|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 24, 2019 17:05:51 GMT -5
I am going to ask about 'conscious efforts' (I haven't read this thread from the start this time). I don't know about any formal practice; neither zazen nor self-remembering. What I am reading nowadays about Gurdjieff's teaching focuses on harmonious working of three centers of man (intellectual center, feeling center, instinctive-moving center). It seems one just tries not to get lost in one of them - one tries to use all three as much as possible. Is that right?
I think the intellectual center brings the possibility of seeing; the body, doing; and the emotional center gives 'depth'. I don't know what brings them together exactly.. But the 'effort' there does not look like an effort of sitting at some place for hours.. I mean it is a normal activity, but not always possible due to abnormal habits. Because I had forgotten (or never learned about) Gurdjieff's 3 centers), I didn't respond to this post initially, but after watching the Tart interview, I became clearer about what G was pointing to as well as some other teachers who've pointed to the same thing. Adya, for example, talks about intellectual enlightenment, heart enlightenment, and gut enlightenment, and he's probably pointing to the same 3 centers. He talks about realization moving from a head-centered perspective, down to a heart-centered perspective, and ultimately to a body-centered perspective that is unified. ...................................... How, then, do all three "centers" become unified, and do the three centers vary in depth? Well, yes and no. From a conventional perspective we can say that the intellectual center is the most superficial because it's like an mental overlay that obscures what's happening below the surface or the intellect, so to speak. The heart center is deeper because its free functioning requires a high degree of authenticity, honesty, freedom, and self knowledge. The body center is the deepest because as it becomes more dominant, all of the other centers become subservient and at the same time unified. The key to everything was summed up by Ikkyu who's famous for the "attention, attention, attention" admonition. The issue is where attention is focused. If it becomes focused upon the actual rather than thoughts, sooner or later ideas will fall away and psychological unity with THIS will result. Yes.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 24, 2019 17:10:32 GMT -5
Reefs wrote: Cool. Well, Tart looks at it primarily thru the filter of a psychologist. And with that perspective, one can't really go that deep. But I think it's also this perspective that made his presentation quite balanced and well structured. When he mentioned the space between thoughts and how he struggled with that pointer, that was sort of a giveaway for where he's actually at on the pathless path. But overall, I enjoyed the interview. He made Gurdjieff a lot more digestible to me. [/quote] zd wrote: Agreed. I encountered Tart more than 30 years ago, and I've often used his phrase "the concensus trance state" to point to the usual mind state of adults. I had never read about Gurdjieff's 3 centers, but that's certainly a worthwhile distinction. As you noted, Tart's comments about his own inability to meditate or become silent reveals that he remains an intellectual who has not yet become intimately familiar with what are arguably the two most important centers of intelligence. Tart also probably doesn't realize that by activating or focusing upon the body's natural intelligence it's possible to (1) become free of the intellect and (2) activate the emotional center. Like Tart, I found the cushion-sitting thing to be rather cold and isolating, but it was a valuable first step for a blind person searching for a light switch, and it ultimately led to finding an activity (ATA-T) that was broader in scope and could be pursued in the midst of ordinary life. IOW, from my POV the fastest path to freedom and non-abidance is through re-discovering the body's natural intelligence, shifting attention to the ways that that intelligence manifests, and learning to trust that intelligence. Chilton Pearce didn't use those exact words, but what he was pointing to with his phrase "the primary program" was body knowledge, and his phrase "the secondary program" pointed to the intellectual overlay that keeps most adults trapped in Tart's "consensus trance state." The great advantage to shifting attention away from thoughts to the body, to what the body senses, and to what the body does is that it's simple. There are no levels involved, and there is no complexity. It is, quite literally, a reversal of the activity that inevitably led to the dominance of the intellectual center. Best of all, no cushions are necessary, and the activity of pouring concrete, IF ATTENTION IS FULLY FOCUSED UPON THAT ACTIVITY, can probably lead to clarity faster than sitting in a cave on a mountaintop. [/quote] sdp wrote: Yes.
|
|
|
Post by zin on Oct 5, 2019 9:53:21 GMT -5
I am going to ask about 'conscious efforts' (I haven't read this thread from the start this time). I don't know about any formal practice; neither zazen nor self-remembering. What I am reading nowadays about Gurdjieff's teaching focuses on harmonious working of three centers of man (intellectual center, feeling center, instinctive-moving center). It seems one just tries not to get lost in one of them - one tries to use all three as much as possible. Is that right?
