"Burner on!" episode shows danger in trusting our intuition

Many religiously-minded people put a lot of stock in feelings. Meaning, those intuitions that appear full-blown in the mind, seemingly from out of nowhere, that just seem So Absolutely True, they demand to be believed. 

Like, God is love, Jesus is watching over me, and such.

Well, last weekend I had an experience that calls into question the veracity of intuitions like that. It started with my Sunday morning habit of making pancakes for breakfast. 

More accurately, one large pancake. Which I cook in a correspondingly large pan, that's heated by a large burner on our electric cooktop. 

After eating the pancake, which I'd topped with butter, sliced strawberries, and maple syrup, it was time for me to head off to another Sunday habit: a coffeehouse get-together with an old friend, Jim. 

Driving into Salem from our rural home south of town, I was idly listening to the news on satellite radio, not thinking about much of anything except, most likely, about the latest episode in the ongoing Trump administration drama.

Then it hit me -- a message suddenly popped into my mind as if it had been beamed in from an outside source. There was no mistaking what I was being told. 

BURNER ON! YOU LEFT THE PANCAKE BURNER ON! 

I shifted my attention from the car radio to what seemed like a Red Alert in my brain.

My wife was in central Oregon. I'd stayed home rather than accompany her to the vacation home in Black Butte Ranch that we share with three other couples, because a company was scheduled to sealcoat our driveway on Monday, and I felt that one of us should be there in case any questions arose.

So calling my wife to check the burner wasn't an option. I tried to remember whether I'd turned the burner off, but no distinct memory surfaced. 

Logically, it seemed unlikely that I'd departed our house after leaving a pan on the stove with the burner on, since I hadn't done this for many, many years. In fact, maybe never. 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.

Even though it would take me about 10 minutes to drive home, and I'd be late to meet up with Jim, I decided that I should attend to the intuition. After all, if somehow our house burned down after getting a mental message that I'd left the burner on, that would be a heck of a lot worse than being twenty minutes late for coffee with a friend.

When I walked into the kitchen I was unsurprised to find that... I'd turned the burner off. And also taken the pan off of the burner. Which is what I always do after making a pancake. 

So intuitions can be wrong, even when they seem oh-so-right.

Now, I realize this isn't earthshaking news. Naturally not everything that seems absolutely correct to us actually is. But my experience still surprised me, because the feeling that I'd left the burner on came with such suddenness, and with a strong sense of truth.

A seeming truth is just that, though, seeming, until it is verified. This applies both to mundane stuff like whether a stove burner has been left on, and to divine stuff like whether God, or the Universe, is sending a message to us. As the saying goes, trust, but verify. 

Comments

[Turan]

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?

[pooh bear]

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.

[Spencer Tepper]

And if the burner had been on?

[Appreciative Reader]

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!

[Spencer Tepper]

Hi Appreciative

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

Then we gulp, and say Oops, thanks!

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[Spencer Tepper]

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

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

[Dungeness]

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.

[Dungeness]

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.

[vinny]

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.

[Appreciative Reader]

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?

[Appreciative Reader]

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.)

[Spencer Tepper]

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

[Appreciative Reader]

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.

[Appreciative Reader]

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. :-)

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[vinny]

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.

[Appreciative Reader]

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).

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[vinny]

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.

[Appreciative Reader]

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).

[vinny]

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.

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[Jen]

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.

[Jen]

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) ;)

[777]

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

[777]

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

[Jim Sutherland]

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. 😇

[Arjuna]

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:-)

[Arjuna]

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

[Appreciative Reader]

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.

[Appreciative Reader]

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.

[777]

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

[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

[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

[Jim Sutherland]

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. 😇

[Arjuna]

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

[Jim Sutherland]

@ 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

[Arjuna]

@ Jim looking forward to reading it.

Speak soon

[Brian Hines]

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

[Arjuna]

@ Brian. Hope you are right 😀

[777]

What is wrong on our Planet :
They : Misses compassion

How come :

D O G M A

777

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[Appreciative Reader]

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? :-)

[Spencer G Tepper]

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.

