grist to the mill

Grist to the mill of mindfulness

George G Clark, 18 June 2009

 

This morning I noted that the phrase 'middle class wanker' was lurking in consciousness and that it linked to the phrases 'elders and betters' and 'the good and great'. I also noted an associated feeling of dis-ease that seemed to have roots in anger, shame and disappointment concerning recent shocking revelations about MP's expense claims in the UK.

Existential Jujitsu Whatever turns up in mind whether good, bad or indifferent can be used as fuel for mind training. For better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, the more powerful the thought and the stronger the emotion then the greater its potential as an aid to turning your mind around. http://www.srds.co.uk/begin/jujitsu.htm

Then I realized that these thoughts and feelings would make excellent grist to the mill of mindfulness. There could be a bout of existential jujitsu (see box).

Then I felt moved to dive beneath the shallow, intellectual understanding of things. This called for a matrix dealing with two main issues: (a) it is easy to be seduced by head stuff (thoughts) and thus to ignore the heart stuff (feelings) or vice-versa. But subjectively there cannot be one without the other - it is all mind stuff; and (b) there are causes and conditions for both conscious and unconscious aspects of mind stuff. But the dividing line between the two is sometimes misty and there is ongoing movement to and from the attention centre.

Grist to the mill of mindfulness
	Conscious - in the attention centre	Margin - on the misty edges of attention	Unconscious - not available for attention
Thought - Head stuff	1	4	7
Feeling - Heart stuff	2	5	8
Thought/ feeling - Mind stuff	3A & 3B	6	9

 

It would be tedious and not very enlightening to detail my ongoing story about 'hegemony' and 'elegant power' in terms of the nine boxes in the matrix. Some generalisations might, however, offer food for thought.

Those who are not involved with mindfulness and meditation are largely confined to the tip of the iceberg that is consciousness (1, 2 and 3). The concept of 'conditioned robot' springs to mind.

Those who are relatively new to mindfulness and meditation become increasingly aware of stuff at the misty margins of consciousness and of the influence it has on the conscious material. It soon becomes apparent that pure head and heart stuff do not exist and categories 4 and 5 enfold into mind stuff (6). The mind has a mind of its own!

Those who are well practiced in mindfulness and meditation intuitively grasp that 7 and 8 are non-categories and that there is an enormous amount of mind stuff that is not commonly available for attention (9). The goal of mindfulness and meditation is to still the mind such that the chatter of 3 and 6 is reduced and the promptings of 9 might be intuited.

We can think of mind stuff in the attention centre as having two forms - 3A and 3B. The former is the conditioned robot and the latter is what bears quiet witness to it. 3B can thus enable creativity and originality by heeding the intuitions from 9 - from your 'muse'.

SO - Will the greedy 'good and great' (1 & 2) take up existential jujitsu? Will they shift to wise and compassionate generosity by moving from 9 through 6 to 3B? Here's grist to their mill!

lamplight of we

the lamplight of we

George G Clark, 16 June 2009

I noticed many thoughts and feelings passing through my attention centre this morning. There will have been causes and conditions for all of them but these will have been multiple and complex. And each thought and feeling will have had a neural correlate.

A key democratic question is the extent to which conscious (or unconscious) thoughts and feelings can feedback on their neural correlates. Can we, by taking thought, change our thoughts and feelings and thus their neural correlates and the world?

BUT … is that really a key question? Is it not the case that the lamp which is the neural correlate (the tangible thing) is intimately linked to the light which is the thought and feeling (the intangible thing). If there is no lamp then there can be no light. But also if there is no light then there is no actual lamp (only a potential one). The lamp and the light are two sides of the same coin. One cannot exist without the other.

BUT … neither lamp nor light is unchanging. They are not so much 'beings' as 'ongoing becomings': not so much static products as dynamic processes. They come into existence (from where?), hang around in the mental churn for a while (where does the light exist?) and then pass out of existence again (where do they go?). So how long does a lamp/light last? To the extent that it can be hypothesized as a tangible thing, can it exist for more than a tiny fraction of a second - a thought moment?

SO … might we consider thoughts about tangible products (things) to be illusions of consciousness that were useful for a time during the evolution of 'intelligence' in the universe? We might! But evolution has moved on.

There is now consciousness of consciousness and it is emergent. No predetermined blueprints; no central planning committee. Instead we can conceive of dynamic churn generating the variations that feed the process of natural selection at cosmic, biological and cultural levels. (Think of the invisible hand controlling(?) the freemarket!)

SO … we return to the key democratic question. It boils down to figuring the extent to which human consciousness in its totality is or can be a deliberate and considerate agent of evolutionary selection under conditions of domestication. It would be nice to think that it can be. But this begs the question of socio-political process in these globalised times. If we accept that by taking thought we can be an agent of change in the world - then how are we to conceive of 'we'?

