« Being religious won't save you from suicide | Main | The Book of Chuang Tzu praises uselessness »

June 13, 2018

Comments

Yes, a funny old thing intuition. How many times have I left home only to have the nagging doubt that I have not locked up? Or as in one case of not turning the hob gas off – and drove miles back to check. Call it intuition but it seems to be related to how the habit of ruminating thoughts throw up random words or images that have little to do with leaving the house or whatever.

I put it down mostly to not being aware of what I am doing at the moment. It is distressing to realise that most of our lives are spent in a state of unawareness. Perhaps the recent posts on the ordinary and mindfulness may hold a key?

I agree that suddenly being mentally prompted to remember whether you switched off the stove or locked the door has little to do with intuition and everything to being distracted or even scatty by nature.

In Brian's case, may I say welcome to the world of ageing, where experiencing 'a senior moment', as we call it where I live, becomes all the more frequent. I find it important to be very mindful of matters of safety when going about the daily routine. Especially when I need to go up on the roof for some maintenance chore.

And if the burner had been on?

How very ungrateful of you, Brian, not to accept and acknowledge how you'd been blest, not once but twice over! I mean, what more could one ask for from God?

Miracle 1 : You'd actually left the burner on. God went out His way to let you know this.

Miracle 2 : When God found you dithering, He then went out of His way one more time, and miraculously switched the burner off Himself.

Instead of genuflecting in abject surrender at this double miracle, here you are, speaking of the "danger of trusting our intuition", and all kinds of heretical nonsense about "verifying" God's power! May the Lord forgive you!

Hi Appreciative

When we simply adopt an observer attitude we see exactly what you just wrote.

Then we gulp, and say Oops, thanks!

Happened recently..

Missed the street I normally turn into.
As i watched it pass by I said "ugh. Missed it."

Twenty seconds later I see same turn approaching.

.. And I squint and exclaim aloud, "No F..ing way!"

And in a flash Master's illuminated smile says, "way."


But that damn voice in my head, BURNER ON!, had been so clear and distinct. And it had appeared all on its own, since I hadn't been thinking about anything related to my breakfast when the alert popped into my mind.

I have a theory. Bear with me.

Before the red hot glowing orb appeared you said you
were idly listening to the radio likely not thinking about much of anything except the latest Trump escapade.

That's when a strong, unseen gust began to buffet the
windmills of your mind and the mechanical governor
kicked in to prevent damage from the over-spinning
blades. Just call it the Trumpian wind phenomenon.

The smooth working neural channels in the mind began
to heat up. The governor had to rescue its synapses
from damage. But how? Ah, cook up some doubt and
fear about a mundane event. Play the distraction game.

All of it happens in the blink of an eye while you listen
innocently to things "outside yourself". The only antidote
is mindfulness. Examine what enters your mind. Note
the often subtle currents of anger, disdain, and, yes,
even the odd demonic image coursing through your
brain. Save yourself before the sheriff has to shut you
down.


But that damn voice in my head, BURNER ON!, had been so clear and distinct. And it had appeared all on its own, since I hadn't been thinking about anything related to my breakfast when the alert popped into my mind.

I have a theory. Bear with me.

Before the red hot glowing orb appeared you said you
were idly listening to the radio likely not thinking about much of anything except the latest Trump escapade.

That's when a strong, unseen gust began to buffet the
windmills of your mind and the mechanical governor
kicked in to prevent damage from the over-spinning
blades. Just call it the Trumpian wind phenomenon.

The smooth working neural channels in the mind began
to heat up. The governor had to rescue its synapses
from damage. But how? Ah, cook up some doubt and
fear about a mundane event. Play the distraction game.

All of it happens in the blink of an eye while you listen
innocently to things "outside yourself". The only antidote
is mindfulness. Examine what enters your mind. Note
the often subtle currents of anger, disdain, and, yes,
even the odd demonic image coursing through your
brain. Save yourself before the sheriff has to shut you
down.

Burner on / Burner off hypocrisy suits atheists because such hypocrisy suppresses the vedic science of Sungazing which can free countries from hunger driven slavery. Celebrate at this hypocrisy and celebrate slavery of people by corporates, media and elected governments.

Heh, no, just my joke, Spence!

Or attempted joke, I should say : On revisiting, I find my “joke” more smart-ass-y than actually funny, and I wish I had resisted the temptation of posting it! It fully deserved to fall flat on its face, as it seems to have done here.

Unless … wait a minute, unless you’re Poe-ing me as well?! Are you?

Incidentally, Brian : In addition to all of your talents (your writing, your steadfast unwavering following of your former path, and your subsequent no-nonsense coming to grips with reality), I have to say, you seem to have quite a knack for photography as well! I mean, your camera makes even a pedestrian burner flame look dramatic and arty!

Of course, I suppose that is what art is all about at the end of the day : more about the medium than the subject. If it’s primarily about the subject then it’s more reportage than art per se.

(Not that even simple reportage can be really effective without a certain art, but still.)

Hi Appreciative
What if it wasn't your joke?
But God's?

Hi, Spence.