[Appreciative Reader]

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.

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[Appreciative Reader]

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.

[Appreciative Reader]

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.

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[Dungeness]

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".

[Spencer Tepper]

Hi Dungeness

You wrote

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

Truth!

[Spencer Tepper]

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.

[Dungeness]

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.

[Dungeness]

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.

[777]

MaharaJi Charan Singh :
What is Love ?

To be one with another Being

777

[Appreciative Reader]

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.

[Appreciative Reader]

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.

[Dungeness]

...do you speak from your own personal experience?

No, I only parrot what I've heard from various RSSB
sources. But, hang around by the shore long enough
and, even blind, you can enjoy the sea breeze.

[Dungeness]

...do you speak from your own personal experience?

No, I only parrot what I've heard from various RSSB
sources. But, hang around by the shore long enough
and, even blind, you can enjoy the sea breeze.

[Spencer Tepper]

Hi AP

Yes, I only speak to my personal experiences.

Sometimes that requires analogy, sometimes poetry.

Like using food to describe color.

The transcendental and the cognitive are intimately connected.

In physiological terms you could reframe the out of body, transcendent experience as a opening a door to another part of the brain.

[Appreciative Reader]

Quote Dungeness :
No, I only parrot what I've heard from various RSSB
sources. (…)

Dungeness, thanks for admitting to this so frankly.

And no offense intended! I needed/wanted to know this, and the only (or at least, the straightest) way to do that was to ask directly. I hope you don’t mind!

[Appreciative Reader]

Quote Spencer :
Yes, I only speak to my personal experiences. (…)

Thanks for clarifying this, Spencer.

Would you speak a bit more about this? Specifically about what the experience of direct understanding, following directly from perception (and bypassing the in-between step of cognitive processing), feels like? Describe this as best you can, would you, and as clearly as you can (so that I may attempt to understand exactly what it is you’re speaking of)? Also : How is the experience of this direct understanding different (in your personal experience) than the everyday understanding that we generally experience all the time?

Also, if I may greedily crowd in a second question for you, following on that first up there : Do you consciously watch out for this direct understanding, or is this a post facto recognition of this experience of direct understanding? My understanding of Surat Shabd Yog meditation, as discussed here, is that it involves either mantra repetition, or else visualization, or else, in the bhajan stage, watching out for (and, if one is lucky, then absorption into) the inner sound(s). That’s correct, isn’t it? So, as far as I understand this, you don’t, in the course of your RSSB meditation, actively look out to specifically observe this. Or do you? (You understand what I’m trying to ask, right? In this second question, I’m asking not so much about the experience itself -- the experience of this direct understanding following directly on perception, which is what we’re discussing now -- as about the process of your arriving at this direct understanding, or at least, the process of your recognition of having arrived at this direct understanding. Speak a bit about this aspect, too, would you, in whatever form you think might best address this?)

[Spencer Tepper]

Hi AP

The process of meditation is nothing else but putting aside thoughts naturally. And what is left but conscious perception?

Yet being alert, what is it that is awake and perceives even more clearly as thinking becomes less and less?

What remains isn't thought. It is pure
Consciousness, the capacity to perceive, to apprehend.

When thoughts are generated by the mind, upon what stage are they brought for you to see?

It is only as you watch them fade and realize you are not your thoughts, that your are awake and aware, that you understand, seeing that the perceiver, the receiver of thought isn't the thoughts at all.

That entire experience takes place without thought.

To get there, meditation. In stages you will realize that attention and thought are separate. Devotion to Your Master, Simran, Bhajan, Dion, are all means to help this very natural ascension of your awareness out of the shell of thoughts.

You are still awake and aware.

What you experience then is direct. There is no intermediary of thought involved.

[Arjuna]

@ Spencer Hello. Hope you are well?

May I ask you a question- why did Mike Williams say that simran invokes Satan once?

[Spencer G Tepper]

Hi Arjuna
I can only guess.
The Simran of the Master is the most powerful force in creation.

But it's first duty is to clean you up. For that you must hold steady as you take the grand tour of the sceptic tank known as the subconscious.

