|
|
Post by Portto on Dec 10, 2009 10:29:25 GMT -5
Where is the separation line between direct perception and thinking?
Direct perception always involves the brain/mind as the last step in the chain of events, otherwise we wouldn't have the experience at all.
Also, thinking is usually triggered by direct perception - the seed that starts the avalanche of thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by lightmystic on Dec 10, 2009 12:41:00 GMT -5
Is it possible that all thoughts, all ideas, all descriptions, views, differences, etc... are just another thing that appears within undivided perception...?
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 10, 2009 13:45:37 GMT -5
Porto: Direct perception of physical reality often triggers thinking, but it doesn't have to. After one has practiced non-conceptual awareness for a sufficient length of time, the mind can remain silent for long periods of time without any thoughts occurring. The average adult probably spends 99% of her time thinking and talking to herself. On the other end of the spectrum are young children and people like Ramana Maharshi who probably spent very little time, if any, thinking and talking internally. Here is the process of what happens to us as we grow from childhood to adulthood.
As young children we were psychologically unified with "what is." We were innocent and unknowing (the idea that humans are born sinful is an absurd idea propagated by people who are totally ignorant of human psychological development). Our parents, however, immediately began interacting with us and encouraged us to identify/cognize/imagine what we were seeing. We were then encouraged to imagine names for what we imagined. When we looked at our mother, for example, we distinguished her as something separate from ourselves using our intellectual power of imagination. This was an initial act of artificial and false separation. We then learned to use the label "mama" for that imaginary distinction. Soon, the word "mama" became ideationally equivalent to the image, so that the word and "thing" were interchangeable. We continued imagining and abstracting "what is" into separate components related to each other in various complex ways. As our power of imagination grew, we became able to manipulate the images, ideas, and symbols in our heads in increasingly complex ways. By the time we entered school we were able to imagine numbers, which could be substituted for either images or ideas, and we could add, subtract, or manipulate those secondary symbols in various ways.
Gradually, we created an imaginary visual/verbal/symbolic representation of reality in our head--a meta-reality, and we increasingly spent our time interacting with that meta-reality rather than reality, itself. As adults, we rarely see "what is" clearly--without distinctions or labels. What we see is a surreal meta-world of images and ideas that overlies reality much like lines of latitude and longitude, but far denser and more complex. We spend most of our time internally talking and thinking and only occasionally steal a momentary glance at "what is." All of us have had the experience of driving twenty miles or more on the interstate and suddenly realizing that we were totally unconscious of the world around us for a long period of time. This experience is not significantly different from how most of us spend most of our time; we are usually unconscious of "what is" and lost in a dreamworld of thoughts and talk.
On the path of non-duality our challenge is to reverse the process that led us to live in our heads. We have to practice direct perception and break the habit of incessant thought. If we are persistent, it is possible to return to the world that we inhabited as young children--a world in which our minds are unified with "what is" and thinking is subordinate to direct perception. Like children, we are then able to see "what is," but we retain the full adult power of imagination. If we are engineers, for example, we can imagine forces, calculate loads, plot vectors, and design imaginary structures that can be built in the real world. Afterwards, when our work requiring imagination is finished, we can leave our office and shift our attention back to "what is" free of thought.
The line of separation between direct perception and thought is therefore the point where we shift from a non-conceptual mode of mind to a conceptual mode. If the illusion of control is absent, this shifting between modes of mind is simply seen and accepted as part of "what is." Looking back, we see that our early effort to focus upon "what is" was not "our" effort at all. It was just part of the play that manifested through a particular body/mind. The end result is seeing that the mind is always functioning freely, even though we once imagined that we had some control over it.
As for the last part of your post, I'm not sure that thinking is usually triggered by direct perception. This can happen, but more typically thoughts appear as a result of previous thoughts. Most adults do not spend much time directly perceiving the physical world. They spend most of their time perceiving thoughts, and it is their own thoughts that lead to still more thoughts. Yes, physical events happen throughout the day that trigger thoughts, but I have a feeling that more thoughts are generated by thoughts than by physical events. I'll watch what happens for a day or so, and try to get a sense of what percentage of thoughts come from thoughts versus the direct perception of physical events. That's an interesting issue. Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by klaus on Dec 10, 2009 15:37:28 GMT -5
Hello Lightmystic,
Can you define undivided perception?
Hello Zendancer,
Can you define direct perception?
And isn't undivided, direction perception psychic phenomenon as thoughts are psychic phenomemon, so is there really a separation line between them. And isn't all psychic phenomenon arising from That Which IS?
