Sageous,
Might you be pushing binary logic a little bit further than it goes, and word definitions a little bit stronger than what they're adequate for? As I understand Alyzarin, by 'ego death' he doesn't mean that the ego is in every sense utterly extinguished, though that was also the assumption I had initially made based on the words 'ego death', due to my previous misfortune of having read Adi Da's biography.
Being selectively blocked in that manner seems entirely plausible to me. As an analogous kind of thing, I had a strongly lucid dream once where I was aware of individual identity, but my memory only went back about a half hour. Usually when I dream I have access to a lot of information about waking life, as well as a vast amount of memories from previous dreams. In this dream, my reality, as far as memory goes, was entirely contained within the dream. Of course, had my being truly been wholly contained within the dream, then I would have had a hard time even thinking about the experience while it was happening, because I would not have possessed that degree of cognitive development. But the important detail in the dream is that I lacked awareness of anything beyond it. Which reiterates my point that what we consciously experience does not wholly define what we truly are. So that, for example, a person can experience an absence of awareness of personal identity, but that does not mean that they do not in any sense have personal identity. As I understand him, Alyzarin is not making a claim either way, he's just relating the experience in which he had no awareness of identity.
Off hand, I can't recall having had an experience where I was unaware of having identity. However, my sense of identity does shift all over the place, for instance I can shift it somewhat to my 'muse', and from there it can shift in the first person to other people and events. This is an aspect of how my 'muse' shares information. I don't think this shifting of identity is 'false', I think its natural to be able to move it around like that, and that in a sense I am someone other than my usual self when I have those experiences. (I see I'm repeating myself here, I'm never sure how much to do that.) I also think that, despite having some apparent ease with this, my awareness of identity is muted compared to many other people's. I think that if I was more aware of self, this would help with the waves of sludge problem we discussed earlier, and would make me less confused about what is and is not 'mine' when dreaming. I think I've been improving in this regard. I think that awareness of self was suppressed as a part of how I suppressed other difficult emotional issues. Or another way of saying that, is it was damaged through some kind of misuse of the capabilities of self, and possibly by my environment. I think that temporarily having almost no sense of self is probably well within range of the services my 'muse' could provide, if I needed that as a learning experience. Likewise for other people.
Why would that be of value? To use the first analogy that comes to mind....Suppose that given a type of question you know how to find an answer, but that you have no direct method going the other way. If I say "what is 2+4", you can answer "6", but if I say "the answer is 6, what was the question?", you can't tell me. If I say "the answer is 46, what is the question", you can tell me if you know what I'm alluding to. There are many answers that have definite questions, but for which there is no easy path back to that question. In math terms, the mapping is 1-to-1 but its not invertible. As I have suggested elsewhere, spiritual development seems to me to be this kind of problem. To quote an AC/DC song, "who made you? ain't nobody told you". (I did that just to gratuitously throw two jarringly different references together.) So if it were a math problem, how would we proceed? We need derivatives to point in the right direction, in other words, we need to know which way is "up". How do we get derivatives? There are two ways. One way is to have a model for how you get from the question to the answer that has slope information built into it. (In other words, analytic derivatives.) The problem with that is if your model is wrong, the direction it points you will be wrong. And another problem is that not all models are differentiable everywhere. The other alternative is finite difference derivatives. The way that works, is you perturb your model, and see how the result is different from before you perturbed it. You divide the difference by the size of the perturbation, and that's your arrow that points towards the answer. Although people don't explain it in these terms, this is a primary way that people learn about things. Not sure if LSD helps with spiritual growth? Do a lot of it. If its not a good idea, and if the experiment itself doesn't cause you to misinterpret or misplace the results, then you can do something else in your next life. Or somebody else can do something else in their current life having learned from your example. This is part of the reason we're 'lost' to start with though: a lot of our thought experiments do impair our ability to evaluate the results. Religious dogmatism would be the most obvious example of this, where the misinterpretation of the fruits of the dogma is built into the dogma itself. (In other words the model's derivatives are wrong.)
Anyway, if you're searching for awareness of identity, and you have an experience where you're temporarily almost totally unaware of individual identity, that points you in the right direction on several questions at once. By contrast with that experience, you become more aware of individual identity. And you become more aware of universal or at least more general identity. And you become aware of any number of other things which your comparatively strong sense of personal identity had been eclipsing.
A limitation of this kind of thinking is that in any given context it only gives you a certain type of information, and you may be starved for information at another level. To illustrate what I mean: a couple of weeks ago I had a dream about a particular Mandelbrot fractal structure juxtaposed on a moon, as a metaphor for love. It was a nice image, but the emotional background was cold and distant. Since I'm throwing rock lyrics around today, and someone has a Hendrix quote in their sig, "My heart is warm with feeling, but my mind is cold and reeling. Is this love or confusion?" A simple experience of love or gratitude might have been more useful than the fractal metaphor. And that was actually the main point of the metaphor.
I hope the long winded math analogy wasn't too boring. Although its all kind of obvious, for me thinking about it more clearly or in a new context helps lay the ground for a new experience.
In the closest thing I've had to a classic, jnana yoga 'enlightenment' experience, which is the same in some ways as 'ego death', the central message that I wanted to remember from it was "don't decide anything". What that means, as I interpreted it later, is don't harden experience into judgment where the experience should be left more free or open. I don't think the far extreme of not thinking concisely is a good idea either. But as I have suggested before, I try not to draw stronger conclusions than the evidence merits. That balance of critical thinking and openness is where pretty much all of my new experiences and insights have come from. From the 'enlightenment' experience (I wouldn't call it that), I also gained awareness of myself as feeling and desire, and how those are bound up in thought. But the point about temperance in judgment seemed more important, because it seemed to be key to how that awareness was gained or lost to start with.
|
|
Bookmarks