But even here, there is no danger if you go with Master. Then it's a trip to the county fair with pop.

It's all about what's on your mind, and under your mind.

[Spencer G Tepper]

Ah, Arjuna,
I may have an answer for you.

The names in Simran are of the lords of the five regions. These are really just symbolic names for the powers of those regions. But as they come from the Master, they do in fact command those powers.

When you show your passport, you get entrance.
And all the known hells and paradises reside in the Astral region. But you are "just passing through". So long as you stay on the highway with Master it doesn't matter which state you are driving through.

Nothing, not even your own karma, buried in your subconscious, can touch you.

But you're own dirty laundry, that you at least must help toss it into the wash. Shabd does the rest.

BTW I've used traditional terminology, but it is just as true to say these are all places and parts of your own subconscious. Going through this process reincorporates these parts using the strengths built into you.

So whatever Satan is, is already a part of you. Much better to balance and organize that into the whole that is also you.

No better way than meditation.

[Arjuna]

@ Spencer - makes perfect sense .

Is not mind part of Satan’s tools

[Spencer G Tepper]

To think of all this in purely physiological and psychological terms is probably best, rather than to inflate a notion of evil into something of immense external power that can harm you. All that is generally, our own projection. And because everything is Karma, nothing can touch you that isn't already in your Karma. "Satan" simply can't cross that line.

But you can go to a place beyond Karma, and that is incredible.

Freedom! Nothing like it.

Good news, the mind that has ideated and personified fear has the same for love.

Higher mind, lower mind. Master's meditation is submitting lower to the power of higher.

And at some point we are raised beyond both.

The door that took this and several earlier lifetimes to open now can be opened and entered causally every day. We come and go as we like with our Bro.

[Dungeness]

And no offense intended! I needed/wanted to know this, and the only (or at least, the straightest) way to do that was to ask directly. I hope you don’t mind!

Hi AR,

None taken. It's freeing to admit what we don't know and
have never experienced.

Even without "street cred" though, I'd say, another's
experience, however informed, won't be a shortcut
to equivalent awareness. It's a hint at best.

At this stage, the mental filters are too impenetrable
for anything else. Words and descriptions pass through
multiple layers of our mind and emerge bruised and
bleeding if not totally unrecognizable. Think of the
hilarious ways we mangle and mis-remember what
we've heard or read. We start inventing our own
narrative long before "The End."

So how do you talk about a transcendent reality. All
mystics ultimately say is it's "not this, not this". Words
and description will always fall short so they just tell
appealing "stories".

What we really need is a divine "intervention". Someone
who has the power to pull us out of the swamp, the "fake
news" that we create ourselves. Someone who loves us
enough to do that.

[Appreciative Reader]

Quote Spencer :

The process of meditation is nothing else but putting aside thoughts naturally. And what is left but conscious perception? …

I agree : that fits perfectly with my own conception of what meditation is (supposed to be).

… You are still awake and aware.

What you experience then is direct. There is no intermediary of thought involved.

Again, this ties in perfectly with my own understanding of meditation theory.

.

But you know what, Spencer, that discussion of meditation theory isn’t what I had requested for at all. What I was looking for was your own first-hand description of what the experience of this direct understadning was/is like.

You know, like, if in a world where water at near-to-boiling temperatures were rare enough to be considered near-mythical, if you’d had the unusual experience of having been scalded with very hot water, then what was that like? Not so much an explanation of how the skin might react to that heat, or an explication of how the nerves underneath carry that sensation to the brain, but more directly, what was that experience like to YOU, that experience itself of being scalded? What did it FEEL like, at that moment, and in the period immediately following? Your first-hand take : You know what I mean?

Let me attempt to make this very clear, what I’m looking for, by breaking up those two questions I’d asked in my last comment into some very specific questions. I’d be grateful if you could have a go at answering them.

Around when did you first experience this direct understanding? How long ago, from now? And how long after you’d started meditating?

Was it a one-time thing with you, this experience of direct understanding, or perhaps a very rare occurrence only occasionally experienced, or do you regularly experience this?

