Thank you for your response. If you are seeing my interpretation of ADA as a hybrid of King Yoshi's, due to my emphasis on the self part of self-awareness, then I can see your point as you are viewing it. Perhaps I do give more credit to ADA then I should by injecting what I believe ADA should be or should mean or should represent rather than what it actually does. So I appreciate hearing your perspective.
But I also believe that our words are gross metaphors, and quite often we fail to use them in a manner that properly describes what we are feeling or experiencing. I think that, despite a very good effort on King Yoshi's part, that he simply failed to describe the underlying process. Or he simply didn't recognize that there was one. But that doesn't mean that it isn't there. And one of the points for having a forum in the first place is to engage in conversation that provides enlightenment on our topic of lucid dreaming. I do not believe that ADA, or any other specific practice as described on Dream Views or anywhere else, is sacrosanct, that it is inviolable. It is, actually, our job to interrogate the process of all techniques, etc., to better understand them, and practically speaking to make better use of them.
I can not claim to fully understand awareness in any other context than how it applies through personal self-awareness and my personal self-awareness practices. With that said, and this is re King Yoshi's self-evaluation of the practice, the practice appears to penetrate consciousness to a great enough extent that it brings about a higher degree of self-awareness, lucidity, at least in regard to becoming lucid in dreams. Anecdotal, yes, but what else do we have in this subjective field? Nearly everything on the forum is anecdotal.
What I am trying to say here is that there may be something else at play that the overt description of ADA does not address directly, or that we simple do not recognize as an overt actor on lucidity. It is that very hidden actor that I feel underpins ADA. Obviously, that is my personal interpretation. And that may be why I come across the way I do about ADA and how it is beneficial to the lucid process.
I believe that on an underlying level every practice (mostly, lol) that we discuss on this forum or elsewhere has that hidden element of becoming self-aware in the moment as the precursive, hidden piece that brings success at varying levels. This is why I believe that ADA can be effective. More to the point, I actually don't believe that being aware of every single thing going on around you is at all necessary. I defend ADA practice, to the level that I do, partly because I know that people attempting to practice it will not achieve the stated goal, but with practice they should achieve positive results nonetheless.
You don't have to magically become aware of the millions of pieces of data streaming into your sub/unconscious mind to achieve awareness of the moment. The brain functions the way it does for a reason. We require our filter system or we would be insane. Or enlightened, I suppose.
I take a catch as catch can approach. I monitor my breathing. I monitor my tactile sensations (i.e. experience non-verbally what my body comes in contact with throughout the day), and I add or subtract other elements as I see fit, or as they come up in conversations in forums such as this one, and sound interesting. On your hybrid point, I suppose you could call my perspective 'Piecemeal ADA'. Just the other day, the idea of recognizing your eyelids blinking sounded an interesting element to add to see its benefit, to see if it could be implemented in a seamless fashion. I believe this to be ADA at its heart. So I have used the term recently in posts, and I defend the base practice "as I see it" and still call it ADA.
And despite my agreement with you on many points, I still believe that the 'self' part of self-awareness is what gets trained, even in ADA, whether we recognize the 'how' or not. My dogma, if you will, is that awareness (me the mouse) is intrinsic to existence. I have to do nothing for it to exist. Self-awareness is something that comes in a variety of flavors. Each of our practices, whether ADA, mindfulness, or otherwise work at enhancing or focusing our intellect on that realization.
Because we are rational, functioning humans, our frontal lobe automatically engages when we engage cognitive exercises or activities. The fact that it does so engage when we perform ADA, or a hybrid, automatically brings in the element of 'self', as in self-awareness, into the process. I don't believe that it is volitional. It just is. As human beings, we can not avoid this other than through, I suppose, the ingestion of drugs or other inhibitors.
Whether hybrid or classical as you call it, ADA must activate a process of heightening the awareness of self. The observer, me, I, must be activated to do the observing. Otherwise, we are indeed the mouse. Without other inhibiting (or perhaps enhancing, who knows) factors, that is not possible for a human being. That activation is the activation of self, or self-awareness. Again, many levels, many different flavors, but it is there nonetheless. Meaning, that as humans not only do we naturally possess awareness but also self-awareness. Otherwise, you are not human. You are (level-of-consciousness speaking) a lesser creature. All awareness exercises are exercises for attaining higher levels of self-awareness, not awareness in and of itself, not even self-awareness in and of itself.
Maybe I was clearer about my opinion here. Maybe it doesn't matter. We each have a place to be intellectually, emotionally, etc. at any given moment. Our filters are in place to keep things out that we are not ready to understand. (this is directed at everyone of us) That is why I go back and reread posts on forums six months, a year, later to see what I missed the first time through, what I was not ready enough or open enough to engage with. Attitudes change with more knowledge/wisdom, assumptions change, dogmas shift. Sageous broke one of my assumptions the other day, in fact. Yay.
Thanks again for your response. It helped me get a better understanding of where you are coming from, and I can appreciate it to a greater extent. Whether anyone believes it or not, I appreciate contrary opinions being voiced. You grow not at all by someone agreeing with your perspective. You have at least the potential, the chance to grow when someone disagrees and thus makes you think, whether you want to or not, whether you change or not.
Yikes, this came out way too long. I hope this extended discussion doesn't come across as a hijacking. It was not intended to be. I believe the discussion is still relevant to the OP. Or I hope so any way. Feel free to chastise me if I am wrong.
good dreaming
|
|
Bookmarks