Friday, December 30, 2011

Arguing with reality

Recently I got together with some folks and we watched an Adyashanti video called "Freedom from Separation". It helped me with some parts of the non-duality message that I've found difficult.

My first "spiritual experience" was a course of cognitive therapy to address a depression I suffered in the 1980s. It didn't simply reverse my depression, it left me with the certainty that I would never be seriously depressed again. I had peered deeply into the fundamental machinery of human suffering and felt compassion for everybody.

The idea behind cognitive therapy is that depression is the result of particular thoughts which contain glaring logical errors. You learn to notice and transcribe the thoughts, find the logical errors, and propose to yourself more reasonable alternatives. I wonder if something similar could be helpful for those seeking spiritual awakening.

Some of the language used by modern non-duality teachers has been elusive for me. Talk about a "sense of separation" leaves me scratching my head. I can see that we're all the same down deep inside, but we're still different people. Bill Clinton aside, I do not literally feel your pain.

Adyashanti asked "how would you feel if the sun disappeared? what kind of day would you have if the atmosphere were replaced by vacuum?" OK, I can get that. I interact with the air and the sun and the grass and trees and people and my cat. Is it separation when I forget about these connections? Maybe, but there is a deeper, more interesting take on it.

Like everybody, I have thoughts that cause me to suffer. I worry about my health or my bank account or my relationships with others, or a million other things. Each thought has two facts about it:
  • This thought is in conflict with reality.
  • I am emotionally invested in this thought.
The biggest example is thoughts with the word "should" in them. Every "should" thought implies that reality isn't good enough, that it can somehow be improved. The reality of this present moment cannot be changed, I can only accept it or reject it. If I reject it, I suffer. (Skillful actions can cause desired outcomes in the future, but that's another matter.)

To connect this back to separation, whenever I engage with a thought conflicting with reality, I am distancing myself from reality, and from everything in it: the people, the animals, the cars and planes and trains, the grass and trees and rocks. I'm disappearing into a fantasy world of "things would be better if only X were true". If I can disengage from all those argument-with-reality thoughts, I can return to the real world where everybody else is hanging out. Maybe that's what these guys are talking about with the "sense of separation" thing.

One person mentioned some related videos (five of them, starting here) that Scott Kiloby has done, something he calls an Unfindable Objects inquiry. Very interesting stuff.

No comments:

Post a Comment