Do you experience this direct understanding only at the time of meditation, or does it tend to stay with you at other times also, this experience of direct understanding?

Focusing as much as possible only on the experience of direct understanding (just for the time being to the exclusion of, for example, the inner sounds heard and the inner lights and inner forms seen, or even of extremities going numb, et cetera), could you speak about what that experience of direct understanding itself was/is like?

Like all of us, you’ve obviously experienced the everyday understanding, that follows on cognitive processing of perceptions and thoughts. This cognitive process may be deliberate, or this may be unintentional, automatic as it were, subconscious, whatever : but everyday understanding is cognitive, and we all know what that is like.

Having experienced the other kind of understanding, this direct non-cognitively-arrived-at understanding, could you discuss how the one differs from the other, at the experiential level, as you have yourself experienced it? Not the theory, but how your personal experience of the one differs/differed from your personal experience of the other? (That is : the equivalent of : how does being immersed in scalding water feel different from being immersed in ordinary water?)

Did you (or do you) actually look out for this direct experience while meditating, or did it (or does it) suddenly come up on you spontaneously as it were, unbidden, by itself?

Were you (or are you) aware of this different mode of understanding at the time you experience(d) it, or was/is it a post-facto recognition of having experienced it, recognized after the actual experience was/is past?

These days, when you perform your RSSB meditation, do you consciously look out for this direct understanding? Or is it merely a side-issue, an incidental peripheral experience that is not in way central to your meditation proper?

.

I’m sorry, that looks like a great many questions, and appears to call for a great many words on your part, but that isn’t really so, not when you look closely at what I’ve asked. When answered directly based on your first-hand experience, all of these will, I expect, be answered briefly enough and easily enough and quickly enough, in no more than a sentence or two each. Except for questions #4 and #5 : those two will require some detailed explanation of your actual experience, in your own words, and probably at some length, just those two.

I’d be grateful if you could have a go at answering these specific questions. This’ll let me have a clear idea of what it is you’re speaking of : you know, the equivalent of the (hitherto) sightless attempting to form as clear an understanding of vision as possible basis the clearly presented descriptions of someone who’s actually seen : which is probably the best one can hope for at second hand (as opposed to directly experiencing this at first hand, which of course continues to remain one’s primary goal).

[Appreciative Reader]

Quote Dungeness :

another's
experience, however informed, won't be a shortcut
to equivalent awareness. It's a hint at best.

Absolutely, Dungeness, I agree cent per cent with you there. There's nothing that might substitute personal realization. And one single ounce of personal realization is worth immeasurably more than many pounds of second-hand or third-hand "knowledge".

I keep asking these questions, and try to find out about others' personal experience, first and foremost because the subject fascinates me. Of course, in the process one sometimes picks up invaluable pointers, sometimes even whole directions which one may pursue.

But I agree with what you're saying : if you have access to first-hand experience, no matter how humble, then that's far more important than the most detailed and most exhaustive cognitive second- and third-hand knowledge of all manner of esoteric experiences of others.

So how do you talk about a transcendent reality. All
mystics ultimately say is it's "not this, not this". Words
and description will always fall short so they just tell
appealing "stories".

Well, yes and no.

That is, at one level obviously words can never do full justice in conveying any experience to someone who themselves do not have access to such experience.

And yes, many traditions do point out the futility of words -- the most succinct and ancient of these being the "Neti, Neti" you refer to.

However : I wouldn't say that these experiences cannot be conveyed by words at all. That's simply not true. Spiritual literature is replete, across traditions, with mystics expressing what they've experienced.

Often they get around the difficulty of explaining clearly by resorting to poetry and metaphor. Yes, and stories as well, as you say. Poetry is often beautiful, and yes, sometimes one is, via these means, able to convey a great deal indirectly.

However, if your intention is to try to find out exactly what the mystic has experienced, and if the mystic is willing and able to take the trouble to help you understand, then I'd say this would be best served by the mystic clearly explaining, literally and simply and without flourishes, what it is they've experienced.