I think the intellectual center brings the possibility of seeing; the body, doing; and the emotional center gives 'depth'. I don't know what brings them together exactly.. But the 'effort' there does not look like an effort of sitting at some place for hours.. I mean it is a normal activity, but not always possible due to abnormal habits. Because I had forgotten (or never learned about) Gurdjieff's 3 centers), I didn't respond to this post initially, but after watching the Tart interview, I became clearer about what G was pointing to as well as some other teachers who've pointed to the same thing. Adya, for example, talks about intellectual enlightenment, heart enlightenment, and gut enlightenment, and he's probably pointing to the same 3 centers. He talks about realization moving from a head-centered perspective, down to a heart-centered perspective, and ultimately to a body-centered perspective that is unified. Is there a conscious effort involved in anything we do, including practices like meditation? Is there any work involved? Well, yes and no, depending upon what has been realized and depending upon what one's understanding is. ................................. The key to everything was summed up by Ikkyu who's famous for the "attention, attention, attention" admonition. The issue is where attention is focused. If it becomes focused upon the actual rather than thoughts, sooner or later ideas will fall away and psychological unity with THIS will result. Thanks. I think I am among the ones who doesn't have a 'strong sense of self'. Also I have a scattered mind usually. I looked for advice to be aware of myself more and read things like being aware of how I use my hands or how I walk or talk. I did these for a few days (whenever I remembered!) and surprisingly saw that I began to remember other things as well, things I usually think of doing in the day but forget.. I don't know 'who decides, who does' really. But it had some unifying effect. In the end it comes to focusing on what is actual, as you say.
|
|
|
Post by zin on Oct 5, 2019 10:08:44 GMT -5
What about the 'higher centers'? Do they do anything? As I understand, a person can 'use' the lower centers, but I don't know how is it with the higher ones. The two higher centers are always functioning, in everyone. But we are not normally aware of their functioning. The higher emotional center is contacted through the emotional center, but our emotional center is so clogged with ~nasty~ emotions, these burn off a surplus of energy which has the possibility of being transformed into an energy which allows connection with the higher emotional center. One could say the whole of the Work is working toward being able to be connected to the higher centers. So work really begins with balancing the centers so that each center works with its own energy, thus saving energy, and transforming this energy to a finer quality which can connect to the higher centers. This is a process of learning, which begins with self-study. I've found the idea of three people (ie three 'lower centers') in one person very interesting (but these are my words now, I won't look for quotes). I didn't know that they were this much unrelated in my case. Each in its own world, or sometimes, 'cage'! When I first asked the question about conscious efforts I meant using all centers *at once* (but I didn't express it clearly). It turned into a talk on balancing the centers (somewhat) in time, and that's good. It's a broader subject than I first thought.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 7, 2019 9:17:58 GMT -5
Agreed. I encountered Tart more than 30 years ago, and I've often used his phrase "the concensus trance state" to point to the usual mind state of adults. I had never read about Gurdjieff's 3 centers, but that's certainly a worthwhile distinction. Yes, Gurdjieff's 3 centers model is really good. I take it to mean the same as what we usually call here 'integration'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2019 8:36:37 GMT -5
I like to juggle. The interesting thing about juggling is thought has to give way or the balls fall down. No thinking and the balls stay up. So I guess if you practice juggling, you practice not thinking. Yoga balancing poses are similar, except with them you focus your attention on an object, a focal point, and exclude thoughts by doing this. Again, if you think, you fall. That can be painfull doing bakasana, crow. I heard someone say they don't "practice" golf, they just re-introduce themselves to the feel of the club striking the ball at the range or putting green. I guess I can say, when I meditate, I don't "practice" not thinking, I just re-introduce myself to the feel of not thinking which in my book is freedom, not sahaja, but savikalpa samadhi.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 30, 2019 20:16:25 GMT -5
I like to juggle. The interesting thing about juggling is thought has to give way or the balls fall down. No thinking and the balls stay up. So I guess if you practice juggling, you practice not thinking. Yoga balancing poses are similar, except with them you focus your attention on an object, a focal point, and exclude thoughts by doing this. Again, if you think, you fall. That can be painfull doing bakasana, crow. I heard someone say they don't "practice" golf, they just re-introduce themselves to the feel of the club striking the ball at the range or putting green. I guess I can say, when I meditate, I don't "practice" not thinking, I just re-introduce myself to the feel of not thinking which in my book is freedom, not sahaja, but savikalpa samadhi. Over forty years ago one week we were given the task: Teach yourself to juggle. It took me a week to be able to juggle three objects. To do it efficiently you are teaching your hands, arms and eyes ~what to do~, that is, creating "muscle memory". The next week my teacher asked us one question about the task. I knew the answer. What was the question? (Anybody). zazeniac, what you said is correct, but it doesn't speak to the question (above).
