Present Time Awareness

Taoism is also very much about the now...

For some in the mystical community, time is an abstraction, an illusion, yet the maker of sorrow, for how we view the universe in piecemail fashion causes confusion. The real trick, they say, is to understand that everything is happening all at once, but our inadequate perception ruins everything.

In many Eastern religions (okay, most modern religions) we learn that existence is sorrow.

Though at the turn of the last century we are told:

"Existence is Pure Joy."*

*Liber Vel Legis.

What the fuck were we talking about again.

Ah, present moment awareness. What is experiencing this awareness? Us? Who are we? Who am I? What am I? Where am I? WTF?

bigb said:

Just wondering, when you eat a sandwich, do you actually taste it?

Click to expand...

Not very much, actually, I have sinus problems, almost no sense of smell, and very little taste. (Getting surgery soon to fix that though--so, I'll get back to you.)

When "I" eat a sandwich, of course "I" taste it.

See that's funny. Because I included within my "I" the tongue which tastes things. But I didn't factor in what the mind does to my tongue tasting things. I just assume because I ate it I tasted it...


Now, I don't know what to make of the present. I've always felt my sense of duration was different from those around me. (And it is, isn't it, to be sure?)

The present...do you mean 2010? The time I write this, the time you read it, neither nor either or?

Please elaborate -- I don't see that they preclude each other.

I see present-time awareness as a tool and not an objective. Using it can benefit some tasks (for instance, eating mindfully may reduce the amount we eat, improve our choices in what we eat and thus contribute to better health), but I think it's either unnecessary or potentially distracting in some others.

For me, an example that many may recognise is in fiction-writing. When writing fiction it's important that I'm periodically mindful of myself and my readership and my environment, but essential that at times I'm not mindful of these things -- because they're a distraction from the subject and creative process. When my best writing occurs, I create a fantasy so compelling that for a time, that's all I notice. The rest of my life, for a time, runs by habit, and I let my environment and my readership look after themselves for a while.

Obviously, one can't continue to do that forever. At some time I need food, and if my posture has slumped into a sack of fatigue I need to correct that, and at some point I need to check whether I'm reaching an audience, or simply writing for myself.

There are some tasks I simply wouldn't undertake without the kind of mindfulness Bigb advocates though. When I'm consulting for instance -- especially in cases of conflict or anxiety -- I find it critical to stay aware of myself, and the person I'm talking to, and where and when we are. Failure in this can lead to disaster. The same with dynamic, physical tasks like martial arts training, or many group tasks. Less so for some solitary intellectual tasks, I think -- like authorship, or system analysis, or composition, or invention.

Some philosophies make an aesthetic discipline out of the kind of mindfulness that Bigb calls present-time awareness, but I see that as somewhat prescriptive nannying. If I were honest I think I'd have to say that I wish people were more mindful more of the time (e.g. when we drive or shop), but that isn't to say that I think we need to be (or would benefit from) being utterly mindful all of the time. That latter compulsion strikes me as a sort of superstitious fear. My alternative suggestion is to let the purpose and circumstance dictate our attention according to a pragmatic sense of what everyone (ourselves, others, the environment) actually needs.

As to the 'enlightenment' side, I'm not sure what that is. It seems to mean any of three things:

• A period in Western history in which human knowledge started taking continuous strides forward, and humans started taking responsibility for their own welfare;
• A state of awareness that idealists believe in but never quite attain;
• A posture adopted by charismatic poseurs to impress the naive.

My view is that we can get smarter and kinder by continuous application, but a single aesthetic discipline isn't likely to do all that -- much less do it 'perfectly', with no more room for improvement. We need to find and use tools according to their fitness for purpose, and set new targets as old ones are achieved and new ones become apparent. I don't think there's a single, final light-switch for enlightenment, and suspect that those who think they've found it have just shrunk their perception to fit their aesthetic.

Ruv Draba said:

· A period in Western history in which human knowledge started taking continuous strides forward, and humans started taking responsibility for their own welfare;
· A state of awareness that idealists believe in but never quite attain;
· A posture adopted by charismatic poseurs to impress the naive.

Click to expand...

The bullet points drew me to this first. I think he was quite obviously referring to the state of awareness.

Why did you list the two other definitions of enlightenment? You've discussed Buddhism intelligently with me before, so I find it difficult to believe you were unaware of its meaning within that religion. What are you trying to express, here? I certainly hope you're not painting the Buddha in the light of some spiritual grifter.

The Buddha's enlightenment didn't come from somewhere outside, he didn't see god, go to another place, or suddenly understand heaven.
He simply found, through meditation and attention to breath, that enlightenment was here and is always here, but our thinking gets in the way. Being in the present moment helps relieve subjectivity and allows you to see things as they are, which is what Buddhas enlightenment simply was.

Click to expand...

The Pali Canon and a number of Mahayana sutras describe enlightenment as an infinitely more complex creature. You're right, I believe, that he realized that people all had the potential for mental clarity, but I'm not sure that his meditation was as simple as you make it out to be.

His first discourse after the incident beneath the Bodhi tree led to a teaching on the four noble truths and the eightfold path, leaving very little to suggest that his meditation focused on the breath, rather than visualization of some kind.