Lots, lots, LOTS of mystics have done just that. I'm sure you've read many of them yourself. Across traditions, across ages, mystics who've done a great job of explaining their experiences clearly and simply and literally -- always recognizing that at one level these explanations cannot but prove wanting, but nevertheless, at another level, these explanations do a great job of letting others know what they wouldn't have otherwise known.

What we really need is a divine "intervention". Someone
who has the power to pull us out of the swamp, the "fake
news" that we create ourselves. Someone who loves us
enough to do that.

Well yes, absolutely, that's one way, one widely accepted way, of going about this. One of the traditions I (attempt to) follow directly adheres to this philosophy.

On the other hand, there is another widely accepted philosophy too, that says that ultimately this "pulling out" is something another cannot do for you. Sure, others may guide you, teach you, but any "pulling out" that is to be done, can only be done by you yourself. That's another way of looking at this (and yes, I realize this latter POV directly contradicts the former). And one tradition I (attempt to) follow squarely advocates this second POV/philosophy.

Of course, it is possible to merge these two POVs by thinking of God / Providence / The Universe / Whatever acting to help the true seeker, in ways that the seeker may not themselves be aware of. I'd like to think that's true, although of course I have no way of rationally proving something like that.

[Spencer G Tepper]

Hi AP

As you wish....

1-3. After the first hour or so of Meditation, sometimes outside of meditating as well, when my mind focuses on someone or some issue.

4. When you think back, recall something you have already learned, something you already understand, with a host of memories around the learning process. That's what happens instantly with direct perception, direct cognition. You now have understanding of what was a mystery, along with a set of detailed solutions as if you had witnessed those things over time and developed the solution over time.

5. See above. I go into a room to help facilitate solutions to problems. Perhaps several patients have died unnecessarily in the emergency room. I listen to everyone's version intently, as I mentally hand this to Master. Instantly I see and hear what happened, the personalities of everyone involved, and literally a script of what to say.

I say that, most agree this is their next step. Meeting over. Drive to the airport.

My days now are spent flying around the country going from hospital to hospital doing this. From my perspective, it's almost mindless. But I'm fulfilling my obligations.

[Arjuna]

@ Spencer - Master Gurinder says there is no journey - we are already there. So there is no astral region to travel through. Any thoughts?

Oh what is Dark Matter - I am fascinated that scientists can’t account for what it is . It’s fun

[Spencer Tepper]

Hi Arjuna

You wrote

"@ Master Gurinder says there is no journey - we are already there. So there is no astral region to travel through. Any thoughts?"

Anything a scientist discovers was already there. New for them. Old as creation.

[Dungeness]

Of course, it is possible to merge these two POVs by thinking of God / Providence / The Universe / Whatever acting to help the true seeker, in ways that the seeker may not themselves be aware of. I'd like to think that's true, although of course I have no way of rationally proving something like that.

I think that's the leap of faith we take in the beginning.
Then, we slowly, experientially verify it. We must have
experience or it devolves into blind faith.

But, even without miraculous visions, I experience not
feeling lost in thought and confusion and fear. There's
a presence that says "I'm right here". It fills my moments
and I don't want to ever let go of it.

I'm in the moment waiting for the help I get along the
way. Right now that's enough. One day I hope to peep
behind the curtain and understand fully.

[Dungeness]

Of course, it is possible to merge these two POVs by thinking of God / Providence / The Universe / Whatever acting to help the true seeker, in ways that the seeker may not themselves be aware of. I'd like to think that's true, although of course I have no way of rationally proving something like that.

I think that's the leap of faith we take in the beginning.
Then, we slowly, experientially verify it. We must have
experience or it devolves into blind faith.

But, even without miraculous visions, I experience not
feeling lost in thought and confusion and fear. There's
a presence that says "I'm right here". It fills my moments
and I don't want to ever let go of it.

I'm in the moment waiting for the help I get along the
way. Right now that's enough. One day I hope to peep
behind the curtain and understand fully.

[Jen]

"The process of meditation is nothing else but putting aside thoughts naturally. And what is left but conscious perception? …"

Putting thoughts aside then we are left with conscious perception. So its still consciousness, just a quieter part of the mind / brain and then people have visions and unusual out-of-body experiences but its still mind / brain and maybe imagination? Consciousness being creative and producing experiences because of wishful thinking and beliefs?