Sure, who can say?

I personally would think it extremely unlikely, and would not care to interpret spirituality in such fantastic and dramatic terms : but then what do I know, for sure I mean?

If you choose to interpret what happened as literally a miracle, then I have no wish to hurt your feelings (or to disturb your faith) by contesting this. Which is why I said I found my joke, on revisiting, to be a tad tasteless, and that I wish I hadn't made it at all.

And nor was it my intention to really challenge your personal thinking -- except in a friendly, collaborative fashion, and with your consent -- in that other thread, where I've just posted another comment addressed to you.

There's no sense in unnecessarily disturbing others' faith, especially given my own lack of definitive knowledge one way or the other. Live and let live, I say, as long as people don't try to force their beliefs down others' throats -- which you don't, Spence, not per my lights, except perhaps ever so gently at times, so gently that it isn't objectionable. :-)

Appreciative
The joke was exceptional for a number of reasons.

First, we live in a mystery, and what you wrote could be true. We are ignorant and presume and judge many things wrongly.

Second, it could be God's joke, to show how nearly blind we are to each moment, even to our own fears and psychology. And it could be superstition.

What Brian calls intuition was just fear. He had no means to distinguish these three: fear, superstition and actual intuition.

I'm pretty sure he never believed it was intuition. He chose to label his fear and by doing so define others' intuition and superstition as his own fear.

When there is no fear at all, then you get awareness, and intuition.

The experience I cited for myself is completely true. There is no physical explanation that is known to science.

Only a psychological or a spiritual one.

But which to believe?

Brian made a choice. I tend to make a different choice.

But each of us makes that choice, simply to get on with life.

Same Christians who were shouting about Inventions at the top of their voice have gone silent on living without food by Sungazing, Is this Pseudo Christianity or True Christianity. Perhaps they cannot digest the power of vedic science because their hearts are rotten.

Spence, I'd say that Brian's "voice" was simply what happens to all of us, in terms of wondering if we've forgotten to lock the door (and returning back to cross-check). I suppose it's normal enough behavior (unless it crosses the line in terms of frequency to OCD land -- and even then it merely remains somewhat dysfunctional, it does not actually cross over into paranormal territory).

As for what happened to you, that deja vu : I have no clue how that might have happened, and nor will I attempt pseudo-explanations. Although mundane explanations do spring to mind, but then so do non-mundane ones as well -- except I suppose I personally tend to go with the mundane unless there' overwhelming reason to go for the non-mundane explanation.

My point is, there is no need to hinge our spirituality on to such fantastic occurances. Spirituality is effective enough, for me, without necessarily bringing miracles into it.

Does what I say mean there are no miracles? Obviously not! My thinking (or yours) can hardly impact what's actually happened (or hasn't happened), 'out there' as it were. Should what happend to you have happened to me, no doubt I'd look around for explanations myself (although I suppose I'd first start with seeing if the ordinary everyday possibilities might apply, but that's just me).

Vinny
Can a camel buy a plane ticket to Moscow?

You ask others to consider things too far from their own experience or thinking.

It's OK, I do it all the time.

People tell me it's pie in the sky... But I tell them..

Don't tell me it's pie in the sky when there are footprints on the moon.

Hi Appreciative

You wrote

"Does what I say mean there are no miracles? Obviously not! My thinking (or yours) can hardly impact what's actually happened (or hasn't happened), 'out there' as it were. Should what happend to you have happened to me, no doubt I'd look around for explanations myself (although I suppose I'd first start with seeing if the ordinary everyday possibilities might apply, but that's just me)."

That may limit you capacity to be aware of what is happening around you.

Then you may be wondering about things, and not remember, because your mind was occupied, whether or not you left the burner on or locked the door.

The world doesn't always need an explanation. Humans don't do a very good or honest job explaining things. If we can honestly accept and experience things as they are, which is well beyond what we can understand, then these things happen all the time, because we aren't attempting to squeeze life into the tiny box of our mental conception. And we then keep ourselves open to experiences, within as well as sensory.

A general attitude of openness and an attitude of thankfulness helps keep the camera lens wide open.

Spencer Tepper , its neither pie in the sky nor camel's plane ticket to Moscow. You are a coward who cannot digest the superiority of vedic practice of Sungazing with scientific research on it. You are a coward who wants to hide behind Jesus who advocated purity of heart not cunningness.

That may limit you capacity to be aware of what is happening around you.


I'm sorry, I don't see why that should be so. After all, I'm not rejecting that other possibility out of hand. It is just a question of what appears (subjectively, to me) to be more probable.

If Brian imagines he'd left his burner on, and subsequently finds he hadn't, then to me it appears infinitely more probable that he'd merely been mistaken. But if some other event somewhere admitted of no other plausible explanation other than the extra-ordinary -- and if the extra-ordinary explanation were plausible -- well, then, if would be absurd not to accept it. I'm perfectly open to accepting such explanation in such case.

Why then would this keep me from being aware of what's happening around me?


.


A general attitude of openness and an attitude of thankfulness helps keep the camera lens wide open.


