Teaching technique from Indian spirituality/culture

arundhati nyāya [1]
 
1. Describe a concept using an analogy
2. Extend/modify the analogy to modify the learning progressively
3. Finally, work directly with the concept
 
(4. For tough concepts, give other analogies for different perspectives)
 
Example (Chāndogya Upaniṣad):
 

1. Analogy 1 


Pluck a fruit from that huge banyan tree, slice it open, and take its seeds
 
Learnings
 
• a huge tree may have a small seed
• c.f. Mulla Nasruddin's story about pumpkins growing on thin vines while a huge oak has much smaller acorns
• simple direct reasoning - large effect from large cause - may be wrong in Nature
• a near-infinite cycle - from seed to tree and back


2. Analogy 2/modify analogy 1
 
Cut open a seed and look inside, it's practically empty/invisible.
 
Learnings
 
• something large can manifest from something small
  
• everything in the huge tree came from something so negligible
• variety (roots, trunk, leaves, fruit, seeds) can come from simplicity
 
3. Directly working with the concept [2]:
 
That thou art, Śvetaketu.

 
Learnings
 

• that simple, practically invisible, thing - within the seed, the tree, and various parts of the tree - is within you as well.
 
• how so?
 
• you are a human being, with a large, complex system, like a tree
• the same nothingness, or practically nothingness, in the seed, that became a tree has also become you
 
 
 
Discussion
 
But-but-but, animal vs. plant, human being vs. tree, thinking-moving being vs. unthinking stuck-in-the-mud organism - the analogies are incorrect/nonsensical!
 
Yes, yes, fine! Go read up on at least these two complex concepts before reading this again [3]:
 
1. the scientific theory of creation of the universe from a similar nothingness (a naked singularity?)
2.  creation and evolution of the vast variety of living beings from either:
1. non-living matter - the scientific theory - or
2. from conscious entities - Indian and other philosophies
 
 
Notes
 
[1] arundhati nyāya, or arundhati logic, is based on the technique of locating the arundhati star (Alcor) by first looking at the right area of the sky using a nearby tree or building, then locating nearby brighter stars, and finally the arundhati-vasishtha dual-star system.
 
[2] Other analogies (dissolving salt in water - uniform density, distribution) describe other aspects, but follow a similar sequence.
 
[3] While the answer may come across as a bit snarky, the example illustrates the depth of thinking needed to really grok the Upanishads. This thinking is called nididhyāsanam, essentially ruminating over a lesson, e.g. for inconsistencies, incomplete details, linking to earlier lessons, etc. nididhyāsanam forces students to update their conceptual models. As mananam means thinking, some traditions consider this to be mananam and nididhyāsanam to be a different learning activity - like meditating on the concepts.

Mind Sandwich

An ice block in a brook on a warm summer day.

 

Think of its bottom and top surfaces. One is in water, the other is in air.

 

Compare it with one's mind - think of range, stability, movement, changing state or vibratory levels. (Ignore evanescence, solidity, physics of ice.)

 

            ATMOSPHERE

     {{vapour}}

     {{{{{ }}}}

          I

       BLOCK

          E

     ~~~~~~~~~~

     ~~liquid~~

       A BROOK

 

Compare:

 

    {{Subtle vibrations}}

    {{{{{{{{{{ }}}}}}}}}

              M

              I

              N

              D

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    ~~ Gross vibrations~~

 

Ponder:

What is at either end of the mind?

At one end, it's obvious - the body. But at the other?

Is there another end? Or does the mind just become subtler and subtler?

Distractions during meditation

(A more didactic version of Letting go of thoughts in meditation)

1. There should be minimal use of energy in meditation. An efficient brain is in a state of 'flow', without distractions or random emotions. (dhyāna is taila-dhāra, from Vyāsa's Yoga Sūtra Bhāṣya)

2. When my attention is on a new chain of thoughts, returning to the previous thought or idea or object of meditation involves a very simple technique - letting go of the new thought.

3. I suggest or desire mildly that my mental "hand" relax and let go, like my hand letting go of the string of a thought balloon. My attention naturally drifts back to the previous thought.

4. One subtle point - my focus should be on the heart, most of the time. Letting go of distracting thoughts should not take up most of the meditation. If it does, I am struggling with distractions, rather than resting in the heart.

5. Letting go should become easier with practice. I must be gentle, but ruthless, and be able to detach from any and all distractions.