There are a number of glorified accounts of what Gotama experienced during this critical meditation, but I think we can safely say none of them speak with authority. He went from being an extreme ascetic to preaching Spartan moderation, so some internal force changed his opinions. Determining what this was is probably impossible at this point.

bigb said:

it's not about time, so forgive the title, but Present Moment Awareness seems to be taken by a specific group and Present Awareness seems to be missing something. But I'm not educated so what do I know.

....
i want to know how important you think it may be.

.....
Humans can compute many thoughts while physically doing unrelated task. Is this really a good thing?

.

Click to expand...

It's just a return to an animal state: "Me eat food. Food good. Food taste. Food taste. Me full. Me sleepy."

Fun, but nothing special. Good for our brains from time to time, and useful if you're doing something physical "in the now", such as fighting with a longsword.

Why would somebody want to be other than fully human? What's the difference between this state and being stoned?

Bartholomew said:

What are you trying to express, here? I certainly hope you're not painting the Buddha in the light of some spiritual grifter.

Click to expand...

It's unlike you to jump onto the worst possible interpretation of my statements, B.

I don't believe in 'enlightenment' in the mystical sense of the word. I think it's a bit of a distraction from living, to be honest. I do believe in a smart, responsible, self-aware but semi-ignorant kind of kindness, in which we do the best we can with what we know today, and try and learn more to do better tomorrow. I suppose that one place where Buddhism and I part company is to believe that there's some enlightened ideal in which everything's perfect. I don't believe in enlightenment because I don't see it, and the paths people take to try and achieve it don't look terribly constructive. Moreover, I don't think a belief in perfection is necessary to try and live a better life, or to help others do so.

Regarding what I think about Gautama the historical figure, I don't think of him as a grifter -- I see him as a smart idealist, but my opinion really doesn't matter. That history is long dead, and so is the world that spawned it. We live in a different world, now -- one in which stepping on an ant does little material harm, but where you drain your sump-oil can make a huge difference, even if it kills not a single animal at the time. Our sense of consequence is if anything stronger than it was 2,400 years ago, so our standards of kindness in some sense need to be stronger than Buddha's were. We have to be more mindful of where we put our sewage than Tibetans are, for instance.

By the same token, the aesthetics and taboos of early human civilisation are under question too. The value of life is changing the more we understand it. Some parts are growing less sacred, others arguably more so.

In my view, kindness needs smarts and smarts need kindness. We can't do one effectively without the other. I think it's time to stop idolising historical figures whoever they are, and perhaps see if we can't be kinder than Buddha and smarter too.

bigb said:

i didn't realize animals brush their teeth, drive cars, and talk on cell phones.

Click to expand...

Animals have teeth-cleaning functions, are able to travel on external power-sources (like wind, or tide, or other animals), and have long-distance communications. Sometimes we make too much of the form of tool, and forget how many tool functions we didn't invent.

bigb said:

i want to know how important you think it may be.

Click to expand...

I cannot change the past, and cannot access the future. The Present Moment is all I have...it is all I possess...it is all that is right now. So the importance of the Present Moment is tremendous.

A moment-by-moment return to the Present Moment relieves the suffering over the past, and the worry over the future. This practice is not strictly "Eastern", "Buddhist", etc. (The Practice of the Presence of God, by Brother Lawrence, for example). The applications of this kind of practice are vast.

SWest said:

I cannot change the past, and cannot access the future. .

Click to expand...

No? Hmmm. I can.

bigb said:

No Buddhist monastary i've spent time at, speak anything of perfection.

Click to expand...

In many faiths -- especially the older ones that have had time to question themselves and reflect -- I can usually find a branch of the faith that looks a lot like secular humanism, albeit in a sort of mystical, dogmatic wrapper, and I generally warm to it when I do.

It's not hard to find in Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism or Taoism, and I expect that Islam probably has it somewhere too, though nowhere that I've looked so far. Despite that, I'm not drawn to any of those faiths just because one segment thinks similarly to me. Ultimately, it's the mysticism and dogma that I reject.

Buddha questioned the ways of his time and would encourage people in the present time to do the same.

Click to expand...

The thing is, I don't really need Buddha's permission or encouragement to question, and while Buddha's opinions are often interesting, I don't consider them authoritative or, in some cases, even correct.

Enlightenment in the Soto school, is simply being aware of ones own nature.

Click to expand...

I think it's sensible not to ignore what one knows about oneself, or opportunities to learn more. I don't think one ever knows the whole of oneself though; just the parts that one can test and evaluate impartially. So while I think that self-knowledge is useful, idealism about it isn't. Other than the historical usage, 'enlightenment' smacks of idealism to me.

bigb said:

But an animal isn't going to be talking on a cell phone, rear end the driver in front of them that has a baby in a baby seat.

Click to expand...

Animals suffer narrowed awareness, just as humans do. That trait is frequently exploited by ambush predators.

Animals also suffer internal conflict. They want stuff, but grow dependent on one another to help them get it. Consider fledgeling birds who know how to fly and hunt or gather, but still want to get fed by Mum and Dad.