1/19/16
Adhyaropa Darsana finale
Cosmic Projection – Applied Psychology
The
concluding essay of the first darsana is a tour de force, epitomizing the
spiritual/psychological search for meaning with exceptional clarity. We read
out about half of it, and will finish it up next week. Although the essay needs
little elucidation, a couple of key ideas do bear emphasizing.
The
first darsana is about superimposition, and Nitya starts off with a good
working definition:
A superimposition implies a
ground upon which something alien to its nature is transposed or imposed. The
ground of our experience is what we call “I,” although the I we talk about or
ponder over is not the ground, but only a semantic symbol which is colored by
what is superimposed on it. Thus the transactional I is as much alien to the
beingness of the ground as what is fictitiously projected upon it.
Nitya is being careful to not come right out and say our
transactional I is a fictitious projection, but that is what this boils down
to. If you’ve come this far in the class, you must be able to handle that
disconcerting but basic idea. While initially daunting, it can quickly become a
joyful and liberating realization.
I
have been adding Beverley’s ruminations at the end of Part II, which she occasionally
sends me as she types up the work. Since most people don’t read that far into
the notes, I’ll put her comments on this right at the beginning:
I found this well worth the time
and effort involved…. It is indeed a wonderful essay. My brain finds it a splendid
work-out. In a way Nitya’s tendency to wander round and round an idea or
concept is more attractive than Nataraja’s direct and precisely aimed method.
Both of them leave me mentally staggering a bit: Nataraja because he uses a lot
of specialised language from both Indian and Western philosophy, and Nitya
because I get fascinated by his analogical flights but also get hopelessly
sidetracked. Perhaps happily side tracked is more like it.
It is also wonderful that, thanks to Beverley’s cheerful
persistence, Darsanamala is finally being brought into the digital age, and I
can fling its paragraphs all over the planet.
The
pulsation model that Nitya delineates here reveals the core of meditation
according to the Gurukula:
The first
movement of pulsation arises from the alpha point, provoking incipient memories
to wake up and gather the momentum to push through the subjective world of
desires, fantasies and deliberation, in order to become an actuality in the
objective world. As all through this movement the primal momentum comes from ananda or the ground of values, its
actualization in the empirical world is experienced in terms of affectivity.
This is the reliving of a memory.
The experience then changes
into a
subjective impression, contracting from the outer circle to the middle circle,
then transforms into a seeded potential to reoccupy the unconscious core as a
continuing incipient memory. The momentum which carried it all through is again
reabsorbed into the alpha point. Thus, the omega and the alpha are both at the
identical center.
From the point source or karu, energy expands outward
through several shells. The first indicates the incipient memories (vasanas),
or what we now think of as genetic patterning. The second shell represents our
more or less conscious mental orientation (samskaras), and the outer shell the
transactional world.
Ordinarily,
the psychic impulse is drawn outwards from its core and becomes attached to the
outermost shell, the crust of existence. Frustration is inevitable because that
level is almost purely determined by outside forces, and necessity overwhelms
us there. We are immensely constrained by our transactional requirements. If we
pin our hopes on making an impact solely at this level, we will almost certainly
be defeated. Yet that is precisely where we tend to put the lion’s share of our
energies.
As
Nitya implies, we do have a measure of control over how we direct our
samskaras, or how we let them direct us. We can observe how they are impelling
us into darkness or light and subtly influencing our selections. Rather than
futile battles to adjust the surface details of our life, we can have much more
success by working on this level. In his description:
The second
circle suggests the field of the threshold of our consciousness, from which
consciousness expands to the frontiers of objectivity. Two ambivalent forces
operate here like positive and negative energies. One fills the subjective
consciousness with hope, courage, love, empathy, compassion, a sense of beauty,
and many similar positive values; the other is the stifling, oppressive energy
that comes again and again like a dark cloud to fill one’s mind with anguish,
nausea, and helplessness.
One of the most exciting things about our class is that many
participants are feeling empowered to engage more positive interpretations.