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 30, 2019 21:10:42 GMT -5
The two higher centers are always functioning, in everyone. But we are not normally aware of their functioning. The higher emotional center is contacted through the emotional center, but our emotional center is so clogged with ~nasty~ emotions, these burn off a surplus of energy which has the possibility of being transformed into an energy which allows connection with the higher emotional center. One could say the whole of the Work is working toward being able to be connected to the higher centers. So work really begins with balancing the centers so that each center works with its own energy, thus saving energy, and transforming this energy to a finer quality which can connect to the higher centers. This is a process of learning, which begins with self-study. I've found the idea of three people (ie three 'lower centers') in one person very interesting (but these are my words now, I won't look for quotes). I didn't know that they were this much unrelated in my case. Each in its own world, or sometimes, 'cage'! When I first asked the question about conscious efforts I meant using all centers *at once* (but I didn't express it clearly). It turned into a talk on balancing the centers (somewhat) in time, and that's good. It's a broader subject than I first thought. Just the 3 centers is fine. In Beelzebub's Tales a certain category of beings (us for example) the term three-brained-beings is used. But this is a category throughout the Cosmos. There is another term used in In Search of the Miraculous, but I'm not going to look it up. (Mammals are called 2-brained beings, reptiles are called one-brained beings). Yes, the idea of 3 centers is very useful, but idea is merely intellectual knowledge. But you specify the information, apply it to yourself, you thus indicate you understand from personal experience. Yes, they are unrelated (to each other) in my case also. I was ~introduced~ to my feeling/emotional center in the 9th grade in Jr high school (in a way other than anger/fear etc.). I was introduced (via certain events/people encounters) to a *side* of myself I didn't know anything about, yes, each in its own world. And I very understand 'cage'! (which for me went back to earliest memories). We can think we are going to do a certain thing, and end up doing something else, and we can have feelings/emotions which are unrelated to either the thinking or the doing. A first real aim is balancing the centers, or integrating them (Reefs), where one center does not predominate (one aspect of balancing the centers). I recently developed an analogy concerning the blind-spot we all have in the visual field where the optic nerve attaches to the eyeball. If there were a one-to-one correspondence to what we see, we would all have a hole in the center of our vision, because of no sensory data there because of the optic nerve obstruction. But the brain compensates and fills in the blind spot so that we have no interruption in our visual field. In a similar manner we have psychological blind spots where we don't see what (actually) is. These begin with blind spots concerning our own self, but they extend into all life. Our warped psychology (read ego) distorts what enters the organism, as well as what-we-are (or are not). It can be most difficult to be objective toward self. And likewise it can be a shock when we (sometimes) see ourselves as we are. There is a kind of wall separating our bodily self, feeling/emotional self and our thinking center self. Sometimes we get a peek at both sides of the wall, simultaneously (or even three sides). When we don't see each side we can hear ourselves saying things like: Why did I do that? or, I don't know what got into me. or, What was I thinking? Concerning your conscious efforts question, "First you have to row a little boat". And yes, there is a kind of 6 degrees of separation, all things eventually connect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2019 21:19:54 GMT -5
I like to juggle. The interesting thing about juggling is thought has to give way or the balls fall down. No thinking and the balls stay up. So I guess if you practice juggling, you practice not thinking. Yoga balancing poses are similar, except with them you focus your attention on an object, a focal point, and exclude thoughts by doing this. Again, if you think, you fall. That can be painfull doing bakasana, crow. I heard someone say they don't "practice" golf, they just re-introduce themselves to the feel of the club striking the ball at the range or putting green. I guess I can say, when I meditate, I don't "practice" not thinking, I just re-introduce myself to the feel of not thinking which in my book is freedom, not sahaja, but savikalpa samadhi. Over forty years ago one week we were given the task: Teach yourself to juggle. It took me a week to be able to juggle three objects. To do it efficiently you are teaching your hands, arms and eyes ~what to do~, that is, creating "muscle memory". The next week my teacher asked us one question about the task. I knew the answer. What was the question? (Anybody). zazeniac, what you said is correct, but it doesn't speak to the question (above). Who juggles??
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 30, 2019 21:21:00 GMT -5
Over forty years ago one week we were given the task: Teach yourself to juggle. It took me a week to be able to juggle three objects. To do it efficiently you are teaching your hands, arms and eyes ~what to do~, that is, creating "muscle memory". The next week my teacher asked us one question about the task. I knew the answer. What was the question? (Anybody). zazeniac, what you said is correct, but it doesn't speak to the question (above). Who juggles?? Good question, but not it.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 1, 2019 20:58:23 GMT -5
Over forty years ago one week we were given the task: Teach yourself to juggle. It took me a week to be able to juggle three objects. To do it efficiently you are teaching your hands, arms and eyes ~what to do~, that is, creating "muscle memory". The next week my teacher asked us one question about the task. I knew the answer. What was the question? (Anybody). zazeniac, what you said is correct, but it doesn't speak to the question (above). Who juggles?? It's not a koan.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2019 12:12:24 GMT -5
Can you use chain saws next week?