[Spencer G Tepper]

Hi June

All that you describe are thoughts. Going beyond that is the journey.

There is a passage of the hero, the passage to a deeper understanding.

And that entails at some point letting go of the popular myths we have used to dismiss that higher consciousness and those alternate experiences as unreal.

It involves the rite of initiation, the rite of passage where we can no longer go back, where we now take responsibility to enter that journey, that adventure, and slay our own ignorance.

We make a promise, which is really to ourselves, to stay the course.

But the rocks reveal the ships that ran aground and did not complete the journey. They carried the sailors who tell their frightening stories, that there is no place beyond, that madness lay in wait there, that only death and illusion are the rewards for anyone foolish enough to venture further than they have.

That is the testimony of others who failed. It is of limited value.

The hero is compelled by an inner conviction to proceed, as you ses in Dungeness ' remarks. That comes from within. It's not for everyone.

Letting go, surrendering our need to explain in comfortable terms the unknown. In inferior terms, that allows us to stay where we are without having to surrender ourselves to the journey.

Because most people cannot pay the cost of giving up the ego to a greater purpose.

It is popular to pretend that is being scientific when in fact science has no such knowledge.

The hero is always singular. Because most people want to defend staying where they are, unwilling to sacrifice the ego, the old self, to that higher purpose.

But explanations do not lead to progress.

[Spencer G Tepper]

Sorry "June" - Jen, autospell is my worst enema.

[Jen]

Hi Spencer,

Thanks for the reply. Its no big deal about my consciousness enquiry. I'm telling myself to stop trying to figure things out about life, this world and whatever lies beyond - see how long that lasts, my enquiring mind! Just living each day to the best of my ability and glad that I still follow the Sant Mat principles. I know you like helping others and I do in my own little way, being kind and helpful etc. Satsangis and ex-satsangis do have a lot in common and its a kind of blessing in many ways.

[Spencer G Tepper]

Hi Jen!
Yes, you are also in the midst of a journey. And what makes that journey real is the understanding that life is at its core a mystery. We are all discovering, so long as we look forward with an open mind.

[Spencer G Tepper]

Jen
'Our nirvana is when we hold our center, not led by lust or fear.'
Joseph Campbell

[Appreciative Reader]

Spencer, thanks very much for speaking out clearly about your experiences, like I’d requested. I think I appreciate exactly what you were speaking of now. (As exactly, that is, as one can at second hand!)

Of course, one can think of mundane explanations that might adequately account for these experiences ; but I shan’t waste your time, or mine, with such pseudo-explanations. I’m perfectly content to take your own interpretation of what your experiences at face value.

And yes, I am now able to better appreciate your meaning when you’d said to me, in an earlier comment in another thread, that “Your Master tells you that you were mistaken in (mis-)interpreting a particular comment of mine in a particular manner”, or words to that effect. At that time I’d found your way of putting this curious.

If I may put in one last question on this, Spencer, before moving on to other things : Do you sometimes find it necessary to bolster this marvelous internal connection of yours to your Guru with everyday contact as well? That is, do you sometimes find it necessary to ask your Master’s advice on particular matters via more everyday means, like the telephone or email or in person? Or is your internal connection sufficient at all times to solve all your questions and your doubts and your need for assistance from your Master?

.

Quote :
My days now are spent flying around the country going from hospital to hospital doing this. From my perspective, it's almost mindless. But I'm fulfilling my obligations.

On a wholly different note : This last paragraph in your comment addressed to me struck a chord. It speaks to the exact issue I’d brought up in that other thread, you know, in my comment addressed to Manjit, that both you and he were kind enough to offer your personal perspectives to in response.

Harking back to that earlier question of mine, I’d like to ask you something that might help me gain some perspective about what I’d asked then :

Given that you find what you do ultimately “mindless”, why exactly do you carry on with it? (Assuming, of course, that financial necessity is no longer overridingly important.) You speak of “fulfilling your obligations” : obligations to whom? And for how long do you believe you’re “obligated” to carry on doing this, and why?