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 10, 2009 16:54:16 GMT -5
Hi Klaus: I usually use the term "direct perception" interchangeably with "non-conceptual awareness" to distinguish that kind of activity from "indirect perception,"--perception mediated by thoughts. To be more precise, I probably ought to use the term "non-conceptual awareness" all the time in order to avoid confusion. Non-conceptual awareness is when we look at the world like the lens of a camera. Our looking is empty, and what we see is a field of being without distinction. We see without knowing.
If I am looking at the physical world without any kind of verbal thoughts or internal talk occuring, then I am seeing it directly, without anything else going on. Most of us do not look at the world like this. Most of us "think-see" the world; we look and simultaneously think about what we're looking at.
Yes, seeing physical reality non-conceptually and seeing what we imagine is all part of the same Oneness, so there is no real separation. Neverthless, making this distinction between conceptual and non-conceptual awareness is often very helpful to people. It points them toward the living truth at a time when they are usually confused by their own thoughts. After becoming free of thoughts, it no longer matters how we think about this, and we can throw these ideas out the window.
Until we break the habit of incessant thought, most of us never realize how much our thoughts are affecting our perception and understanding of the world. Most of us, for example, cannot distinguish when the mind shifts back and forth between physical reality and the stuff that we are imagining. Why does this matter? Well, what we imagine can often make our lives miserable, and we usually don't know that our unhappiness is being caused by our imagination. As the habit of imagination loses its power over us, life becomes much clearer, far simpler, and much happier.
I have a friend who thinks that he is responsible for his financial success. He thinks he is a self-made man. He believes these ideas strongly. His imaginary ideas cause him to be very self-righteous and very judgmental toward people who haven't enjoyed his level of material well-being. He currently lives in a dream. If he loses his material wealth, however, which could happen at any time, he would suddenly find himself living in a bad dream. If he were free of the illusion that he controls his destiny and is separate from reality, he would see the world in a completely different way. He would be far more sympathetic to people who haven't been as lucky as he has. Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Dec 10, 2009 20:04:30 GMT -5
Thank you for another insightful post, ZD. For the first part of your post, since you analyzed the transition from child perception to adult perception, it would be interesting to analyze how and why this occurred for humans as a species. For the last part, I'm not sure that thinking is usually triggered by direct perception. This can happen, but more typically thoughts appear as a result of previous thoughts. This is in fact similar to what I mentioned; I said that direct perception triggers an avalanche of thoughts. The first one is due to direct perception, while the other ones appear as a consequence. I see direct perception as a "seed." What is the cause of the first thought in the morning or when coming out of meditation? It can't be another thought... It must be perception of physical reality (memory is included here, in my opinion). |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Dec 10, 2009 20:18:20 GMT -5
Is it possible that all thoughts, all ideas, all descriptions, views, differences, etc... are just another thing that appears within undivided perception...? They certainly must have the same source, which has always been around. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Dec 10, 2009 20:54:47 GMT -5
Again, the question the illusion of a separate self must keep asking/penetrating, "Who's/What's doing all this doing/thinking/describing/viewing/differentiating/imagining/experiencing/perceiving?" Always deeper....until the bottom falls out. Imagine you're standing in front of the most spectacular mirror the world has ever known. You're watching your life being played out in the mirror; watching yourself think, love, play, imagine, cry, hate, forget is all you ever do all day every day.
Has the image itself ever actually thought, loved, played, imagined, cried, hated, forgotten?
Watch you imagine an answer. Is it possible that all thoughts, all ideas, all descriptions, views, differences, etc... are just another thing that appears within undivided perception...? LM, my post was just meant to be an addition to your original question, as you probably already know. ZD, I really like ZM Seung Sahn's pointing too. Cool dude. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 10, 2009 21:22:10 GMT -5
Porto: Whew, I'm not sure that I want to think too hard about this (LOL) because I'm not sure that we can quantitatively know the answer to your question. Our stream of conscious thoughts may be only the tips of icebergs protruding above the surface of our subconscious and perhaps above the surface of our collective unconscious. Your question raised my curiosity about this issue, however, so this afternoon I spent some time watching thoughts as they arose. I went over to walk around the inside of a local coliseum. I spent the first fifteen minutes focused on what I could see and hear in order to start off with some mental silence. Then, I just watched what appeared. A number of thoughts arose that were related to interactions with people on the internet earlier in the day (memories of previous thoughts and words that both I and others had written). Other thoughts and words arose as a result of looking at physical objects (trees blowing in the wind outside the building, people walking bundled up against the cold wind on outside sidewalks, a fire extinguisher and a defibrillator hanging on an interior wall, etc). And still other thoughts arose related to experiences earlier in the week or anticipated meetings scheduled for in the future. When I woke up this morning, the first thought I remember having was, "I wonder what the stock futures are doing this morning, and I wonder if WDC (a particular stock I follow) is going to hit $40/share today?" This is one of several stocks that I often think about, so this is probably something running through my subconscious based on a history of past thoughts concerning business-related news and stock trades. After I walked past the front door toward the kitchen, I remember thinking, "I wish that my wife hadn't covered the windows beside the door with Christmas decorations because I can't see the field in front of our house where deer are often gathered in the morning." This was triggered by the direct perception of red ribbony thingamajigs that were blocking my vision.
