list as it goes.  

These are pretty intense teas; I suspect the feel will go along with the flavor intensity, and I won't get far through rounds before needing a break.  I'm feeling pretty sluggish from effects from a run yesterday evening, and I have a busy day planned, so that could work out, having a lunch in the middle, and absolutely getting dosed.

Beng Long #3:  overall balance falls together nicely.  For someone on that page, for loving high bitterness, highly floral range this would be perfect.  I might like it more in two more years, once all that settles a bit.  That bright, fresh, intense flavor isn't going anywhere; I wouldn't worry about it dropping out, as can be a real concern with more approachable, sweeter, lighter teas, which often include less bitterness and orient a bit more towards fruit tones.  

It would interesting trying this alongside a Da Xue Shan version I had not long ago, this one, from 2023 (that is Lincang, the broader area).  It was one year younger, and might've been that much more intense and bitter, a little more challenging.  They're kind of similar, and it would be interesting to see just how similar.  

I should've brewed this in two parts, as two 5 gram sessions; these are way too intense maxed out for proportion like this.  It's not like I couldn't possibly foresee that either.  I rely on intuition to tell me how to prepare teas, and which to try, and I don't know that it gets things wrong sometimes, but I'm not always clear on where it's coming from.  Maybe I felt an inclination to really get dosed?  I did get a sluggish start to the day, and have things to do.

Wa Long:  a touch of dryness to the feel structure is entering in.  The warm tones are still hard to separate apart (beyond floral range; a main component).  One part is like aromatic wood, like cedar.  Then it seems to connect with warmer mineral range.  There may well be spice range beyond that, which is hard to really separate out, since those flavors mix as a set.  

I just re-tried a tea (sheng) that tasted a lot like a warmer version of wood, straight wood, and I really don't care for that, and it's not what I mean related to this.  It's mostly bitter, then also floral, with decent sweetness for balance, and then these other flavors are supporting that range.  The main flavor range is fairly conventional.

Beng Long #4:  warmth picks up, and complexity, and it had plenty going on before.  It's odd how this takes a short step towards the other in terms of character.  Bitterness is still the main part of the experience, but it's more balanced now, already.  For brewing half as much of this, dropping proportion, it would be easier to dial that intensity level to where you like it.  Just using fast infusions is working though.

General pleasantness isn't coming across clearly in these descriptions.  Feel is pretty substantial, rich and not too rough or dry, and aftertaste experience adds complexity.  Nothing else is off about it.  That vegetal range does include a little plant stem / green wood tone, but it's secondary, after the bitterness, sweetness, and floral range, so it integrates well.

Wa Long:  that one warm flavor range continues to evolve, as it seemed that it would.  It still does taste a bit like aromatic wood, like cedar, with some spice undertone, but a bit more fruit joins it, something like dried citrus peel, or not completely unrelated dried tamarind.

What about camphor; that flavor keeps coming up in vendor descriptions, when I don't really see it?  Sure, maybe.  There's an edgy and warm medicinal tone to this too, and I think plenty of people would interpret that as camphor.  I tend not to, trying to break it down further to parts that are causing that effect, but it's a little like that.  

It's interesting how the bitterness, warm wood or spice tone, floral range, and some fruit mix in effect.  It's so complex, but it integrates.  It's not really "catchy," not the kind of set of flavors or complex experience that everyone would love, but I think a lot of more experienced pu'er drinkers would completely get it.

I'll drink a bit of water to get this hui gan effect to clear, then one more round, and get back to these after doing other things.  They'll both brew many more rounds, and keep shifting some, but I think the first 5 rounds will tell a lot of the story.  That reminds me of another favorite blogger who always writes out dozen round reviews, always highlighting transitions, mentioning a new flavor aspect for each round, making it sound like he is drinking 3 or 4 different teas, when it's just one.  You can kind of see what you look for in experiencing or reviewing teas; if the focus is on flavor transition then some of it is there to be noticed.

Beng Long #5:  that vegetal range bumped a little this round, for some reason.  It's along the line of kale, although green wood also works as an interpretation.  Again heavy bitterness, sweetness, and floral range dominate even more, and that other aspect stands out a lot for being novel.  Sheng can taste like green wood but the other range seems more common.