6. Thought and/or emotion streams will first come from the conscious level and then from the subconscious level.

7. Those from deeper levels may be more intense, more subtle, and more engaging - positively or negatively.

8. The ability to detach increases with practice.

9. abhyāsa vairāgyabhyām tat nirodhaḥ - says Patanjali in the Yoga Sutras, referring to how yoga - citta vṛtti nirodhaḥ - is achieved.

10. True thoughtlessness comes after cleaning away samskaras. Bhog, or unwinding of samskaras, in meditation or sleep, or through daily experiences, generate thoughts.

Letting go of thoughts in meditation

Some ideas related to thoughts in meditation. A few points may be relevant only to Sahaj Marg meditation.

When a thought, say t1, arises, other related thoughts, t2-t3-t4,etc. follow.

Generally I become aware of the thought stream or thought chain not at t1 or t2, but later, maybe at t5 or t10.

No matter how far down a chain I go before becoming aware, to extricate myself is very simple.

I let go.

Imagine, if you like, a helium balloon suddenly appears and you are holding on to its string. To let go, I simply open my hand, and the balloon drifts away. Further, suppose that the balloon in my hand was tied to others. By letting go of one, I let go of the entire set of balloons.

When a thought chain is released, my mind, or my attention, automatically goes back to the previous activity. This activity is the idea of the light in the heart, resting in its presence, getting pulled inwards by the source of the Divine light, etc. Essentially, feeling the presence of the light in the heart.

So really speaking, I do do some very subtle activity in meditation. I start meditating, after a while (short or long), a thought chain arises, I let go and return to the starting thought, another chain arises, again I let go and return.

Keep repeating gently, affectionately, patiently, tirelessly, lightly. Use as little energy as possible. Especially when what comes up is a strong thought, or even an intense emotion or physical sensation.

I don't need to keep a watch for thoughts or emotions or sensations, though, they will arise on their own. Due to Master's cleaning if I am meditating or in satsangh, or due to the preceptor's cleaning if I am taking a sitting.

The progression should be:

1. fewer and fewer, almost nil, emotional, I-based, thoughts of recent past and near future, once the conscious level is cleaned or emptied.

2. ditto for far past and future, once the subconscious level is cleaned

3. reversal from incessant thought streams to a mostly silent mind with only "mechanical" thoughts arising as needed for events in the material world.

Fable of two beings

IMAGINE:

- a being with a physical body which can feel and do (see/taste, and walk/touch, etc.). It is conscious or aware, but only of itself, and of everything else in relation to itself.

- another, humongously vast. It is single, and conscious, but has no physical perceptions or physical actions.

- the second in contact with the first. An interface exists between their consciousnesses. Vibrations, of various types and levels, in the interface are the communications between the two.

- also, the second in contact, simultaneously, with all of the first beings. The interface is not localised to a specific one.

- the interface is non-uniform - the subtlest vibrations occur near the second being and the grossest near the first.

- the first being's consciousness was initially so rudimentary that the second's consciousness controlled the higher perceptions and actions of its species.

- the first beings evolving. Each one's individual consciousness becomes subtler and starts to perceive and act, for itself. Species-wide perceptions and actions dwindle and communication occurs only through the physical senses, from the outside.

- some sensitive first ones who could raise their consciousness to subtler levels, nearer the second being's consciousness. They could access ideas and perceptions other than their own, from other first beings, and from the second.

- their feelings and their frustration when they tried to share their wonderful experiences through grosser vibrations of the physical level - sounds and symbols, words and letters - and failed.

- they work to raise the consciousness of the first beings to subtler levels, so all of them experience, and feel the same joy and peace, and live - in wonder, beauty, love, and fearlessness.

- you are one of them.

Imagine further

 

- the second being only exists, it doesn't act

 

- it _is_ consciousness

 

- it emanates consciousness unconditionally, eternally

 

- it has no thoughts

 

- it has no emotions

 

- it _is_ love

 

- it emanates love unconditionally, eternally

 

- it manifests ... all beings ... from, by, and in, itself

 

- all beings exist, are conscious, and love

 

- they cannot be, or do, otherwise

A Fable Across Lives

Once there was a human with a sincere interest in the highest  spiritual goal.

It had many lives as both man and woman, as father,  mother, daughter, son, lover, husband, and wife.

It tried many different  spiritual practices - some lifelong - and slowly built up, from life to  life, its understanding of effective techniques.