This I agree with cent per cent.

What is more, it has also been my experience that protracted spiritual practice -- protracted meditation of whatever stripe -- automatically tends to result in a spontaneous feeling of gratefulness. This simply happens, without necessarily having to weigh the pros and cons of deliberately maintaining an attitude of thankfulness. I don't know why this should be so : but it has been both my observation and my experience that this is so.

So I suppose we're in agreement about this.

Except : this latter does not in any way depend on the former. That is, I am able to grateful for a thousand tiny miracles in my life without necessarily having to believe fantastic explanations for everyday events (when, that is, everyday explanations suffice to explain whatever it is I'm trying to explain).

These imaginations can be dangerous, carnal imaginations will lead to sexual arousal and release of energy from lower aperture, killing the foundation of self discipline which is cultivated Celibacy.

Hi Appreciative

You wrote

"That is, I am able to grateful for a thousand tiny miracles in my life without necessarily having to believe fantastic explanations for everyday events (when, that is, everyday explanations suffice to explain whatever it is I'm trying to explain)."

Yes this is my point. You don't need explanations, Fantastic or ordinary.

They get in the way of seeing and understanding.

Well now people of earth, this is God speaking. It is my Will to reveal to you that I did not make a joke. I never make jokes. Not even smart-ass-y ones (although I do kinda like that term). For those of you who believe in intuition, well the court is out on that matter, how to prove such a thing exists. Now there is a fella some people call Kal who is very tricky and likes a bit of mischief, for instance putting thoughts into someones brain like you better dash back home to check on the kettle or suchlike. So you better stop blaming me for all sorts of nonsense its this other Kal guy who really enjoys messing with people's minds and anyway it is all illusion innit.

Should have included this in my comment:

Spencer said:
"What if it wasn't your joke?
But God's?"

Its okay guys, I'm not totally crazy (not yet anyway) ;)

You are not the best of our species to be tested on intuition

Like myself you are old and have to take measures to prevent mistakes
like this, due to dying braincells before they are copied

I found a nice ANTI INTUITION method
You can write of it was yes or no
You can also activate neighbouring braincells by adding a unique gesture
for instance "click two times on the stove"

That one you will remember
and the false intuition is dead at the start

This will become way more intense Brian , causing many deaths before their time
All Karma

If God wants to wan you, he will give you a serendipity, 110% impossible to ignore

A happening that the churches would pay a trillion to be !

Good luck with the sales of that house

77

btw
Simran helps the brain big time and not thinking even more

I have a question
Would you dare attend a USA Gurinder Satsang , if I pay the expenses ?

Not my intuition , this question , remembering Jim
but it might learn you some


Instead of genuflecting in abject surrender at this double miracle,

Like the Sailer falling in the Ocean shouting "God Help" !

A line came out of the sky
and he shouted
No God , forget it, athey throwed me a line


777

777 writes,......”I have a question
Would you dare attend a USA Gurinder Satsang , if I pay the expenses ?
Not my intuition , this question , remembering Jim
but it might learn you some”

Me: All it takes is once to know the real indentity of a Poser, when he exposes his sexual thoughts in a Spiritual Satsang. I wouldn’t walk accross the street in my home town to hear him, now, after traveling accross the planet to hear him expose himself only once.

The Bible asks, ...”Can an Ethiopian change his color?” And “Can a Leopard loose its spots?”

Jim asks,......”Can a dirty old man posing as God In Human Form be trusted in a room full of young innocent female Virgins begging him to “Initiate” them, after he exposes he has butts and 69s on his mind?

But,.......Brian might go, if Gurinder forgives him for all of his past negaitive P.R. and takes him back in to Satsang with Lane , and publishes their Books in RSSB. 😇

Hello Brian - ever thought that the Creator planted that thought into your mind to make you turn around to avoid something ahead. Perhaps a car accident or a random man with a nice near the coffee station who would not have liked the look of you when you out of the car.


Have a great day:-)

* a random man with a knife. I meant in my post above

Quote Spencer :
Yes this is my point. You don't need explanations, Fantastic or ordinary.

They get in the way of seeing and understanding.


Ah, I get you now. And I agree with you there.

We do compulsively keep on thinking, thinking, thinking away. (As you’d pointed out earlier on yourself.) Our cognitive faculty, which is an excellent tool, does in the “normal” course tend to run amok, careering away on its own path, wild and wholly uncontrolled.

Absolutely, that would get in the way of “seeing”. And absolutely, this needs to be controlled.

.

However : I don’t agree with the second part of what you say. You say that this gets in the way of seeing and understanding. And that second part makes no sense.

When you seek to disengage from compulsive thinking -- and it’s far easier said than done, and a rather wonderful achievement in itself, even if “achieved” only partly -- then you’re simply ceasing to attempt to “understand”.

“Understanding”, whether attempted deliberately or carried on unawares, is essentially a cognitive process. Even when you look up at thunder (or a switched-off burner) and interpret it as God’s miracle, you’re basically thinking. Even this understanding of yours, this recognition of “God’s joke”, is based firmly on “thinking”. The fact that you’ve got “God” tagged on to your thoughts does not mean that it isn’t thinking, does it?!

