enquiry-1Ali,

I feel that a few words about enquiry are necessary. It’s very easy to fall into the trap of opinions, beliefs, and views based on one’s experiences and conditioning. Even if one doesn’t want to engage in this way, it’s very hard to remain in a questioning mode, and come from ‘I don’t know.’ It’s very difficult, and apparently exceedingly rare, to question together with another human being, to hold open a space and keep a question going, so that there may be shared insight. We may not be able to achieve that, but that is one’s intent. At present, we aren’t communicating in this way.

enquiry-2It seems that you’ve set up a bit of a straw man in saying that in “talking about other people’s expectations, dreams, problems, sorrows, etc,  is far easier than doing something about yourself.” We aren’t doing that, or “promising people leadership, guidance and eventually happiness.” We are looking at the actual
I feel that a few words about enquiry are necessary. It’s very easy to fall into process of thought, sustained by the observer, within oneself, and asking: What is right observation, which quiets the chattering mind, and puts the mind, emotions, brain, and body in natural order and proper balance, and allows transmutation to occur?

Can the people who have “a natural talent to quiet their thoughts and clean their mind, not by effort and struggling, but only through insight” point the way for others? Certainly they can, though each person has to do so for themselves. It simply isn’t true that “as soon as you try to put this experience into words, which is within the very limit of the known, your real experience and insight start fading away and the thought invades back the mind.” Words aren’t the problem, nor writing. Did Rumi lose his insight because he wrote beautiful poetry? Of course not. One can indeed lose insight by writing, or speaking, but only if one makes the words more important than the things, out of a desire to make a name for oneself or some other motivation. But as long as one is enquiring, asking questions within oneself, insight is not lost. Indeed, it is nurtured.

enquiry-3Also, I don’t accept the starting position of self. If we start from self we will end with self. ‘Myself’ is an illusion, a separation made by thought that seems to have permanence. For most people, the feeling of ‘myself’ lasts a lifetime, with no true break. For people who actually meditate, the continuity of self ceases, at least for a some timeless moments or minutes.

So yes, the question of meditation is of the highest importance, what we are really talking about. As you say, for you meditation is an idea, but for me it is an actuality, the most important action a human being is capable. Meditation  isn’t a matter of talent, though it may come easier for some people than others. So let’s not play with words like ‘meditation,’ since the word is not the thing, just as the map is not the territory.

enquiry-4You said, “I have no intention to question thought. What I want to is to follow it to the where it takes me.” What is the ‘I’ that has this desire, and the ‘me’ for which the desire is supposedly leading? These are constructions of thought at a very subtle cognitive and emotional level. It is precisely this structure that has to be observed, without division, so that meditation can ignite. It is in that sense we ‘start with self.’

In other words, the ‘I’ cannot analyze or follow thought because it is thought, and the ‘me’ ends up exactly where it started, as ‘me.’ “To dissolve thinking, I will definitely use thinking” is a vicious circle.

You said that “following thought where it leads me…has nothing to do with observation because the observer is separate from the source.” This seems very mistaken and confusing. Let’s be as simple as possible. Is there an observation in which there is no observer? Clearly, yes. It is possible for the brain simply to observe, holistically, not from the thought-made entity ‘I.’ One simply has to observe the observer, and in doing so, the deep habit of thought splitting off from itself as ‘I’/’me’/the observer ends. Then there is just observation. This is an actual fact for one, not a theory, or idea, or method. There is no method, there is only right observation.

enquiry-5So if you “do not want to observe [that] which is thinking,” then there can and will be no quieting of thought, because as long as the thinker continues, thought will continue, obviously.

Essentially this is true: “When there is thought there is no meditation and when there is meditation, there is no thought.” But that can also be a clever abstraction. And it isn’t so black or white. One may have a deep insight into the observer, but the movement of thought may continue, both during a given sitting, and in the brain. But a deep insight into the observer means it no longer dominates in the brain.

Without implying time, transmutation is an arduous process. It may happen quickly in one person, and take lifetimes in another. One has to take a playful, experimental attitude. It simply isn’t so that one has “nothing to do about meditation but thinking and talking about it.”

As Evrim said, it is “vital the observer be negated.” This is the heart of the matter of meditation, by whatever name we call it. What is the Turkish word? Perhaps it is better. What I mean by the word is the effortless state of awareness that comes into being when the observer has been negated.

enquiry-6Someone might still ask, but how do you negate the observer? ‘How’ implies a method, and the first thing is to be done with all methods. It isn’t a matter of avoiding judgments, evaluations, analyses, or reactions. One simply observes them as they arise, with the understanding that they are part of the entire field of thought and emotion. Judgments and evaluations are secondary reactions, and when one observes them as such, they become part of the whole movement of thought/emotion, and fall away without one doing anything.

It’s an interesting question—is there judgment or evaluation or analysis without an observer? When the observer dissolves, isn’t there just the movement of thought and emotion as they arise?

Then, if one keeps passively watching, observing, listening, attention quiets the entire movement of thought/emotion. It seems accurate to say that meditation begins the moment the observer ends, even though attention has to gather greater energy for thought to fall essentially quiet in the brain.(The ‘I’ doesn’t gather attention; it simply gathers with passive watchfulness!)

enquiry-7Evrim clearly states a painful truth: “Without clearing the human mind from all limiting beliefs, the modern age epidemic of self-righteousness will prevail.” She asks, “What would happen if man started meditating? Would he get rid off this epidemic?”

One feels so. If even one tenth of one percent of the people in the world ended the observer through regularly sitting quietly and passively observing the movement of thoughts and emotions as they arise, humankind would be “prepared for the next leap,” and effortlessly take it.

Kind regards,

Martin

İlgili Yazılar