> I think you guys should either spell out more clearly the training you do on your website, or increase the minimum experience level of the people you’ll accept
Data point: this was my (much milder) experience at MAPLE, OAK’s parent org. I thought it would be too challenging for me, they assured me it would be fine, it was indeed much too challenging for me.
I read your blog post, and I think part of the challenge was the lack of an appropriate framework through which to see the structure of the retreat, which they really should have given you. For instance, you’re supposed to be meditating during the busywork you do, because eventually you’re supposed to enter a meditative state during all parts of everyday life. Once you can enter some state during sitting meditation, you try it in walking meditation, then you try it with a mindless task like sweeping the floor, then with a slightly more involved task, until you get to doing everything in a meditative state, and life itself becomes your meditation.
Another thing is that intellectual progress is not the point of a meditation retreat, you’re not supposed to think through your issues, you’re supposed to be observing the bare reality of your senses in intimate details, preferably from the time you wake up until the time you lose consciousness at night with unwavering focus. The discomfort also serves a purpose: if you observe the feelings of discomfort with interest, and completely let go of any expectation that they will get better, the discomfort changes in nature, and the pain stops being a problem.
It’s a real shame that some retreat centers have a cultural aversion to explaining anything to participants. Maybe it comes from zen, which uses the state of confusion and uncertainty as a teaching tool, but I’ve seen it happen in other retreats (like Goenka’s) too, and it really doesn’t mesh well with a rationalist view.
you’re supposed to be observing the bare reality of your senses in intimate details, preferably from the time you wake up until the time you lose consciousness at night with unwavering focus.
Wow I think they did even worse at that. I didn’t emphasize this because it wasn’t a big pain point for me relative to being cold and hungry, but the meditation instruction was absolutely unhelpful for me (and I’ve gotten helpful instruction elsewhere, so it isn’t just a me thing, although clearly it works better for some people).
> if you observe the feelings of discomfort with interest, and completely let go of any expectation that they will get better, the discomfort changes in nature, and the pain stops being a problem.
I understand that there are ways this can work really well for people but jesus christ the failure modes on that are numerous and devastating.
I understand that there are ways this can work really well for people but jesus christ the failure modes on that are numerous and devastating.
I really agree with this. The reason spiritual communities can go more quickly and more disastrously off the rails is because they are aiming to tinker with the rules by which we live at a really fundamental level, whereas most organizations generally opt to work on top of a kind of cultural base operating system.
I would generally find it unwise to tinker at all with one’s operating system except that our cultural operating system seems so unable to address some really really huge and pressing problems including, seemingly to me, all of x-risk.
I think part of what the rationalist community has done well (that incidentally I think EA has done less well) is be willing to discard some of the cultural operating system we inherited, in a deliberate and goal-oriented way.
Just noting here that Elizabeth wasn’t at one of MAPLE’s retreats (from what I understand; I’d never set foot on MAPLE at the time of her visit). MAPLE hosts a silent meditation week about once a month. The rest of the weeks are called Responsibility Weeks. While the residents are expected to meditate throughout the day during these Weeks (but it’s really hard to because they have to use computers and stuff), guests are not expected to. Guests can just experience a different way of living and being.
MAPLE has a handful of ‘jock hippies’. Jock hippies believe things turn out all right generally. Their visceral experience is embodied. They often experience pleasurable sensations. They’re happy despite a lot of turmoil. They like walking barefoot through nature, doing vigorous forms of exercise, and interacting with strangers.
Elizabeth was on the phone with one such person, who explained things to her in a way that failed to comprehend a more typical rationalist way of experiencing the world.
But it was good of Elizabeth to come and teach MAPLE something new, and MAPLE is always learning how to better engage with their guests. There are heated debates about this where people get passionate about giving guests a more comfortable experience vs. giving guests a more monastic experience. There is always a tension here, but I do think it’s worth MAPLE understanding how to treat different people and know where they’re coming from.
MAPLE’s ‘demographic’ is one of the most diverse (culturally) that I have seen (for something that is super niche and not mainstream or well-funded), and it brings up a lot of complex scenarios. Each different cultural demographic uses language and communication in different ways, and so lots of communication errors are possible. I believe trial and error learning is needed to grow in this area.