Where before they may have been defeated by negative emotions, they are working
at depths where they can choose to not be dragged down by the cruel workings of
fate, and their psyches are the brighter for it. This is absolutely the reason
we come here every week. It’s a slow and sometimes agonizing process, but when
even a tiny bit of the psyche is converted to light, it is worth every minute.
Karen
was enthusiastic about sinking into the depths of our psyches, likening it to
diving in the ocean to get beneath the chaos of the waves. Down under, all is
calm, all is bright.
Meditation,
then, is a conscious realignment with the inner, more subtle aspects of the
psyche, and the deeper we go, the less we are constrained by superficial
necessities. In our philosophy it isn’t a mere retreat from the world. The
psyche continuously expands and contracts, touching both poles, and these
interact harmoniously to open up a wider and more amenable ambit for our
participation in life. Nitya puts this very well:
Why should we bother to seek the
ground? It is because at the conscious level in which we live our life we have
no control, since that level is already manifested. If we want to do something
with the primeval dynamics, we should go to the area which is still in the
process of being manifested. The further we go into the unmanifested
potentials, the greater is our control.
How do we go about this? Let us go into our own personal
experience, our own life. What problems are we confronting now? What kind of
personal relationships do we have with others? What makes us cry? What makes us
laugh? What inspires us to write poetry, or paint, or do any creative work?
What inhibits us? What gives us courage? These are the areas that have become
fully manifested. We should try to predicate the “what” in these questions.
We can see from this that the problems we encounter are the
keys to self-awareness, rather than blocks to it. Because of this, we aren’t being
directed to withdraw and escape life’s conflicts, but to stay with them and
learn from them, because they can energize our inner trajectory.
In
this light, Deb made an excellent observation, that when she’s in a frustrating
situation, whatever explanation she gives is just part and parcel of what got
her into that situation in the first place. Until she lets go of that, she is
simply reinforcing her entanglement. In a sense, then, the explanation itself
is the problem, and not the solution, as we’ve been taught to think in our
upbringing.
Susan
took a workshop with James Hollis on personal myths this past weekend, and she
felt it closely paralleled our class. Hollis also emphasized that we shouldn’t
either get totally involved with our problems or try to escape from them, but
to examine them. We should “stay with the tension of opposites as long as we
can stand it.” She summed up this part of his presentation:
James Hollis in his lectures last
weekend talked about Jung’s idea of complexes, which seem a lot like the
Superimposition that Nitya is talking about. Hollis says that our complexes
make our decisions for us because we are conditioned to look at the world
through that conditioned lens. But there can be a feeling that something isn’t
right with a decision. He suggests that our authentic self (the ground) is not
comfortable with the reaction of the complex and so we feel a tension. He says
our task at those times is to hold the tension of opposites as long as we can
bear it until a third entity appears. This third entity is a new understanding
of our developmental task — what we need to do to see beyond the complex and
grow.
We can clearly see the dialectic or yogic aspect of this
excellent suggestion. Rather than reject what we dislike and cling to what we
like, it is more helpful to face up to the negativity in our life, accepting it
as an integral part of our fullness. If we can do that, the tension will
eventually be resolved. By dividing good and bad in our mind, the tension only
increases. Hollis was well aware that this was why so many people turn to
distractions and medication, to dissipate the tension. But that is ineffective
if we want to live a meaningful life, and not just fritter it away.
Jan
felt this advice helped her to realize we should let go of the manifestations
we get hooked on. If we instead go back to our true ground, which is more
extensive, it is much more fulfilling. Deb added that when gurus advise us,
they are addressing our ground and not so much our personas. We may not realize
they are talking about us and our problems, because we are less familiar than
they are about this level of the psyche. I added a plug that the class also
gave us an opportunity to dive together into the depths of our being. We are
not trying to create a new, improved persona but to free ourselves from the
need—called forth by our social relations—to be any persona at all. While not
outwardly dramatic, the subtle changes this brings about are significant and
satisfying.