So absolutely, I agree that our thinking tends to get compulsive, and it’s a great idea to attempt to give it a rest -- indeed, doing that, by means of simple observation, is in itself a bona fide form of meditation -- but I’m afraid this has nothing to do with “understanding”, as you’re saying there.

All of what you say, both here and elsewhere, is wholly predicated on thinking. When thoughts stop, so does speech. And so does understanding. It makes no sense at all to object to one form of compulsive thinking, while merrily carrying on with another kind of compulsive thinking (and imagining that this second kind of thinking -- which isn’t a different kind of thinking at all -- isn't “thinking”, isn’t “understanding).

Unless, of course, you’re referring to the deeper understanding that is said to well up by itself when thought stops? I’m afraid I’m yet to observe this phenomenon in myself, so that is something I won’t -- can't -- speak about.

Quote 777 :
No God , forget it, athey throwed me a line


Nice! :-)

And, I suppose, a perfect analogy for Brian’s burner episode. (Provided you care to adopt this POV.)

Which is why I so very much regret that hasty joke of mine. These are deep waters, and only a fool laughs at what he does not know and does not fully understand. For a space, I had been that fool myself, in cracking that joke.

The only time ridicule is acceptable in matters of this sort -- per my lights -- is when you’re laughing at a closed-minded bigot who’s parading his fundamentalism, perhaps attempting to force his beliefs on to others. And that is emphatically not the case here, at all!


…Which, of course, is not to go overboard and get all gooey, espying God’s direct miracle in every event! Literally espying miracles, I mean to say -- it's a great idea to be able to see miracles, metaphorically, in every small thing in one’s life. That’s a whole different thing, the metaphorical recognition of miracles : that’s a matter of attitude, nothing else, and one that I would say is a lovely idea. Provided that sort of thing appeals to you : and yes, it does appeal to me, personally, at least at times.

Hi Jim
""room full of young innocent female Virgins"""
WOOOOOW
That phenomenonon does not exist
But your mind is existing for sure since that day
3 weeks seeing the planet , . . . 12 power seconds did it all
Don't You see Sir
This has become a kind of wishfull_Jimmy_Swaggert_Contemplation
Jim, go to a brothel and see if you have compassion somewhere
in that judgemental brain

-------------


Wow AP
You always define things very well and you know english

Arjuna*
""a random man with a knife. I meant in my post above""
We laughed our heart out triple LOL

Gurinder too , . . . not easy to get this ridiculous blog alive
to remain in peace HIMself

777

PS
Sorry BabaJi, I forgot Your Master plays 7th dimensional chess
What a relief you need nothing to do


777

For those who never read my posts
THIS is exactly the definition of a God in Human Form ( GIHF )

Nothing than serendipities, ( miracles ) , all the time
and He s SO admiring the Doer (His Master ) all the time

777


JIM SAID
But,.......Brian might go, if Gurinder forgives him for all of his past negaitive P.R. and takes him back in to Satsang with Lane , and publishes their Books in RSSB.


Jim, you are really what they call " A Dirty Old Man"
Gurinder has put the naked lady on the ground a long time ago

I ask Brian to olace my post you withhold about Jims archeological non compassionate dogma attitude

777

777 writes,....”Jim, you are really what they call " A Dirty Old Man"

Me: But 777, it was YOU who posted a link to the porno cams you watch, not me. Let’s call a Spade a Spade. You aren’t fooling any one that reads here.

We know who are Dirty old men and who are Saints. 😇

@ Jim - how are you Sir? How were your recent travels?

@ Arjuna,...I am fine. Thanks for asking. I posted a short report on my recent travels on my blog, which you msy read there. Thanks.

http://eternaloasisofsouls.blogspot.com/2018/05/touring-tibet-china.html

@ Jim looking forward to reading it.

Speak soon

Aruna, no, I never thought my "burner on" intuition was a message from God. It simply was an incorrect message from my own mind.

@ Brian. Hope you are right 😀

What is wrong on our Planet :
They : Misses compassion

How come :

D O G M A

777

Hi Appreciative

You wrote

"it's a great idea to be able to see miracles, metaphorically, in every small thing in one’s life. That’s a whole different thing, the metaphorical recognition of miracles : that’s a matter of attitude, nothing else, and one that I would say is a lovely idea. Provided that sort of thing appeals to you : and yes, it does appeal to me, personally, at least at times."

Yes, those are the only miracles there are. And they are incredible.

Evolution is miraculous. The idea that a few forces and chemicals could, over billions of years, bounce a few trillion times around into us is astounding, and wonderful. What an amazing system! I'm humbled, and thankful.

Hi AP

You wrote
"The only time ridicule is acceptable in matters of this sort -- per my lights -- is when you’re laughing at a closed-minded bigot who’s parading his fundamentalism, perhaps attempting to force his beliefs on to others. And that is emphatically not the case here, at all!"

Could that judgmental fundamentalist be a dogmatic Atheist as well, criticizing or ridiculing with laughter any belief in something science hasn't captured yet?