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 3, 2019 20:01:14 GMT -5
Can you use chain saws next week? But if you did, ~the question & answer~ would become even so that much more important, as on a razor's edge.
|
|
|
Post by zin on Nov 14, 2019 5:38:14 GMT -5
I've found the idea of three people (ie three 'lower centers') in one person very interesting (but these are my words now, I won't look for quotes). I didn't know that they were this much unrelated in my case. Each in its own world, or sometimes, 'cage'! When I first asked the question about conscious efforts I meant using all centers *at once* (but I didn't express it clearly). It turned into a talk on balancing the centers (somewhat) in time, and that's good. It's a broader subject than I first thought. ........ Yes, the idea of 3 centers is very useful, but idea is merely intellectual knowledge. But you specify the information, apply it to yourself, you thus indicate you understand from personal experience. Yes, they are unrelated (to each other) in my case also. I was ~introduced~ to my feeling/emotional center in the 9th grade in Jr high school (in a way other than anger/fear etc.). I was introduced (via certain events/people encounters) to a *side* of myself I didn't know anything about, yes, each in its own world. And I very understand 'cage'! (which for me went back to earliest memories). We can think we are going to do a certain thing, and end up doing something else, and we can have feelings/emotions which are unrelated to either the thinking or the doing. A first real aim is balancing the centers, or integrating them (Reefs), where one center does not predominate (one aspect of balancing the centers). ......... I am interested in the 'three types of foods' feeding these centers.. ie ordinary food, air, and impressions. What can you say about air and impressions as food? About their relation to centers? I will write some, later.
|
|
|
Post by roydop on Nov 14, 2019 8:35:22 GMT -5
This thread has been considered for a few days, and finally comes as a response to a post by wren, June 29, 4:42 PM, sdp seems to be a lot clearer in his view the last month or so. My reply to this post (What?) was also recently commented on by E (about an hour+ ago). So I will briefly give my view, again. Becoming more conscious is like juggling, it cannot be passive, it takes effort. You begin to learn to juggle using three objects, usually balls. With two hands, one ball has to be in the air at all times. So there is a movement of catching and throwing with an expenditure of energy. If the throwing and catching stops, the juggling stops. Becoming more conscious, similarly, requires certain effort, but conscious efforts. One cannot become more conscious, passively. Awakening requires a certain quantity of a certain quality of energy, and this energy cannot be come by, passively. The energy of awakening can be accumulated, but if conscious efforts, which concern the use of attention and awareness, cease, the energy will leak away, like the flow of the balls ceasing when one stops juggling. Now, some are going to say, but that's not how I understand awakening. So I will use the term, self-remembering, that's what self-remembering is, the state of being awake. I do this to try in a small way to circumvent the problem of language we are having with the use of the term Self Realization. The term Self Realization is obviously being defined differently by different people here. So I will use the term self-remembering for the state of being awake, not to be equated with Self Realization, which I have said before is not in my vocabulary (for various reasons). One significant difference is that self-remembering can come and go, one can be more awake or less awake, one can be more conscious or less conscious. This, again, depends upon this quantity of a certain quality of energy. So what is the role of ego/personality/cultural self/imaginary self in all this? Ego/etc. is a drain of energy. If one lives primarily through ego/etc., he or she can never accumulate the energy required for awakening, excuse me, for self-remembering. So, one has to "keep the balls in the air" via conscious efforts to such an extent that the energy entering the organism exceeds that exiting the organism, generally through the sieve that ego/personality/imaginary self, is. Working with attention saves energy, by working with awareness, one creates this finer quality of energy and likewise saves it. I realize that most of this is at odds with the view and ideas spoken to primarily here on ST's (non-volition and such). For others maybe this will give some additional perspective. Almost everything I have ever posted here on ST's relates in some manner to this information (the OP). So this is my view in a nutshell. Basically, any ordinary effort, that by ego/imaginary self, is a mechanical effort and is non-volitional. Conscious efforts, obviously and by definition, cannot occur unconsciously, that is, resulting from habit, conditioning or through ego/imaginary self. Additionally, awakening/self-remembering does not involve the repair of ego/personality/imaginary self, it involves making ego/etc. passive. It takes effort until it doesn't. That's the Enlightenment moment.
|
|