Wa Long:  it's interesting how that novel flavor set, which I've said enough about, seems to integrate more and simplify.  It's not as if it's losing complexity (not much, at least), but seems to come across as all one thing more.  For being in this novel range I'd really expect some part of that to be more negative, for an off aspect to be included that makes the rest more challenging.  I guess like green wood; that works as an example, even though to me it's not so negative in the other version.  

This comes across as fairly balanced and refined, where with just a touch of odd flavor or mustiness it wouldn't, at all.  Even a thin spot could throw off that balance, for example if sweetness level didn't support the rest, as it does.

These don't necessarily match what I love most in sheng experience, to be clear.  I'm a fan of quite drinkable versions, including some fruit, and a bit less bitterness, even when that comes at a cost, for example when a version gives up some intensity, or overall balance.  They're good though.

Of course I drank lots more infusions later, I just didn't get back to taking notes.  They may have transitioned a little more, but in general didn't seem so different than where they left off.

Conclusions:

I didn't comment on these in relation to the product descriptions or prices, since I hadn't read that before writing those notes.  It's interesting that one costs three times the price of the other.  The Wa Long does seem better, in a few senses, in a more interesting and pleasant flavor range, with nothing about it seeming negative, or like a flaw.  The Beng Long seemed nice to me too; some people might be put off by a touch of green wood in the flavor range, but to me that was fine, since it integrated fairly well with sweetness and pronounced floral range.

It's tempting to try to summarize a quality level assessment, and then move on to judging value.  Does the tea version that I liked a little more justify costing three times as much?  Local area demand factors in, not just character.  People love the gushu theme, and value it.  Then it's tempting to critique that entire context.

What are they seeing, and valuing?  I've been reviewing other teas that are presented as gushu sheng versions, and others said to have won awards in competitions.  It's not just about teas having good flavor range, complexity, intensity, and balance, with bitterness level and sweetness matching in a positive way, or versions lacking flaws.  An emphasis on depth comes up.  This is hard to even describe; it relates in part to a mineral layer supporting the rest.  

It's a type of intensity, but not forward flavor intensity.  I don't see it as all that positive, in terms of adding that much to the experience.  Some people claim that it relates to very positive aging potential, but I'm not so sure about that either.  I've tried plenty of tea said to be gushu that just went dead, while much more challenging and inexpensive versions were still becoming more approachable.

To me claims of quality level for oolong, green, and black teas are easier to unpack.  Flavor range is emphasized, and in the highest quality levels the aspects I see as "quality markers" make sense.  They're not always so desirable that they make a lot of practical difference between 40 cent a gram tea and 80 cent versions, but at least you can notice them, and they seem positive.  Really if a sheng version has positive and novel flavor range, with good intensity and complexity, good balance, a lack of flaws, and decent refinement it's enough.  All that is a lot to ask from versions that aren't blended--using multiple material inputs--to cover all that range effectively, and mixing different location materials instead trades out some flavor distinctiveness.

In conclusion, these teas are good.  I wouldn't buy 70 cents a gram sheng, but I get it why people can easily have a looser tea budget than I do, and can value unique experiences.  I'd buy decent Yiwu before this Wa Long version, which can be moderate in cost, if it's not "gushu."  It would be more standard in flavor profile, and overall character, so more ordinary, but I like that pleasant, approachable range.  I don't even buy much Yiwu, to be clear; it's more a comparison reference.

I can relate to that other relatively bitter sheng style, it's just also not a favorite range.  I was happy that a local tea friend gave me a whole cake of a version that's like that (200 grams; it's a bit though), so I can drink it when I feel like it.  If Jan meant that once in awhile it's really pleasant drinking something like that grandpa style, mixing up what you experience, in calling it a "daily drinker," then I completely agree.  Or sometimes you just feel like dialing up the bitterness and intensity.  Usually not so much that I want to drink a partly aged Xiaguan or Dayi Jia Ji tuo version, but once in awhile I'll even go that far.

I don't see that tea as being below average in quality level; to me it seems like a good value at that price, even though that does put it in the $80 or so standard size cake range, the low end of where a lot of better in-house vendor produced versions now land.

Online contact and teen social development

 

I just ran across a few group posts on Reddit about people not being successful at dating, attributing causes to that.  One guy said that he experienced early childhood trauma, and took a decade of therapy to get over that, and couldn't act naturally in dates or relationships as a result.  Fair enough.

