I sat looking out over the ocean this crisp morning. My morning routine (yoga, calligraphy in the sand and tai chi) were done so I could just sit in the sand and let my mind think on itself. What stood out today was how clearly consciousness is separate from thinking. This is a radical view. Indeed, many define consciousness as thinking (i.e., no thinking, no consciousness). That is just crazy. Naturally, what I say will sound crazy to them – especially where I end up.
First, to review:
Consciousness is the foundation of knowing for all animals(1). To think that one knows places thinking ahead of consciousness, and we end up believing what we think is true. Consciousness, the source, gets short shrift; we take it for granted. Simple consciousness is impartial and that bores us. On the other hand, there is nothing boring about feeling certain that one’s thinking is impartial and true. The irony: it is emotion that gives us this sense of truth and certainty. The more emotion, the more things will not be what they appear to be (i.e., the stronger the ‘truth’ illusion becomes).
Desire and insecurity (see emotion, need, fear, instinct) lie at the base of consciousness and drive thinking. Emotion drives the direction thoughts take, consciousness provides the space for thought to roam. When event-linked emotion ruffles the feathers of awareness, we re-think the event. This re-thinking feeds back and re-stimulates emotion, easily setting off a vicious circle. We maintain the unbalanced emotional state long after the stimulus that ignited the initial emotion has ended.
Next, on to the ‘new’:
Future, present and past are figments of imagination. We think these are real, because we think what we think is real. Time is simply the continuum of consciousness. The points, past-present-future, are simply the projections of our desire and insecurity (need and fear) that give us the illusion of time as we think of it. We are so habituated to clock time now that we think it is real… tick, tick, tick.
(1) Looking at the birds on the beach like these pelicans in front of me, helps me escape the trap of thinking. I imagine that is one of the prime benefits, besides companionship, that pet owners enjoy. For some reason I especially love that little long beaked bird. One of its kind is always there poking around in the sand looking for food.
Consciousness is like the sky; thinking is like a bird flying through it. Consciousness is the background; thinking is the (sometimes very busy) foreground. If I were to paint consciousness, it would either be done in an instant or it would take an eternity.
I feel less nuts now. Thanks.
it’s hard for me to undestand what you says… but …
…. Shariputra, form does not differ from emptiness; emptiness does not differ from form.
Form itself is emptiness; emptiness itself is form.
So, too, are feeling, cognition, formation, and consciousness. (The Heart Sutra)
so, the focal point is always only one: the mind.
I have a cat … chan is its name and it is my zen master.
When I am in presence of my zen master, I can see the difference between my mind and its mind.
In every moment, the chan’s mind is always full and empty: as a bottle without bottom.
So, If I put some water in its bottle-mind, then I see the water enters in chan’s mind and immediatly exits.
I see the water to pass through the bottle-mind of chan and goes away from the bottom … the bottle-mind of chan is full and empty in every moment.
This is the difference … I have a bottle with the bottom.
I am very lucky to have chan: a great zen master.
Elio, thank you for saying that! I see what you mean. Yet, it seemed so coherent yesterday. One motivation for my writing here is the challenge of writing clear enough to be understood. I reworked it some… hopefully for the better!
Give Chan a little tummy rub from me.
Lynn, you probably understand this post better because of all our previous exchanges, eh? You’ve come to know my mind’s idiosyncrasies. That is what makes writing so difficult; perceiving how another will perceive it.
I like your ’sky’ metaphor. Mine would be darker, maybe the night sky with thoughts being the meteors that flit by. Also, I’d place emotion along side thinking in the foreground.
You might find this article interesting:
“Does Your Language Shape How You Think?”
http://www.theledger.com/article/20100829/ZNYT04/8293000?p=all&tc=pgall
That was a good article. It inspires me to say more about this, tho heaven knows I’ve said enough. Still, breaking language’s hold on perception is a delightfully challenge, so here I go…