[Appreciative Reader]

Quote Dungeness :
But, even without miraculous visions, I experience not
feeling lost in thought and confusion and fear. There's
a presence that says "I'm right here". It fills my moments
and I don't want to ever let go of it.

That’s wonderful, what you say.

I wouldn’t presume to offer advise to you -- because no doubt you have thought this out for yourself -- but I’d say this is just as valid and as ‘solid’ experience as more dramatic son et lumiere shows internally. While I’m fascinated with descriptions of people’s ‘experiences’, I’m increasingly less impressed by the necessity (or even the relevance) of such : I’m increasingly coming to see the internal quietude and that essential, well, centeredness, as the primary aspect of meditation and the spiritual life in general.

In other words, there’s no reason to imagine your “cred” (to use your own words) is any less than anyone else’s.

I'm in the moment waiting for the help I get along the
way. Right now that's enough. One day I hope to peep
behind the curtain and understand fully.

Amen to that! What more can one ask for from life? My very best wishes to you, Dungeness!

[Spencer G Tepper]

Hi AP
Life itself is a constant challenge to inner balance.
The pond is being agitated all the time.
So therefore daily meditation is crucial for that connection to my Master and my own inner self. It helps prepare me for the day.

The experiences I wrote of are not continuous, but only in certain moments, in particular in Meditation and at key times where the right answer is absolutely necessary, or when Master intervenes to say "change course now!"

At all other times I'm restricted to this tiny biochemical brain and its significant flaws and limitations. I have to form an opinion based on limited information. Mistakes are frequent, but generally minor. That is necessary for me to act as me, mistakes and all. And that is necessary to meet my karmic obligations.

In deep meditation, in Master's direct presence, I'm free of that restriction. But that is a minority of my day. Yet I live for that freedom.

You could say that Master promised me 2.5 hours per day of absolute paradise and freedom minimum, at the cost of my constant effort to complete my vows. It has turned out to be the best deal of this and several other lifetimes.

But the remaining waking hours I must function in this little cell with its limitations. My connection to Master is nearly continuous, but there is a difference between walking with your beloved and being one with them. The latter state, for me, happens in mediation.

It is a constant effort, but I really am paying my debts, so I'm happy to do it. The accounts can be viewed visibly in meditation.

I like doing work that helps people, so Master has provided the means for me to do so without loosing balance too often.

You can get an idea from the above of where I am on this path.

This isn't my first lifetime as an initiate. Unfortunately, this is also not my last one.

[Appreciative Reader]

I appreciate what you say, Spence.

However, what you say does not address either of the questions I'd asked you. (Although absolutely, I do appreciate your saying what you do, in that last comment of yours.)

May I copy the two questions I'd asked you earlier, and add a third basis this last comment of yours?

Copied from my earlier comment : Do you sometimes find it necessary to bolster this marvelous internal connection of yours to your Guru with everyday contact as well? That is, do you sometimes find it necessary to ask your Master’s advice on particular matters via more everyday means, like the telephone or email or in person? Or is your internal connection sufficient at all times to solve all your questions and your doubts and your need for assistance from your Master?

Copied from my earlier comment : Given that you find what you do ultimately “mindless”, why exactly do you carry on with it? (Assuming, of course, that financial necessity is no longer overridingly important.) You speak of “fulfilling your obligations” : obligations to whom? And for how long do you believe you’re “obligated” to carry on doing this, and why?

I'm adding this last basis your last comment : How do you mean, "paying your debts"? Do you mean in a Karmic sense? How/why do you think this is what you need to do in order to pay/repay your way out? And if as you say you like doing this work, and if in addition you believe that this work is helping pay off your Karmic debts, then why do say you find what you do "meaningless"?

(You do see why I'm asking #2 and #3, right? These two questions have nothing to do with our discussion on "understanding", but are about that earlier question I'd asked you in that other thread, that suddenly seems relevant here again basis what you say here.)

[Spencer G Tepper]

Hi AP
Let me try to be more direct.