Even science acknowledges they have only documented and explained adequately much less than half what occurs here.

Hi again Appreciative

I noticed you wrote this

"When you seek to disengage from compulsive thinking -- and it’s far easier said than done, and a rather wonderful achievement in itself, even if “achieved” only partly -- then you’re simply ceasing to attempt to “understand”."

Actually there is a good deal of anecdotal literature and some research on cognitive and other forms of demanding performance (design, athletics, mental tasks) that says we comprehend better, are more alert, and actually solve problems better when the higher brain is not pre-occupied, but in a restful, and focused, alert status.

Many discoveries, inventions, even symphonies, took hold of their 'author' not as one final logical step amidst a torrent of thought, but in a brilliant flash of inspiration all at once, often after they had left the problem for the time being, when their higher cognitive functions, completely awake, are relatively unoccupied.

How much understanding can be taught? And how much must be caught?

I don't think science supports your claim, AP.


Quote Spence :
"Yes, those are the only miracles there are. And they are incredible.

Evolution is miraculous. The idea that a few forces and chemicals could, over billions of years, bounce a few trillion times around into us is astounding, and wonderful. What an amazing system! I'm humbled, and thankful."


Agreed! Simply contemplating all of these things -- not to mention, at the personal level, the inevitable cessation of our personal selves -- can, at times, be unbearably wondrous, tragic and yet uplifting, insignificant and yet momentous, despairing and yet uplifting, all at the same time!


Could that judgmental fundamentalist be a dogmatic Atheist as well, criticizing or ridiculing with laughter any belief in something science hasn't captured yet?


Absolutely! That's the slot I'd put myself in, after all, in this particular instance.

Interesting thought, on the side : These words, "Atheist", "Fundamentalist", they can, I suppose, be thought of in relative terms. After all, the fundamentalist Muslim is after all, often an atheist when it comes to other religions and other deities!

(Although not always -- sometimes the fundamentalist Muslim will acknowledge other deities, but think of them as demonic rather than Godly. And of course, my use of the word "Muslim" there is only as example. Case in point : There are some regular commenters on this blog itself, who'd been way more active in the earlier days than they are now but who occasionally emerge from woodwork once in a while even these days, who are brilliantly rational in their deconstruction and take-down of Sant Mat beliefs, but who, astonishingly, are unthinkingly steeped in their own superstitions as regards their own pet God-ideas, as well as in their opinion that Sant Mat Gurus and ideas and demonic! I mean, how crazy is that : First denounce Sant Mat ideas as irrational, and then, suddenly, turn around and call those demonic, wholly oblivious of the irony there!)


Actually there is a good deal of anecdotal literature and some research on cognitive and other forms of demanding performance (design, athletics, mental tasks) that says we comprehend better, are more alert, and actually solve problems better when the higher brain is not pre-occupied, but in a restful, and focused, alert status.

Many discoveries, inventions, even symphonies, took hold of their 'author' not as one final logical step amidst a torrent of thought, but in a brilliant flash of inspiration all at once, often after they had left the problem for the time being, when their higher cognitive functions, completely awake, are relatively unoccupied.

How much understanding can be taught? And how much must be caught?

I don't think science supports your claim, AP.


Agreed.

One needn't go all "enlightened" or even "spiritual" to access this "higher understanding", as one may roughly call it.


Although -- if you'll pardon my incorrigible nitpicking -- even this isn't "understanding" per se. It is inspiration, it is intuition, but it isn't understanding.

An Einstein may have all manner of astounding ideas revealed to them via this intuition or inspiration, but then it takes a great deal of regular normal cognitive effort to translate that into actual ideas, spelt out clearly and worked on. (That old saw -- attributed to Edison unless I'm mistaken -- about genius being 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration, comes to mind.)

So if you're someone who's able to literally not think (either consciously and deliberately, or accidentally), and content not to think most times, then your inspirations stay simply fuzzy inspirations (and indeed, I'd say, fizzle out into forgetfulness and hazy half-remember nothingness) in the absence of conscious deliberate translation into cognitive structures.

I don't think you can have "understanding", as such, in the absence of thinking, at all.


Unless, again, we're speaking of that deeper understanding that, they say, one is able to access when thinking does stop fully. And again, not having personally accessed that state (yet?), I'd rather not speculate about that. For all I know that could be no more than urban myth! Or should it be "desert myth", or "forest myth", or "hermit's mountain cave myth", or something like that? :-)

Hi AP

You wrote
"Unless, again, we're speaking of that deeper understanding that, they say, one is able to access when thinking does stop fully. And again, not having personally accessed that state (yet?), I'd rather not speculate about that. For all I know that could be no more than urban myth! Or should it be "desert myth", or "forest myth", or "hermit's mountain cave myth", or something like that? :-)"

Think in more relative terms. When you see the sun, you understand it is day. Your brain might take a moment to filter and label what you see, but it doesn't have to do much work to figure it out. You didn't have to do a lot of reasoning. It's right there before you. You see your friend and recognize them immediately.