But it would be nice if there were a way to feel more resolution with Elizabeth in particular. I will consider it myself, but, Elizabeth, if you wanted to let me know what would be beneficial for making things right, that would also be helpful.
> “There are heated debates about this where people get passionate about giving guests a more comfortable experience vs. giving guests a more monastic experience”
This seems irrelevant to my point that the experience was not accurately described (or rather was, but then was countermanded).
> “Elizabeth was on the phone with one such person, who explained things to her in a way that failed to comprehend a more typical rationalist way of experiencing the world. ”
I do not like the way you are pinning this on me being a weirdo. Living in a barely heated retreat that restricts food and sleep is the marked choice here, and if someone is incapable of noticing that is bad for some people they probably shouldn’t be the one handling inquiries from potential visitors.
> Just noting here that Elizabeth wasn’t at one of MAPLE’s retreats (from what I understand; I’d never set foot on MAPLE at the time of her visit). MAPLE hosts a silent meditation week about once a month. The rest of the weeks are called Responsibility Weeks. While the residents are expected to meditate throughout the day during these Weeks (but it’s really hard to because they have to use computers and stuff), guests are not expected to. Guests can just experience a different way of living and being.
This is inaccurate. I was indeed not at a formal retreat, but we visitors were following the same schedule as the residents for the first (several days? week?), until we complained. This schedule was similar to the one described on MAPLE’s current website as a responsibility week and included many hours of meditation per day, the timing of which restricted sleep to (6.5) hours if one could fall asleep immediately after the last meditation and wake up moments before the first one. (which I definitely can’t do). The 4 hours dedicated to work were not free time for us, I think probably we had more chores? I definitely wasn’t allowed to nap during them. When I first deviated from this schedule people definitely noticed and pushed for me to adhere to it, although some of that was relaxed later in the visit.
> But it was good of Elizabeth to come and teach MAPLE something new, and MAPLE is always learning how to better engage with their guests
I have no way of knowing what goes on inside MAPLE but this has not been evident in any of their engagement with me since, and I’m generally grossed out by the framing of “oh it all worked out because we learned from it”.
> I think you guys should either spell out more clearly the training you do on your website, or increase the minimum experience level of the people you’ll accept
Data point: this was my (much milder) experience at MAPLE, OAK’s parent org. I thought it would be too challenging for me, they assured me it would be fine, it was indeed much too challenging for me.
I read your blog post, and I think part of the challenge was the lack of an appropriate framework through which to see the structure of the retreat, which they really should have given you. For instance, you’re supposed to be meditating during the busywork you do, because eventually you’re supposed to enter a meditative state during all parts of everyday life. Once you can enter some state during sitting meditation, you try it in walking meditation, then you try it with a mindless task like sweeping the floor, then with a slightly more involved task, until you get to doing everything in a meditative state, and life itself becomes your meditation.
Another thing is that intellectual progress is not the point of a meditation retreat, you’re not supposed to think through your issues, you’re supposed to be observing the bare reality of your senses in intimate details, preferably from the time you wake up until the time you lose consciousness at night with unwavering focus. The discomfort also serves a purpose: if you observe the feelings of discomfort with interest, and completely let go of any expectation that they will get better, the discomfort changes in nature, and the pain stops being a problem.
It’s a real shame that some retreat centers have a cultural aversion to explaining anything to participants. Maybe it comes from zen, which uses the state of confusion and uncertainty as a teaching tool, but I’ve seen it happen in other retreats (like Goenka’s) too, and it really doesn’t mesh well with a rationalist view.
Wow I think they did even worse at that. I didn’t emphasize this because it wasn’t a big pain point for me relative to being cold and hungry, but the meditation instruction was absolutely unhelpful for me (and I’ve gotten helpful instruction elsewhere, so it isn’t just a me thing, although clearly it works better for some people).
> if you observe the feelings of discomfort with interest, and completely let go of any expectation that they will get better, the discomfort changes in nature, and the pain stops being a problem.
I understand that there are ways this can work really well for people but jesus christ the failure modes on that are numerous and devastating.