"since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defences of peace must be constructed"
http://www.icomos.org/unesco/unesco_constitution.html

 

"The mind, indeed, is never seen by anyone,
and, therefore, whether it can know or cannot know itself,
just like the beauty of a barren woman's daughter,
this merely forms the subject of a pointless conversation.
[Shantideva - 8^th Century]

 

 

 

 

B. Alan Wallace on the new synthesis

Living alone

George G Clark, 08 June 2009

'Living alone' has been the theme of several recent conversations. I now live alone, work from home, and make time each day for mindfulness. Other people have different patterns. So, to what extent is living alone a good thing? This one-pager maps out four main viewpoints.

Living alone
	normal	abnormal
Bad	1. anti-social	3. weird loners
Good	2. individual freedom	4. mindful creativity

 

Living alone is increasingly common in our modern individualistic cultures. Once there were extended families living in tight knit communities. Then there were socially-mobile, nuclear families living in boxes on estates. Now there are many single parent families and increasing numbers of people living alone.

(1) There is the notion that we are social animals. We become human only through interaction with other humans. Living alone cuts us off from being truly human. We can arrange contact via the media and computer based social networking: but this does not give the full blooded stimulation that we need.

(2) On the other hand, living with others calls for compromise and diplomacy to negotiate pathways through the different desires of individuals. There is less personal freedom of choice. By living alone we find the mental space to go beyond the parochial confines of our immediate social circumstances. We are thus able to consider what to be free from and what to be free for.

But throughout human history there have always been individuals who embraced living alone. These were the hermits and renunciants living in solitary retreat and figuring out the science and art of being truly human. At their best these pioneers had insights that contributed to major political, economic and religious systems.

(3) There is the notion that these Spartan recluses produce only a hotch potch of mystical mumbo jumbo and magic. The meditators would be better for the planet if they got a real job and contributed meaningfully to society and the economy.

(4) On the other hand, there are those who reckon that our present way of dealing with the planet (resource depletion, pollution, sweat shops etc) is seriously undesirable but structurally inbuilt. We therefore need a change of values, a paradigm shift in humanity's self-consciousness and its place in the web of things. Those who embrace living alone and a regime of mindfulness are well suited to finding better ways to be human.

So, to what extent is living alone a good thing?

Different people will have different viewpoints. We need different strokes for different personality types and at different times!

I personally have come to value and enjoy living alone most of the time. There is some guilt for not being more 'engaged' with finding solutions to the human roots of community and planetary problems. But business as usual is not getting us anywhere. If I am to stop being part of the problem there is need of a radical mental turn around. This requires lashings of stillness such that the media fed chatter fades away and the workaholic mud settles. The occasional company of like-minded souls helps. Some days are better than others!

"Do not lose yourself in dispersion and in your surroundings. Learn to practice breathing in order to regain composure of body and mind, to practice mindfulness, and to develop concentration and understanding." (Thich Nhat Hahn)

Moral Foundations Theory

Jonathan Haidt (2008) at http://www.moralfoundations.org/

Moral Foundations Theory was created to understand why morality varies so much across cultures yet still shows so many similarities and recurrent themes.

In brief, the theory proposes that five innate and universally available psychological systems are the foundations of "intuitive ethics." Each culture then constructs virtues, narratives, and institutions on top of these foundations, thereby creating the unique moralities we see around the world, and conflicting within nations too. The foundations are:

1	Harm/ care	related to our long evolution as mammals with attachment systems and an ability to feel (and dislike) the pain of others	This foundation underlies virtues of kindness, gentleness, and nurturance
2	Fairness/ reciprocity	related to the evolutionary process of reciprocal altruism	This foundation generates ideas of justice, rights, and autonomy
3	Ingroup/ loyalty	related to our long history as tribal creatures able to form shifting coalitions. This foundation underlies virtues of patriotism and self-sacrifice for the group	It is active anytime people feel that it's "one for all, and all for one."
4	Authority/ respect	shaped by our long primate history of hierarchical social interactions	This foundation underlies virtues of leadership and followership, including deference to legitimate authority and respect for traditions
5	Purity/ sanctity	shaped by the psychology of disgust and contamination	This foundation underlies religious notions of striving to live in an elevated, less carnal, more noble way. It underlies the widespread idea that the body is a temple which can be desecrated by immoral activities and contaminants (an idea not unique to religious traditions)

Much of our present research involves applying the theory to political "cultures" such as those of liberals and conservatives. The current American culture war, we have found, can be seen as arising from the fact that

(a) liberals try to create a morality relying almost exclusively on the Harm/Care and Fairness/Reciprocity foundations;

(b) conservatives, especially religious conservatives, use all five foundations, including Ingroup/Loyalty, Authority/Respect, and Purity/Sanctity.

You can find out your own moral foundations profile at www.YourMorals.org .

third enlightenment

"We have not one Enlightenment project but three: a Western one based on rational thought, an Eastern one based on seeing through the illusion of the Self, and a Postmodern one based on the concept of socially constructed reality. And despite their many differences, they share the common goal of liberation

 

http://www.srds.co.uk/begin/third_light.htm

whispers from everywhere

"Words of Faith" from the Lesotho days

Available through www.lulu.com

 

Find at http://www.lulu.com/content/3516069

basics and extras

George G Clark, 20 May 2009

I got frazzled while shopping in Tescos. I felt the need for a session of just sitting. This raised the question of  "Why not sit still most of the time?" The answer that emerged is set out in the following box where three life styles are set on a continuum of worldly involvement.