So even a solution, an idea, a truth can arrive through apprehension. There's not any logic or reasoning needed to arrive at it. The argument is presented all at once and understood, if not in the same step, then in very few steps.

The focused mind does much less work to arrive at a better understanding.

And that is because the focused mind understands what is there better, by not obscuring the basic picture with opinions.

Less thought, more understanding.

A quiet focused mind apprehends in a moment what is simply beyond the perception of the busy mind.

Less thought, more understanding.

This is why meditating is so great. If helps the mind wake up, by reducing thought long enough to capture, well, happiness to start with.

Hello again, Spencer.


Quoting part of what you say there :

Think in more relative terms. When you see the sun, you understand it is day. Your brain might take a moment to filter and label what you see, but it doesn't have to do much work to figure it out. You didn't have to do a lot of reasoning. It's right there before you. You see your friend and recognize them immediately.


I'm not so sure this is true.

For instance, you look at the sun go round, and the earth appears flat. And your unfiltered understanding tells you, here's this ball of fire going round us, and here we are, on this nice flat earth.

I'd say this example applies to what we're discussing in two distinct ways :

(1) -- Simply accepting the first explanation that comes into our head when we see something, that simply opens us up to being misled.

And (2) -- Whether our brains do more work or less work, that's probably wholly irrelevant to what we're discussing here. In either case, this remains a cognitive process. Not to recognize this is to mislead ourselves. If you think that just because some explanation springs to our mind apparently effortlessly,therefore that explanation is somehow more 'natural', and that mode of understanding 'less cognitive', I don't think that's true at all. Cognitive is cognitive, irrespective of how much "work" we have to put in!

What I was referring to, in that portion you've quoted (as opposed to the rest of my comment, from which you've picked that portion), is the transcendental understanding that, it is often claimed, accompanies protracted meditation practice. That is a whole different thing from mere intuition, or a more centered thinking, or a more peaceful state of mind. I don't know if this transcendental understanding is fact or mere myth -- science does not recognize this -- but since I'm embarked on a fairly heavy-duty course of meditations (plural) over a protracted period, no doubt I'll find this out for myself one way or the other, one of these days.

In any case, such transcendental understanding -- while no doubt it would be great, should I experience it -- isn't the be-all and end-all of meditation practice, so that not encountering it wouldn't exactly be a deal-breaker for me.

.

NEVERTHELESS, I agree with you when you say the following :


The focused mind does much less work to arrive at a better understanding.

And that is because the focused mind understands what is there better, by not obscuring the basic picture with opinions.

Less thought, more understanding.

A quiet focused mind apprehends in a moment what is simply beyond the perception of the busy mind.

Less thought, more understanding.

This is why meditating is so great. If helps the mind wake up, by reducing thought long enough to capture, well, happiness to start with.


To extract ourselves, via mediation, from compulsive thinking, that facilitates better understanding in many ways.
(1) Better focus, better attention
(2) Less biased thinking
(3) One is that much more aware of one's own inner filters
(4) One is that much more open to inner intuition
(5) I suppose the instances of intuition also become more more plentiful


Nevertheless, understanding, when it does arrive, remains a wholly cognitive process. There is no getting around that. I'd be deluding myself if I imagined that just because I meditate, my understanding is any different than the understanding of those who don't meditate.

So absolutely, while I agree with much of what you're saying, I think it's important not to forget this particular nuance, so that we don't end up deluding ourselves about what we're doing and what we're achieving in the course of doing it.

Hi AP
I'm glad you're engaged in

"a fairly heavy-duty course of meditations (plural) over a protracted period".

You may find that the direct apprehension of a portion of reality is actually part of our normal cognitive processes, and that the direct perception of truth without thought is actually the rare and full expression of something that happens to a lesser extent frequently and is very normal.

It isn't supernatural. It's part of the miracle of cognition and consciousness.

The process of questioning what we see is a cognitive process, but what is the result of questioning? We stop, focus, eliminate distraction, and look again. The reality we begin to understand may only be the part of that process where we step back and try to see without presumptions.

If I question what I saw, then I look again. When that experience is recurring, reliable, under my control, then I can say I have the basis for cognitive understanding and communication.

Do I understand based on conjecture or perception?

Pythagoras saw the Earth from space. That inner perception was his basis for the rest, that the earth, and the planets, revolve
around the sun, not in a circle but an ellipse. And even that the sun also moves in its own path. But he had to see these things first.

Then comes in language, math, and all the tools of measurement and communication.

Even when the mind of a nuclear physicist hypothesizes the existence of particles and forces we can't measure, it must at some point form a picture that conforms to what we know. But that picture when it is right, arrives for our inspection. We use that model to learn more. We apprehend it. And it may arrive all on its own. So did all the data build the model? Or merely focus our thinking to that one point of singularity close enough for a moment of reality to pour through.

Crick, Franklin and Watson first and foremost needed a picture. From the pieces of light reflected in Franklin's crystallography, they had to imagine what might cause those reflections.

And after much focus, in a moment it came, the double helix.

Who can explain that moment of internal perception?