I really agree with this. The reason spiritual communities can go more quickly and more disastrously off the rails is because they are aiming to tinker with the rules by which we live at a really fundamental level, whereas most organizations generally opt to work on top of a kind of cultural base operating system.
I would generally find it unwise to tinker at all with one’s operating system except that our cultural operating system seems so unable to address some really really huge and pressing problems including, seemingly to me, all of x-risk.
I think part of what the rationalist community has done well (that incidentally I think EA has done less well) is be willing to discard some of the cultural operating system we inherited, in a deliberate and goal-oriented way.
Just noting here that Elizabeth wasn’t at one of MAPLE’s retreats (from what I understand; I’d never set foot on MAPLE at the time of her visit). MAPLE hosts a silent meditation week about once a month. The rest of the weeks are called Responsibility Weeks. While the residents are expected to meditate throughout the day during these Weeks (but it’s really hard to because they have to use computers and stuff), guests are not expected to. Guests can just experience a different way of living and being.
MAPLE has a handful of ‘jock hippies’. Jock hippies believe things turn out all right generally. Their visceral experience is embodied. They often experience pleasurable sensations. They’re happy despite a lot of turmoil. They like walking barefoot through nature, doing vigorous forms of exercise, and interacting with strangers.
Elizabeth was on the phone with one such person, who explained things to her in a way that failed to comprehend a more typical rationalist way of experiencing the world.
But it was good of Elizabeth to come and teach MAPLE something new, and MAPLE is always learning how to better engage with their guests. There are heated debates about this where people get passionate about giving guests a more comfortable experience vs. giving guests a more monastic experience. There is always a tension here, but I do think it’s worth MAPLE understanding how to treat different people and know where they’re coming from.
MAPLE’s ‘demographic’ is one of the most diverse (culturally) that I have seen (for something that is super niche and not mainstream or well-funded), and it brings up a lot of complex scenarios. Each different cultural demographic uses language and communication in different ways, and so lots of communication errors are possible. I believe trial and error learning is needed to grow in this area.
But it would be nice if there were a way to feel more resolution with Elizabeth in particular. I will consider it myself, but, Elizabeth, if you wanted to let me know what would be beneficial for making things right, that would also be helpful.
Noting that I do not believe this is an accurate description of my experience but super do not feel like arguing it here.
I’m still mad about this, so:
> “There are heated debates about this where people get passionate about giving guests a more comfortable experience vs. giving guests a more monastic experience”
This seems irrelevant to my point that the experience was not accurately described (or rather was, but then was countermanded).
> “Elizabeth was on the phone with one such person, who explained things to her in a way that failed to comprehend a more typical rationalist way of experiencing the world. ”
I do not like the way you are pinning this on me being a weirdo. Living in a barely heated retreat that restricts food and sleep is the marked choice here, and if someone is incapable of noticing that is bad for some people they probably shouldn’t be the one handling inquiries from potential visitors.
> Just noting here that Elizabeth wasn’t at one of MAPLE’s retreats (from what I understand; I’d never set foot on MAPLE at the time of her visit). MAPLE hosts a silent meditation week about once a month. The rest of the weeks are called Responsibility Weeks. While the residents are expected to meditate throughout the day during these Weeks (but it’s really hard to because they have to use computers and stuff), guests are not expected to. Guests can just experience a different way of living and being.
This is inaccurate. I was indeed not at a formal retreat, but we visitors were following the same schedule as the residents for the first (several days? week?), until we complained. This schedule was similar to the one described on MAPLE’s current website as a responsibility week and included many hours of meditation per day, the timing of which restricted sleep to (6.5) hours if one could fall asleep immediately after the last meditation and wake up moments before the first one. (which I definitely can’t do). The 4 hours dedicated to work were not free time for us, I think probably we had more chores? I definitely wasn’t allowed to nap during them. When I first deviated from this schedule people definitely noticed and pushed for me to adhere to it, although some of that was relaxed later in the visit.
> But it was good of Elizabeth to come and teach MAPLE something new, and MAPLE is always learning how to better engage with their guests
I have no way of knowing what goes on inside MAPLE but this has not been evident in any of their engagement with me since, and I’m generally grossed out by the framing of “oh it all worked out because we learned from it”.