Life Style		Basic things	Extra things	Just sitting
1	consumer	ü	lots	none
2	the middle way	ü	some	some
3	meditator	ü	none	lots

 

1. Consumer: Life = basic things + lots of extra things

The basic things would include arranging for food, clothing and shelter and stepping out of the way of rampaging elephants and ten ton trucks. This would have been straightforward in the hunting and gathering days but would have got more complicated once agriculture was invented and then modern civilisation with its advertising.

It is easy to make fun of the knick knacks that make up the extra things in our status anxious modern life styles. Think of the grades of rich and poor and how they tend to read different newspapers and shop in different supermarkets. In a given supermarket, think of the range of prices for similar items packaged differently (Who would not be seen dead with value brand products in their baskets in Tesco?). Think more generally of people's pattern of consumption and of how when they earn more they spend more and thus never have enough.

3. Meditator: Life = basic things +lots of just sitting

Most mature cultures have their hermits and recluses. These are the saints who chose to be frugal and prudent and thus to get by with the basic things. They thus have time for just sitting, for being still, for noticing what they notice, for thinking about thinking. They have time 'to stand and stare'. And what good does this do? They get in touch with what Huxley called the perennial philosophy. They become inspired by the interpenetrating oneness of 'reality' and thus come to know the peace that passes all understanding. The spiritual insights of the best of them form the bases of the world's main religions.

Note in passing that those of the saintly persuasion are often gathered together in monasteries where their lives are systematically pared back to the basic things + just sitting. This can be a severe approach and is often caught up in the inadequacies that characterise most mature and institutionalised state religions. But not always!

2. The middle way: Life = basic things + some extra things + some just sitting

And then there is the middle way. The everyday Zen of the householder. The idea is that total absorption in consumer capitalism is an existential cop out and leads to suffering. The goal is to go beyond robotic patterns of craving and aversion, to be unattached to the impermanent things of this world, and thus to find peace.

The good news is that our essential nature is peaceful like a mirror. The problem is that civilisation with its never ending stream of extra things is like dust on the mirror. So how might we remove the dust? By making time for just sitting, for being mindful, for meditating.

Ultimately it is a matter of balance. Set aside some time each day (5, 15, 45 minutes?) for quiet reflection. Notice what is going on in your head. Many of the extras will thus become less attractive and easy to renounce. You will thus be on the road to peace of mind and thus to deep happiness and contentment. Why not memorise the following saying and call it to mind when you are getting frazzled:

Don't just do something,
Sit there!

 Printer friendly one page version at http://www.spanglefish.com/SRDS/documents/eastern%20thinking/basics-and-extras.doc

theological imperialism

Huxley's religious future

"Like any other form of imperialism, theological imperialism is a menace to permanent world peace. The reign of violence will never come to an end until:

• First, most human beings accept the same, true philosophy of life;
• Second, this Perennial Philosophy is recognized as the highest factor common to all world religions;
• Third, the adherents of every religion renounce the idolatrous time-philosophies, with which, in their own particular faith, the Perennial Philosophy of eternity has been overlaid;
• Fourth, there is a world-wide rejection of all the political pseudo-religions, which place man's supreme good in future time and therefore justify and commend the commission of every sort of present iniquity as a means to that end.

If these conditions are not fulfilled, no amount of political planning, no economic blue-prints however ingeniously drawn, can prevent the recrudescence of war and revolution."

Aldous Huxley (1945) The Perennial Philosophy; Flamingo; ISBN 0006547338

stillness after breakfast

George G Clark, 12 April 2009

 

A period of stillness after breakfast and I am aware of many vague thought threads. I get the impression that the inner censor is vetoing many of them - or is that being paranoid?

One of the thought threads wonders how many 'agencies' are contained in such a concept? There are perhaps three main ones:

·         Generating thought threads. 
Most thought threads arise from unconscious causes and conditions - external and internal - many and varied - noble and ignoble - habitual and creative. The inbuilt life force doing its thing.
"The mind has a mind of its own!"

·         Vetoing by the inner censor.  
This is a result of other unconscious causes and conditions. There is a tendency to try and maintain a consistent self concept by limiting attention to the familiar and parochial - note that the self concept can be robust or weedy!) Panic attacks are part of the arsenal.
"Don't even go there!"

·         Witnessing the above.
By consciously noticing thought patterns (with their associated feelings) you thus become, to some extent, unattached to them. 'You' are thus potentially able and willing to 'look into' some mental stuff that might normally be avoided.
"Aha, so this is what 'anger, greed, compassion, generosity etc' is like!"

 

Note that the third agency is the one that enables insight and thus liberation from reflexive habit. By being truly aware of what is going on in your head it becomes possible to choose for or against particular patterns of thought and feeling.

Aha - it pays to have periods of stillness after breakfast. Be still and know!