My son is just starting into that kind of range, or really getting far yet.  He's 15, so it's still in a normal time-frame, to be on the fence, or just sorting out early interest.  I commented that online contact now must make it all much harder, because his friends don't hang out with him "in real life," and that's only going to be more of a factor in his 20s, that he might experience most of his social contact online.  It's not helpful for real-life forms of contacts, like dating.

I just saw a graph online that clarifies what I was getting at:

this was cited from here, which includes some odd right wing leaning spin

I would imagine this is really limited to "in real life."  He would spend a couple of hours talking to friends while playing online games last semester, daily, which of course impacted his studies and his grades.  In 2013 someone in his age range would have spent over two hours with friends daily, and the average in this graph dropped down to 40+ minutes.

Would that relate to covid, since it's apparently ending in 2020?  Maybe.  But it was around an hour in 2019, prior to covid, and the graph was showing clear annual decline.

For my age group that's not even a half an hour a day, in 2019, and that was under 40 minutes for the entire range, since 2003.  I get it; contact with friends can really drop out in your mid 30s.  A similar pattern of decline has been happening for the 25 to 34 age group though.

Of course this relates to generational differences, in addition to patterns that affect all of society; from 2003 to 2020 the people at each age range shifted over time.  This theme reminds me of the death of malls in the US, how less people want to go hang out in that particular public space.  It's easier to shop online, and in some cases safety issues come up, but overall people seem to be more focused on experiences at home, on watching streaming content, or spending time online.

Back to my son a discussion point came up about encouraging him to go to a school dance, or not, about letting him make his own decisions versus emphasizing that these really are once in a lifetime sort of social opportunities.  He's just not spending that much time with friends in real life.  He tries to arrange more, hiking outings, playing basketball in a park, or they gather to eat sometimes, but his friends are either busy or just not on that page.

He plays a sport; that helps (swimming).  It's time spent with other kids, and it's relatively social, even though there is training to be done.  As far as I know participation in sports isn't in steep decline; the kids still do that.

One point that made me think all this through, in a different light, is how some of my friends in college were fairly undeveloped socially, not having experienced much or any dating at that point.  Most of them pulled it together, and eventually did end up marrying.  It would be harder if someone wasn't in the habit of participating in real life social interaction at all; the starting point would be different.

Of course one theme that comes up is that online dating apps are making things worse instead of better, that patterns of how people match, or don't, makes it harder to meet people.  A broad range of commentary puts the blame for this on women, for most trying to match with a small percentage of the guys.  To some extent this must happen.  The broader conclusion that women are ruining dating I'm not so sure about.  I suspect that this trend for people to socialize mostly online is more of a cause than all women now only choosing a narrow subset of men.  It gets repeated though, surely making it seem more likely to be true.

I think I've mentioned interesting, novel, and odd forms of patterns of relationships being described online before, like in this graphic version, by a "Hoe Math" channel:

This kind of thing is bordering on misogyny, reducing dating habits and women's preferences--or really men's too--down to a simple series of patterns.  This content creator has given this some thought, but I wouldn't be surprised if he hasn't done much actual dating.  If you actually go through it parts do match normal, typical experience though.  

It just probably wouldn't be helpful, since a short summary is that it blames women for putting too much emphasis on physical attractiveness, even though it says roughly the same thing about men.  Maybe people do tend to date and marry people who are generally as physically attractive as them, but it sets aside all the rest about sharing interests and worldview, or personality types matching or conflicting.

So where does all this leave my son?  We encourage him to participate in sports, and activities and groups, and hopefully he will build up social experiences and skills that help him in the next stage of his life, in college and beyond.  How much he dates and whether he attends any one sort of function doesn't matter as much, but to an extent it all connects.

I really am concluding that too much time spent online, even in social contact in online gaming, probably is negative.  15 to 24 year olds might really average around a half an hour of contact with friends now, and that's not much.  It seems to clearly be decreased by lots of people who don't spend any time with friends, in real life. 

This is a very common theme on Reddit too, that someone, male of female, is in their late 20s, reconsidering why they've barely dated at all, or never have, and don't hang out with friends, and have trouble placing meaning in their lives.  Of course all that isn't just due to online games and streamed entertainment; causes are complex.  Someone who experiences normal working hours and a long commute has no time to meet with friends five days a week.

Mostly this post is about sharing that "time spent with friends" reference, and some thoughts on that, versus arriving at actual conclusions in relation to it all.