Hollis
wove his introductory talk, which Jan and I also attended, around poems,
because he felt that their flexibility and imagery expanded the concepts he was
trying to communicate. He felt that strictly defined verbiage was
counterproductive. He would have appreciated Nitya’s eloquent presentation of
the same idea:
It
has become almost impossible for an adult to have at-one-ment with his or her
original and spontaneous experience except on rare occasions, as when we
experience a musical rhapsody, mystical frenzy, poetic vision, a sexual orgasm,
or spiritual absorption. The eagerness to know what is going on impels the mind
to give a running commentary, as it were, of all inner experiences, by
remolding the experience into a conceptual framework of words. Words are
manufactured to suit as parts of speech. Parts of speech are designed by the
grammarian and the logician, and both of them are cold-blooded pragmatists. To
clothe an experience in all its richness, mystics, musicians, poets, and for
that matter all those who are endowed with a high degree of sensibility, have
to choose mediums other than precisely connoted words, as, for instance, icons,
ideograms, symbols, or even emotionally surcharged theatrical gestalts and
pregnant forms of silence. So when those of us who are not as brilliant as such
creative geniuses have to formulate a linguistic experience for what is being
felt, we struggle for words and then look for the most approximate one; this
makes the experience more and more meager as we practically mutilate it in our
own conscious appraisal of it. By doing this we make our conscious recognition
sophisticated. This sophistication is what is referred to here as
superimposition.
We all recognized how we mutilate our experience with a
running commentary, turning it into a meager vestige of the pure experience on
which it is based. Deb said it very well: “If we stand and look at an experience
to make it into an object, then we are no longer experiencing it.” We can use
artistic experiences to open ourselves, but the most crucial aspect is to stop
the inner narrative, if only for a while. Stop objectifying all the time.
That’s why I never rent the little devices at museums that so informatively
describe the objects there. I want to look at them without knowing, to try to
see them without prejudice. This attitude is the basis of my motto, “Self
description is stultifying.” We bind ourselves with our self-description,
imagining it makes us real, while in reality it shrinks us to fit the
Procrustean bed. If we can trust in our natural greatness, letting go will be
relatively easy.
Susan
noted how parents label their children from the beginning. With the best of
intentions they force them to conform to an externalized description, which
rapidly erodes their natural independence and joy, replacing it with a
socialized persona. This of course is the opposite of recovering our
“nothingness,” which could be viewed as freedom from formal definitions. Deb
quoted Nitya about this: “To understand ourselves we should know our ground,
the nothingness, the scratch from which we began.” Somewhere along the line we
come to identify with our outermost shell, urged on by friends and family. Yet
we can never really “understand” who that is supposed to be, and we remain
certain in our heart that it isn’t really us. Only by shrugging off the need to
present a definite version of ourselves can we find our true nature in the “no
of all nothing,” as E.E. Cummings puts it.
Deb
said when she sits in meditation, it’s not with any program. She simply sinks
into herself and allows whatever is coming to the surface to reveal itself.
Bill, who also loves to sink into himself, echoed that it isn’t about achieving
anything. It’s mostly a matter of getting out of the way. I suggested that’s
why “doing” meditation is contrary to meditation. It’s a continuous
contemplation, around the clock, or better, outside the clock. Both Deb and
Bill disagreed, insisting that they needed to wrest quiet time out of their
busy lives, so it was legitimate to set aside meditation time. For most people
there has to be intention involved: intentionally letting go of our programs in
order to experience freedom from them. Ideally there is a pulsation between
stillness and engagement, each feeding the other.
Bill
lamented how hard it is to conceive of nothingness. He was thinking of Nitya’s
bit about the Guru of Tiruvanamalai: “When Ramana Maharshi advised his
followers to repeatedly ask the question ‘Who am I?’ his intention was to make
them go beyond all semantic exercises and not hang on to the crutches of
reasoning, so that they could experience directly the nothingness of nothing
cancelled by the beingness of being.” Nothingness is elusive, not because it
isn’t present always, but because we immediately define and describe it as soon
as we recognize it. The minute nothingness is noticed, it is no longer
nothingness. It’s something we have to surrender into, to go as long as
possible before we come up for air and give it an arbitrary name. As Bill said,
we are not bound by the world, we are bound by our reactions to it.