After watching thoughts for about forty minutes this afternoon and thinking about other thoughts I had earlier in the day, I think (no pun intended, LOL) that a larger number of thoughts occur as a result of earlier thoughts and conversations and that direct perception is not the trigger for nearly the same number of thoughts. When I wake up in the morning, for example, I often have many thoughts before I ever see or hear anything because my wife keeps our bedroom totally dark. Tomorrow morning watch your first thoughts and see if you can discover if there is any obvious trigger for why they occurred.
As for how and why adults live in their heads rather than in their bodies like most animals, I assume that at some point primates evolved an advanced ability to imagine, and this is the natural consequence of that evolutionary leap. Our power of imagination is both a blessing and a curse. It gives us novocaine and computers, but it also creates a huge amount of psychological suffering.
|
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Dec 10, 2009 21:52:03 GMT -5
Porto: While I was writing my earlier response, SomeNothing addressed the deeper issue. Analyzing and thinking about how thoughts arise may be fun, but it carries us no closer to the truth. My favorite Zen Master (now deceased) used to tell his students, "Put it all down. Only go straight. Don't know. Get enlightened and thereby save all beings from suffering." Now, that's good advice. Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by lightmystic on Dec 11, 2009 11:28:06 GMT -5
Hey Klaus, Undivided perception is simply That which perceives everything. There is no gap between what is perceived and what perceives. The distinctions that there are are just another thing that arises in the seemlessly connected ocean of your own Perception. You perception encompasses all that the mind can see and interpret, including the mind itself. And it extends out beyond what the mind can interpret....the mind may not be able to analyze past it's own personal story and ideas of boundaries, but you can bring up any idea and your Awareness, infinite and un-divided, encompasses that too.... This is true because there is a relationship between you, the person, and everything else in creation. You are "here" and everything else is right "there." There's the relationship and the connection...so with that connection, one cannot really separate themselves from anything, because it's always there...And the undivided Awareness that underlies that encompasses all of those possibilities. If you just focus on the act of being Aware itself (not OF anything, because the "of anything" is where the mind kicks in - this is a priori to that, more fundamental, like the way atoms are more fundamental to molecules - they are always there, underlying it)...Just being Aware of your own Awareness....where does that Awareness "end"? It just keeps going, regardless of the boundaries the mind tries to dictate to it.... Does that make sense? Hello Lightmystic, Can you define undivided perception? Hello Zendancer, Can you define direct perception? And isn't undivided, direction perception psychic phenomenon as thoughts are psychic phenomemon, so is there really a separation line between them. And isn't all psychic phenomenon arising from That Which IS? |
|
|
|
Post by Portto on Dec 11, 2009 14:00:47 GMT -5
My favorite Zen Master (now deceased) used to tell his students, "Put it all down. Only go straight. Don't know. That is good advice, indeed. Thank you ZD, LM, and all. |
|
|
|
Post by lightmystic on Dec 11, 2009 17:40:58 GMT -5
Yes, and that source is your perception itself..... Is it possible that all thoughts, all ideas, all descriptions, views, differences, etc... are just another thing that appears within undivided perception...? They certainly must have the same source, which has always been around. |
|
|
|
Post by lightmystic on Dec 11, 2009 17:41:18 GMT -5
You are quite welcome!  My favorite Zen Master (now deceased) used to tell his students, "Put it all down. Only go straight. Don't know. That is good advice, indeed. Thank you ZD, LM, and all. |
|
|
|
Post by karen on Dec 11, 2009 22:35:13 GMT -5
This is a good thread.
|
|