It had deep, broad,  and intense relationships with other humans - positive, negative, and  neutral. In these relationships, it hurt others - knowingly and unknowingly. Yet, it also helped others, again knowingly and unknowingly. Other humans hurt and helped it similarly, physically and emotionally and  intellectually, in the course of their own strivings, conscious and  unconscious, towards the highest.

It built up many layers of behaviours  and biases from these relationships and thought they were solely its  own.

Now, at the outset of this life, this human decided that, no matter what, it would reach the highest in this very life. No more getting sidetracked by non-eternal goals. For many years, all went well.  It lived and worked on its own, isolated mentally, even if not  physically. Then it started an effective spiritual practice that rapidly  removed the layers from its individual activities across many lives.

Relationships got made and unmade easily, with seemingly few residues. It reached a particular point in spirituality.

Then the residues of relationships also started getting removed and other humans from those relationships, themselves spiritual seekers, rejoined its life, physically and mentally. The variety of those relationships and the effects of  unravelling their residues were some or all of these - blissful, painful,  uncomfortable,  deeply comforting, joyous and depressing.

All this came as a  shock to this human who had thought the spiritual journey to be a solo adventure. Which it is, in that its own effort and understanding is a must. Each human hews its own path. Yet it is not completely solo, either, in that the residues from the relationships of many lives require an engagement at the spiritual level, which gets translated into social, emotional, and  physical engagements.

A rising tide lifts all boats, true, but how about a group of swimmers? Can't they stay afloat with reduced individual effort if they link with each other?

A spiritual  journey is akin to swimming in an unknown ocean of consciousness, where one learns various swimming strokes, how to drown and come back to life, techniques for saving others, other group behaviour, and so on, all the while being in the water.

Frustratingly or happily, depending on  your view of spirituality, there is no ultimate static spiritual goal as a human. The higher spiritual goals come into a human's conscious awareness when it has gone beyond normal human states of consciousness. Is it then still a human?

Thus a fable without a neat ending, but some elucidation, reassurance, and promise.

Discussion, Arguments, and Progress

One of the canonical Indian philosophies or darśanās is nyāya. While reading the basic literature and related articles on tarka (formal argument) and vāda (formal discussion) recently, some points struck home very deeply.

But first, some background. From literature ca. 200 BCE onwards, there are have been described four traditional types of Indian discussions: saṃvāda, vāda, jalpa, and vitaṇda. The first is a bit mystical and is used for Guru-śiṣyās discourses as described, e.g., in the upaniṣads. The second type refers to discussions aimed at discovering truth acceptable to all discussants while the third and fourth relate to arguments aimed at the victory of one side, a zero-sum outcome. Consider this quote:

The merit and esteem of each of these types of discussions ... [are graded by:]

1. the honesty of their purpose
2. the quality of debate
3. the decorum
4. the mutual regard of the participants

and this one:

Udyotakara in his Nyaya Varttika further explains that this threefold classification [of discussion and argument] is according to the nature of the debate and the status of the persons taking part in the debate.

• The first variety, vāda, is an honest, peaceful and congenial ... debate ... to explore the various dimensions of a subject ... [to] establish ‘what is true’. The Vada, at its best, is a candid friendly discussion ... in the spirit of: ’let’s sit-down and talk’.
• The other two are hostile arguments ... between rivals who desperately want to win.

Thus, by implication, the goal of a vāda is establishment of truth or an accepted doctrine; while that of the other two hostile debates, jalpa and vitaṇda, ... [seek only to defeat by any means] ... the opponent.

(both from DharmaWiki's types of discourses - words in [] are my paraphrases)

In the context of the enervating and exacerbating WhatsApp forwards by the proponents and opponents of the various political parties in India, it is worth understanding that jalpa (straw-man arguments, casuistry, trolling, etc.) and vitaṇda (squabbling, lying, mindless refuting, attacking the opponent instead of his argument, etc.) have been used for millenia in India and have been described extensively. But they are disreputable and divisive, and not the only types of discussion that can be done.

We can safely assume that all Indians want their country to progress. Let us discuss using vāda instead of trying to denigrate each other using jalpa and vitaṇda. After all, hasn't vāda proved its worth many times over in the development of the universal and elegant darśanās, the renowned universities of ancient India, and put into practice the open-minded and open-hearted ṛg vedic principle of "āno bhadrāḥ kratavo yantu viśwataḥ" (let noble thoughts come from everywhere - R.V. 1.89.1)?