We
will conclude the Adhyaropa Darsana on superimposition in the next session.
Part II
Since
there is no verse associated with this essay, there is no commentary by Swami
Vidyananda, either.
* *
*
Susan
and Jan shared two favorite poems from Hollis’ talk and workshop, sensing their
affinity for the pulsation model we were discussing. Here they are:
The Layers
By STANLEY KUNITZ
I have walked through many lives,
some of them my own,
and I am not who I was,
though some principle of being
abides, from which I struggle
not to stray.
When I look behind,
as I am compelled to look
before I can gather strength
to proceed on my journey,
I see the milestones dwindling
toward the horizon
and the slow fires trailing
from the abandoned camp-sites,
over which scavenger angels
wheel on heavy wings.
Oh, I have made myself a tribe
out of my true affections,
and my tribe is scattered!
How shall the heart be reconciled
to its feast of losses?
In a rising wind
the manic dust of my friends,
those who fell along the way,
bitterly stings my face.
Yet I turn, I turn,
exulting somewhat,
with my will intact to go
wherever I need to go,
and every stone on the road
precious to me.
In my darkest night,
when the moon was covered
and I roamed through wreckage,
a nimbus-clouded voice
directed me:
“Live in the layers,
not on the litter.”
Though I lack the art
to decipher it,
no doubt the next chapter
in my book of transformations
is already written.
I am not done with my changes.
A Story That Could Be True
By William Stafford
If you were exchanged in the cradle and
your real mother died
without ever telling you the story
then no one knows your name,
and somewhere in the world
your father is lost and needs you
but you are far away.
He can never find
how true you are, how ready.
When the great wind comes
and the robberies of the rain
you stand on the corner shivering.
The people who go by —
you wonder at their calm.
They miss the whisper that runs
any day in your mind,
“Who are you really, wanderer?”
and the answer you have to give
no matter how dark and cold
the world around you is:
“Maybe I’m a king.”
And the Cummings poem, one of my favorites:
i thank you God for most this amazing by E. E. Cummings
i thank You God for most this amazing
day:for the leaping greenly spirits of trees
and a blue true dream of sky;and for everything
wich is natural which is infinite which is yes
(i who have died am alive again today,
and this is the sun's birthday;this is the birth
day of life and love and wings:and of the gay
great happening illimitably earth)
how should tasting touching hearing seeing
breathing any-lifted from the no
of all nothing-human merely being
doubt unimaginable You?
(now the ears of my ears awake and
now the eyes of my eyes are opened)
Part III
Dipika
wrote:
loving your notes...just recently was having a discussion
about living right with a friend...where do you begin ? It has to start from a
childhood upbringing...otherwise you dont know what is right and even to
rectify your thinking in later years you need some base line to compare to
otherwise you can grow up like the young jihadis today who
have been brain washed into killing in the name of god....
thus your notes..with...
What we loosely call self-examination is making an
effort to penetrate the cloud of prejudiced interpretations, both ours and
others’, to access the source from which they have sprung. In Atmopadesa
Satakam this was called returning to the karu, the Core. Here it is a
seed, which specifically emphasizes the potential to proliferate. Retaining
awareness of the existence of a core reality unifies our relationship with the
world, whereas losing contact with it breeds the kind of hysterical eruption of
violence and insanity that is once again ascendant in the political discourse
of the allegedly civilized world
are a great dissemination of wisdom
* *
*
From
Beverley:
Lovely class notes. They come faithfully every week. This in
itself I love. I love the fact that you all, and you in particular, stick with
it. I see an infinite variety rising up out of the sameness. I value being able
to share this.
