Originally Posted by
Faux Newbie
I would disagree on one level. In Buddhism, self is an illusion, and enlightenment cannot be achieved through ignorance of that outside of the self. In short, samsara and nirvana are one thing, nirvana is simply the eradication of ideas of self that prevent a real understanding of things. In Taoism, the phenomenon of the real world must be observed and experienced in order to become a sage, and in Confucianism, Confucius and Xunzi are in agreement that observing the virtue of others is a vital lesson for the path. None suggest that you can do it on your own, and cite the entire world as well as texts and practices as necessary or helpful. Even Chan, which does not promote dependency on texts, still sees their usefulness, and samsara as an essential element toward enlightenment.
In the case of Christian meditation, I would be interested in how they determine that what they see as God is not their own ego. This is an honest question, I have not seen a lot on this specific topic in reference to Christian meditation, but in Chan, one famous scholar and monk was clear in stating that quiet meditation, of all meditation, is most prone to confusing the ego with progress, and so ends each meditation of his own with "that was not the enlightenment I was seeking". If there is such a focus on avoiding confusion of the ego with God, I could see value there, but if not, then this could easily be self centered in a way none of the Eastern traditions are (on paper, of course!)