|
Tom you think you're such a fucking
expert about everything. But you know what? You're more miserable than you were
two years ago. You used to not be a know it all and you were nice. Now you're a
know it all and you're a prick. Surely enlightenment didn't result in more
thorns?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 8:29
PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re:
Individuality: Outward Projection vs. Inner Subjective Sense of No Indiv.
Do
--- In [email protected],
anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]...>
wrote:
> In my experience, it is fun to contemplate such issues. And
thank
> you to each and every one of you who contributed to this
thread.
>
> But, having noticed that even deep immersement in
these ideas over a
> period of years has not resulted in a gestalt
awakening to what is
> really happening here, I go about my business as
usual. Such
> metaphysical questions appear to get burnt up in the
searing heat of
> life lived in the present.
>
> I have
heard that some do awaken to the true nature of things as a
> result of
this kind of self-inquiry, and so, do not condemn it
> outright. But I
wonder sometimes at its utility. In under an hour, I
> am sure that
someone familiar with the various conceptual nuances
> and schools of
thought on the topics of I, ego, doer, individuality,
> self etc.,
could lay them all out so that anyone of reasonably
> developed
intellect could grasp the ideas and check on how well they
> relate to
their own experience. After that, what is the point,
> unless it is to
check in once every few years to see if one's
> perspective has changed
due to the clearing of fog or the shifting
> of mirrors?
(Sorry
Akasha for this linear thinking, non-gestalt
> conclusion - I don't
fully mean it...am just stating how I feel at
> the
moment.)
For the most part, the intellect thinks in a sequential,
linear
fashion. I am not advocating anyone to try to abondon that at all --
I
don't think thats possible. What does occur at times though, is
that
after examining various parts of a puzzle, in a systematic,
linear
fashion, the various parts can "flash" -- fuse in new ways,
providing
new insight.
Sometimes the linear analysis and
(sometimes) subsequent "flash" are
based on symbolic processing -- that is,
its a logical refinement and
manipulation of concepts / abstractions --
sort of like solving an
algebraic equations where the variables are
concepts. Concepts and
abstractions are the "content" of the
processing.
On the other hand, a different type of linear processing
can occur,
also resulting in a, often later, gestalt-typr flash. However,
now the
elements being processed, the content, the data being crunched,
is
experiential. Or, sometimes a mixture of conceptual elelments
and
experiential elements. The post linear analysis phase, the "flash"
--
fuses concepts and/or experience in new relationships and can
result
in a new experiential foundation.
The best analogy I can
think of to explain the fusion of conceptual
and experiential elements --
each originally approached in very linear
systematic fashion, and it is
only an analogy, is in learning a new
skill or sport. For example, for
those that play tennis, a top-spin
serve becomes a valuable tool --
particularly as a second serve. It
almost always goes in, even when hit
full force, and can be made to
bounce so high to an opponent's weaker side
that it is hard to return
-- and further, can get the opponent out of
position.
When I was a kid and a teacher explained the top-spin serve
to me, I
didnt get it. I got the concept, I got the mechanics. But I could
not
"do it", I couldn't make it an experience. Later, some time
later,
fooling around, I found I could make my serves really "kick" by
doing
this "thing" that I could not explain, but could do. Some time
later,
the concept and the experience fused in a flash, and I
tealized what
I was doing was a self-learned top-spin serve. I then reused
the
conceptual understanding of top-spin to refine and clarify
the
mechanics of the "experience" and the feel of doing it. Soon, it
was
just locked in.
The point is, you don't attempt to think
gestaltly, nonlinearly. I
don't know how to do that -- other than to set up
the conditions that
let that happen. And that is to sharply look at
different parts of an
issue or problem in a linear systematic fashion. And
then, in a sense,
let go. And in time, sometimes, or often, a more
holistic,
multi-component (symbols and /or experiential elements) creat
a
"flash" of insight, almost as if the fusion of the elements
creates
energy and light.
The broader point is that I have found
that periodically
systematically and intensely examining the components of
the identity
/ ownership / ego / consciousness puzzle, looking at and
questioning
different views, various conceptual elements begand to flash /
fuse --
and over time these "insights" flashed/fused with
experiential
elements. The result is that it is a clear experience that
there is no
driver to this machine, no-doer in charge of this
apparatus
(intellect, mind, senses, motor skills): that the apparati
are
intelligent self-adaptive, ever learning,
ever-correcting,
self-suficient, yet intertwined, interacting elements.
This process is not adharmic, its not a muddle.
And in
particular that the decider, the intellect, the buddhi, the
pre-frontal
cortex mechanisms, are not in charge. Nothing is. Other
than the design of
the apparati. Which may be "intelligent design" or
"evolutionary design" --
it doesn't matter. The point is the apparati
has an inherently powerful
design that dynamically moves forward, and
self-corrects, by many means,
many learned -- and thus (its
corrective,self-balancing mechanisms) are
expanding and becoming more
subtle and natural.
What remains, beyond
the apparati unfolding according to its nature
and design, is that
glow/light of awareness -- devoid of content,
self-sufficient.
This
all may have nothing to do with the awakening or realization that
others
report. It may have little to do with what various texts
report. However,
it is a clear experience of no-doer, no driver to
this machine, and an
awareness of awareness which is not distorted by
what is seen, or done or
thought.
The process that cultivated this is not adharmic, its not a
muddle, it
is not a waste of time.
To subscribe,
send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and
click 'Join This Group!'
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