They eliminated all the wrong choices, but what built that moment?

Ah the mystery of the calm focused mind.

Do we understand basis conjecture or perception?

I'd say conjecture, but this conjecture itself is based on perception. Perception directly cannot convey understanding. That all-important cognitive process is necessary to translate perception into understanding.

On the other hand, conjecture that is not based on perception results in airy-fairy nonsense, the sort that some of the ancient Greeks (as well as some of the later philosophers) indulged a great deal in.


.


Agreed : the quietude that the mind accesses via mediation, that facilitates understanding.

Also agreed : intuition itself is aided by mediation.

(Of course, neither necessarily requires formal meditation per se. Sometimes simple introspection suffices, or simply deep sleep, or simply taking the mind off to some other subject.)


.


Off topic musing : I've often wondered if different kinds of formal meditation yield the same kind of incidental peripheral effects, or whether these "incidental peripheral effects" (some of which we've been discussing, you and I, in this thread) are different for different forms of meditation.

And incidentally : the "protracted period" I referred to earlier on (and that you mention in your comment) is purely kid stuff when you think of the 30 years that Brian has put in! (But yes, over this shorter period, it's been fairly intense, more so because I [try to] combine three distinct schools, three distinct traditions.)

Why just Brian, many of the commenters here -- including yourself, I guess? -- measure the period they've put in in concentrated meditation in decades! Many have now given this up (or, like you, not), but that doesn't change the fact that they've devoted decades of their life to this endeavor.

Compared to that sort of extended practice, I'm afraid my own engagement in meditation is on a far humbler scale, and isn't "protracted" at all! Just a matter of a few years.

Just wanted to clarify that, lest I leave you with the impression that I'm more engaged, more involved (and, by implication, more accomplished) in this sort of thing than I actually am.

Hi AP

The moment of awareness, where you comprehend immediately upon perception is something I suggest you pay closer attention to. It's there.

Children do not learn through conscious intention at all. They learn through play, as the brain wires itself by testing reality. Inner cognition is the same.

At no point does the child say "I need to add 0.25 ft lbs of force to raise this cup". They try and learn naturally, largely unconsciously.

Their conscious awareness is not hindered with wasted thought.

Consider language acquisition. At some point you read these words and understand them immediately, whole words and phrases recognized at a glance without conscious thought, instantly. You don't think about grammer in that process. You get the meaning first.

And when you hear poetry, you may enjoy that whole experience without any thought for the alphabet or any knowledge of the rules of grammer.

You may not know how a word is spelled, but you apprehend the meaning.

All this is natural. It takes a thinker to misunderstand.

Now imagine such moments of insight merely placing your mind on the subject. Insight whose accuracy you may then subsequently test for yourself. It may not come easily at first, but a pattern emerges of calm dispassionate focus, elimination of distraction, one pointed open consciousness that enters a space of immense size, darkness pierced with light. You realize that this preparation greatly improves your ability to understand.

Silence pierced with a fantastic orchestra whose sounds are blissful. And then apprehension of truth. But the problem is, if it can be said to be a problem, the technical solutions are of no interest. What your mind needs to function it gets from rudimentary calm.

And maintaining that rudimentary calm throughout the day becomes a lifestyle to protect the calm and peace necessary to go back to that immense space every day of light and blissful sound.

All the answers emerge from a place of infinite mathematics and design, but these all are the flowers of a higher place that is pure love, a sea of love. And so that becomes irresistible.

Think of living in that calm focused place. This is a great place to start. It's called the eye center.

These are not inventions. They are not supernatural. They are experiences built into the human form. Nothing but a natural progression from learning all other worldly things. And as it turns out even the very initial efforts at reaching this place have incredibly healthy effects on the brain and even DNA.

Then when panic strikes and your mind says "Burner on" you take a knee and withdraw for a moment into calm. In that dispassionate calm which you have deepened beyond measure through practice, you will see what actually happened, and even the source of your own panic.

Learning not to react, but to stop, eliminate distraction, focus calmly, leads to an answer.

And driving back home you may verify that answer.

And learn to grow and trust that calm place, so that you may use it to deal with your own reactive fears and angers.


Nevertheless, understanding, when it does arrive, remains a wholly cognitive process. There is no getting around that. I'd be deluding myself if I imagined that just because I meditate, my understanding is any different than the understanding of those who don't meditate.

Transcendent "knowing" though is different altogether. It can't be pigeonholed into a cognitive framework. The meditative practice will improve cognitive focus and create more equanimity but that's not its ultimate goal. Rather it's to break free from mental filters and limits entirely.

Meditation in pursuit of knowledge becomes a threshold to experiencing what is beyond time and space, not just a practice to supercharge the intellect while remaining bound within it. The mystics characterize what they experience only as "not this, not this".

Hi Dungeness

You wrote

"Rather it's to break free from mental filters and limits entirely."

Truth!

Dungeness

There is that place where the object and the viewer are one.

That is direct perception, direct cognition.

Those words are inadequate.
Writing of it is inadequate.

The diver is now in the sea. The sea has now dived into the diver.