I
felt a deep response to the first poem 'The Layers' by Stanley Kunitz. I have a
long vista to look back on now and I truly feel I have lived several lives. and
can discern patterns and levels, which no longer cause mortification and
lamenting - well not much!. The concept of the layers goes so well with
the class discussion this time too.
* *
*
Susan
and her friend Ruth (neither of them dim-witted!) recently attended a workshop
put on by Dr. James Hollis, author of
Finding Meaning in the Second Half of Life, and many other books. She is an
excellent note taker, and has shared them with us. The resonance with our
studies should be obvious. Susan has starred a couple of significant points; I
would add an asterisk to “Rationalizing voices are a sure sign of a complex.”
Her
email carried an introduction (her “totally botched” explanation was just fine
and appeared in the earlier notes):
I
had a walk with Ruth on Friday and we talked more about the workshop. I
realized that I totally botched the explanation that I gave you about the
tension of opposites. It wasn’t about the complexes but about duality of
course. I’m sure there’s some overlap but I feel dim witted, as usual. Here is
the way it went: Jung says that small questions are solved by small answers but
for the greater questions of life, the opposite is always true (both dark and
light, negative and positive, etc) — life can only be faced paradoxically. Our
task is to hold the tension of opposites as long as we can bear it until a
third entity appears. I assume this would be the unitive way of understanding.
Anyway, it sounded good the other way too!
James Hollis workshop – 1/16/16
What is my myth?
Greeks: Know thyself. Nothing to excess.
Tracking the invisible world of the psyche in the visible
world. We can’t see the invisible, the unconscious but we can detect it in how
it affects our life – in our reactions.
Who I am vs. what happened to me. I am not what happened to
me.
Patterns of avoidance and patterns of compliance are
examples of ways our unconscious is affecting us. These ways may not be serving
us any longer.
Shame – happens because who I am feels wrong in the
environment.
The child is not meant to compensate for the parent’s
unlived life
William Stafford poem:
A Story That Could Be True
If you were exchanged in the cradle and
your real mother died
without ever telling the story
then no one knows your name,
and somewhere in the world
your father is lost and needs you
but you are far away.
He can never find
how true you are, how ready.
When the great wind comes
and the robberies of the rain
you stand on the corner shivering.
The people who go by–
you wonder at their calm.
They miss the whisper that runs
any day in your mind,
“Who are you really, wanderer?”–
and the answer you have to give
no matter how dark and cold
the world around you is:
“Maybe I’m a king.”
How people get trapped in provisional (and necessary at the
time) understandings
Complexes have no imagination – they just play over and over
again.
Who is my tribe?
What supports my journey and what impedes it?
Fundamentalism has increased in our world – resisting the
evolution of the world around us. A way to treat anxiety. Another way is
through drugs and alcohol, consumerism, narcissism. These are “treatment plans”
all of which have led to liquid modernity – everything always changing. No one
has a true tribe.
Myth – shifting from the group/tribe to the shoulders of the
individual
**We are trying to recover our personal authority.
Why row your boat to the middle of a lake and get out? Why
leave your comforts and treatment plans. You won’t get out of the boat until
it’s leaking and falling apart around you.
Which of the voices inside me come from my authentic self?
We respond to people out of our conditionings – we are
always looking at the world through a lens of some kind (culture, family)
Fate v. Destiny
The Greeks believed there was a forcefield pushing us –
“fate” – you don’t choose your family but they have an influence.
Destiny – seeking to unfold within us. The acorn becomes an
oak tree. Few acorns become oak trees because of fate (environmental
circumstances)
The self is selving – our bodies are digesting, growing toe nails
We can reflect
and this helps but can also cause neurosis because we are separated from our
instinct.
1. We
always have inherent tendencies – our character: like markings on slate
2. Human
ego, because of consciousness, is aware of small status in great universe, imagines
it is capable of much more than it is – inflation. There is a problem when I
say that I know what’s going on – leads to self delusion. Hubrus – tendency
toward presumption
3. Hamartia
(Greek – to miss the mark/sin) – You look through distorting lens and make
choices based on that.