1. No.the internal connection, at varying levels, is sufficient, as it depends purely upon my own attention to it.
2.this question is answered in the latter half of my response earlier today. I am doing work I like, and I'll be doing it for the duration.
3. Also answered in my earlier response. Every activity and player here is listed in the Karmic accounts, which can be viewed in Meditation.
I think 'meaningless' is your term. I don't recall using that.

I did say 'mindless' at those moments of direct perception. No thought is needed : past events, present concerns and circumstances, ideas of others, actual solution all come in an instant. In those moments there is simply recognition and reciting the scripted solution.

Meaninglessness might be partially applicable, because in that moment of instant cognition, there is also what will actually happen, often less than the solution, or having several circuitous chapters until a resolution had been found, or worse, I am speaking in a moment where the forces are moving events in the opposite direction and my involvement will have no visible impact. Still, at minimum, even if my involvement isn't going to change things, I am fulfilling an obligation in a truthful way. Just like these posts.

[Arjuna]

@ Spencer - do you know me? I want to experience what you know of me please.

It will be fun

[Spencer G Tepper]

Arjuna
If you look carefully at what I wrote you will see that I'm just like you. For my job and my personal survival I have access to my Master.

The rest of the time I function within the same limitations, make the same mistakes as anyone else. In short, I accept my role.

The journey of the warrior is the journey within themselves, through the Labrynth, to unlock the endless treasures within, to find the golden fleece that heals all wounds and confers eternal life.
And along the way to battle with all the forces of darkness there, the Minotaur and the Hydra. Of course, the warrior has has been given the sword of Shabd, whose hilt is Simran, encrusted with the jewels of Dion and Bhajan.

What are they waiting for?

[Spencer Tepper]

Arjuna
Hercules had twelve labors to perform as his penance for the harm he had done.

His fifth was cleaning the stables at Augeas. They hadn't been cleaned out for decades. Hercules did it in one night by rerouting the river through the stables. In moments the river washed away all the filth.

That is the power of Shabd.

But he asked for additional payment for that work from Augeas, and though Augeas refused, Hercules was not credited with the deed.

We use what we were given only to complete our duties.

[Arjuna]

@ Spencer - you do have a lot of knowledge . People who really know me think I am too deep and it scares the hoi polloi off.

I have studied science and can reassure you that they can tell you what is on the television screen but they have no idea what drives the images and sound. Science will never know truth. They don’t even know what Dark Matter is loooool. And now they are saying Black holes may not even exist - long story that 2015 gravitational wave had an echo. Einstein’s standard model is about to go up in a flame of glory.

You can fight mind with mind. You need some more - that is what I seek.

[Appreciative Reader]

Quote Spencer :
1. No.the internal connection, at varying levels, is sufficient, as it depends purely upon my own attention to it.

Ah, OK. So, not so much feeling overcome with mundane matters and turning for external guidance, however channeled, for resolving those matters, as a turning in within. Thanks for clarifying that.

2.this question is answered in the latter half of my response earlier today. I am doing work I like, and I'll be doing it for the duration.
3. Also answered in my earlier response. Every activity and player here is listed in the Karmic accounts, which can be viewed in Meditation.
I think 'meaningless' is your term. I don't recall using that.

I did say 'mindless' at those moments of direct perception. No thought is needed : past events, present concerns and circumstances, ideas of others, actual solution all come in an instant. In those moments there is simply recognition and reciting the scripted solution.

I beg your pardon, in that case the mistake is entirely mine. I misinterpreted your use of the word "mindless". I see you used that word not to signify some value judgment, but rather as simple description in terms of being devoid of thought.

In that case, the second part of what I'd asked you in my comment posted on June 23, 2018 at 06:14 AM, as well as my questions #2 and #3 in my comment posted on June 23, 2018 at 07:57 AM, are rendered literally "meaningless"! :-) Scratch that portion out, then!

And apologies for this misunderstanding on my part.

at minimum, even if my involvement isn't going to change things, I am fulfilling an obligation in a truthful way. Just like these posts.

And I appreciate that. Cheers!