But it makes no point to discuss it.

The drive to sea is probably more accessible and helpful.

When you dive in, then you can tell anyone what happened, through the filter of the brain. But you have a life outside of It now.


When you dive in, then you can tell anyone what happened, through the filter of the brain. But you have a life outside of it now.

Right, I'm still driving there... probably more helpful to talk about that wonderful scent of the sea.


When you dive in, then you can tell anyone what happened, through the filter of the brain. But you have a life outside of it now.

Right, I'm still driving there... probably more helpful to talk about that wonderful scent of the sea.

MaharaJi Charan Singh :
What is Love ?

To be one with another Being


777

Quote Spencer :

The moment of awareness, where you comprehend immediately upon perception is something I suggest you pay closer attention to. It's there.


Dear Spencer,

I will. Thanks for that pointer. Absolutely I will.

That is, I do that, in any case. Looking out carefully for whatever may crop up, in terms of physical and/or emotional and/or mental experiences, that is part and parcel of one of the methods of meditation I myself follow, so in any case I do pay “close attention” to this sort of thing in the course of my meditation.

But sure, since you go out of your way to point this out, I will, for a while, for some days, be especially vigilant about this aspect, about this meta aspect, about comprehension itself (in addition to simply watching the thoughts themselves).

Again, thanks for this pointer.


.


That said, I have to point something out to you myself, and clearly ask you something.


Point this out to you :

We started out discussing general comprehension, general understanding.

At more than one place, I linked, per my layman’s understanding, everyday ‘normal’ understanding to the cognitive process. And also, at more than one place, I menationed -- half in jest, to begin with, and after that, on finding you speaking seriously of these things, I spoke about this in earnest myself -- that (alleged) transcendental understanding is a separate issue, and that, lacking personal experience of this myself, I was deliberately avoiding speaking myself of the (alleged) transcendental understanding and realization that (are said to) go with deep states of meditation.

Now I find that you’ve veered the discussion across squarely to this transcendental understanding.

Which is fine : indeed, this is a fascinating line of discussion. But let’s be very clear that we’ve started talking about something else now, leaving that earlier discussion midway. Let’s be clear about that. We left our discussion about everyday understanding with my pointing out, more than once, that everyday understanding is clearly and unambiguously a cognitive process (albeit it may draw inspiration from a deeper and non-cognitive wellspring), and with you side-stepping that particular discussion at that particular point and veering off to this other separate discussion, now, about transcendental understanding.


.


And ask this of you :

When it comes to transcendental understanding : Have you, Spencer, experienced this yourself?

I’ve heard third-person allusions aplenty to this sort of thing. I’ve also heard poetic and metaphorical references aplenty to this sort of thing. Which is fine, I don’t discount such third-person and/or metaphorical allusions, but nor do I swallow them whole, so to say : I simply file them away, without judgment, but also without blind acceptance : I simply file them away as things to look out for, should it so happen that I encounter such experience myself in the course of my own meditation.

Now, I’d like you to spell out clearly what you’re speaking of here : Are you referencing things you’ve read and heard of, and/or are you speaking metaphorically? Or are you speaking literally of things you’ve experienced yourself, at first hand?

If the former, then you’ll excuse me if I take what you say with a pinch of salt.

But if it’s the latter, then that’s truly fascinating! If that is the case, then would you take a stab at clearly explaining, as literally as you can (that is, shorn of poetic flourishes and metaphor ; in other words, clearly) what that was like?

I think our discussion has (unexpectedly!) veered off to an whole new direction, and this may turn out to be both interesting and instructive. I’ll await your considered response.

Quote Dungeness :

Transcendent "knowing" though is different altogether. It can't be pigeonholed into a cognitive framework. The meditative practice will improve cognitive focus and create more equanimity but that's not its ultimate goal. Rather it's to break free from mental filters and limits entirely.

Meditation in pursuit of knowledge becomes a threshold to experiencing what is beyond time and space, not just a practice to supercharge the intellect while remaining bound within it. The mystics characterize what they experience only as "not this, not this".


Hello, Dungeness.

I agree with what you’re saying. That is my understanding too. That is, that is exactly what I’ve heard and read, and understood basis all that I’ve heard and read.

Would you read the comment I’ve addressed to Spencer, just now, that’ll end up posted just above this comment I'm now typing out? I’m going to ask you the exact same thing I’ve asked Spencer.

Are you merely reproducing here, in that comment of yours, what you’ve heard “mystics” say -- ancient mystics writing with quills on tree barks in Sanskrit, or modern mystics speaking or writing in English -- or do you speak from your own personal experience?

If the former, then that’s fine too, that’s still a very valid contribution to this discussion, nevertheless it’s something I’ve heard plenty of times, and will take with a pinch of salt (pending personal verification via personal experience in the course of my own meditation).

But if the latter, then that’s truly fascinating! And if that is the case, then I invite you to speak more about this please, as clearly as you can (and as literally as you can, in the interests of clarity) : speak about what accessing this deeper transcendental understanding was like, in terms of both the process followed, and the end-result experienced.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Welcome


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...