Of what am I unconscious? Can’t know
Dreams are coming from a different place than the ego world
Tragic dilemma – continuing interplay of human being with
powerful forces (the Gods). We are always caught in the realm of our limitations
The Gods – personifying archetypes, dramatization of
archetypal beings
Mental illness can be seen as a separation from power or the
will of the Gods – separation from the soul.
**In relationships: What am I asking of that person that I
need to do for myself?
We think the other person is going to fix things – make up
all the deficits in my life, help me not to have to grow up. Underneath is a
drama, an infantile drama. We are all recovering children.
This is not love but dependent aggression.
The otherness of the other is their greatest gift for us.
The other pulls me out.
Healthy relationship enlarges
“Jung and Aging” – essays about loss and aging – as long as
you have curiosity and imagination, you are growing.
Interrogating unconscious – 90% of reactions come from our
history
Little people inside me sending messages -- this is how
Hollis explains his epiphanies about questions and dilemmas in his life.
We are splinter mythology creatures – we have complexes
We develop an intellectual process that is meant to be
protective
Trust v. distrust – comes from early years – does the world
keep its promises?
A complex is a transient psychosis. Some people are in a
permanent complex; insecurity for instance
What are my myths? What are the value systems that I am in
service to?
Jung – small questions are solved by small answers. For the
greater questions of life, the opposite is always true – life can only be faced
paradoxically.
Our task is to hold the tension of opposites as long as we can
bear it until a third entity appears.
When making a decision we look at pluses and minuses but
what is the question about really? That third thing – what is the developmental
task of this person?
Living your life for a parental complex
Living by complexes takes away life
Mythological crisis – collision of stories
What does soul want?
Rationalizing voices are a sure sign of a complex
Mythology
Cosmos; order – unfolding narrative
v. chaos
logos and eros
separation – birth of neurosis and consciousness
What was it like before birth? Why is life so difficult?
Trauma of birth – we carry it with us – follows Edenic state
when all needs were met
Trees of Eden: Tree of life represents the world of our
nature – you are whole and connected. Tree of knowledge represents separation,
products of the human world. The split is inevitable and necessary and it makes
us neurotic
Freud talks about moving from neurotic misery (causes a
split) to ordinary misery.
Lady Gough said works of female and male authors should not
be placed next to each other
Stable object; necessary other – blanket for toddler
Each separation is a loss and a gain
Creates ambivalence – I get farther from the source with
each step forward
Eating disorders – trying to connect with nurturing source
Read Jung but don’t become a Jungian – find your own path
Ideological seductions – clear moral choices, no ambiguity
Ancestors developed rites of separation:
1. separation
2. death
– naivety, innocence
3. rebirth
4. teaching
– archetypal, rites, duties, tools
5. ordeal
– finding resources within
6. return
to tribe
Instead of these rites, our culture has young people going
to jobs and getting married – just an extension of the womb
How our culture supports aging and mortality – much less now
than in past cultures.
Our ? isn’t
about happiness but about transformation
Our task is to further developmental possibilities
Assimilating shadow – makes you more empathetic
Taking burden on your own shoulders
When myth erodes, something else fills the vacuum – now it’s
materialism
Therapy is about one’s approach to the numinous. The
numinous is everywhere but it is not a function of the ego world.
BBC Interview with Jung
We become more narcissistic, the less we are connected to
what feeds us.
Most neuroses are a conflict of duty
Stop signs are a duty but they do not cause neuroses
John Fowles’ French Lieutenant’s Woman
Holidays give vertical dimension to our day to day
horizontal life.
Search for numinous, for transcendence, transformation,
connection. This is unaddressed in modern culture. Projected into casinos
Jung said about a female schizophrenic patient: She is
drowning in that water in which you learned to swim. Split functioning of mind.
When you can’t recover the ego’s functioning position.
Human psyche wants to impose myth on chaos of reality
Move from tribe to your shoulders.
Gives purpose, accountibility