Doing and not-doing

[Archaea]

In one of the Carlos Castaneda books Don Juan said that we need to stop doing any action which isn't necessary to our health or well being. Ultimately this is because doing things uses energy, so not doing these things means we can store the energy we would have otherwise used.

I think this relates to the centres, if we stop doing things (in a mechanical way) physically, emotionally and mentally then we can store the various different types of energy which we don't use... I'm not quite clear on the point of this, but I think it has to do with the development of will and creative expression.

It seems to me that the forum is already pretty good at some of this stuff. A good example would be with diet, where people stop eating things that are bad for their mind and body, and start eating good things. I think this is a good example of not doing.

So because this forum's already pretty good at some of this stuff this post is going to be focused on the ideas of not doing in regards to perception. Don Juan said a lot of things regarding perception, and not doing seemed to be at the core of at least some of the things he said. For example in one of the books Don Juan said that we create the world though our doing, I'm paraphrasing here, but it kind of makes sense, even from a neurological perspective.

Take a wireframe cube as an example of doing and not doing with regards to perception.

There are two ways to see this cube in three dimensions, one as the "upper" square popping out and the other as the "lower" square popping out. If you're doing one the then you're not doing the other. Furthermore, I propose that to switch between the two perceptions of the cube takes will, even if only a little.

The same thing can be done with this crop circle from chapter 69 of the wave series:

It's even recommended by the C's. :) This is from the same chapter of the wave series.

Q: (T) OK now, and then, outside of that are smaller spheres, each one connected one to the next, in a line. We’re looking at prime numbers here. What are we looking at? We’ve got a central one, six outer: large, six outside of that: smaller, six outside of that: tiny … could, and I’m just thinking off the top of my head here, nothing cast in concrete, is this a representation of … a sphere, getting smaller and smaller … going that way. Or, coming in, this way. Or that way and this way. Like the infinity mirrors …
A: If you three dimensionalize.
Q: (L) It would be like balls, like spheres. (T) Ohhh, it’s an axis, an x-y-z axis! A three dimensional axis. Three-dimensionally, it would be like this. [Holds up hand, forefinger pointed up, thumb pointed to himself, third finger at the horizontal.] Larger, smaller, smaller … a three-dimensional axis. Are we going somewhere with this, or am I out in left field again?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) I’m going somewhere with this?
A: Yes.
Q: (T) Ahhhh, I now see this as a three-dimensional object as opposed to a flat circle.
A: Do that to the others too.
Q: (L) OK, we’re trying to three-dimensionalize them. Now, tell us where we’re supposed to be going here … (J) Well, this first one is a spiral going out … or a DNA molecule … (T) There’s got to be more to it …
A: You do not have to figure this all out tonight, just some food for thought. … Ark may be able to three-dimensionalize by computer program already.

It's also possible to two dimensionalize things which are in three dimensions, for example, the corner of a room. This is easier in twilight or when the lighting in the room is darker IMO, but because the corner of a room is really just three lines emanating from a point, it's possible to actually see it as two dimensions.

This leads me to believe that seeing everything in the day-to-day world as three dimensional is a mechanical doing on our part, but with the application of will we can actually stop perceiving the world, or parts of the world, as three dimensional, even if only for a brief time.

Changing perceptual modes can be really hard to do however, a good example for this I think is the Spinning dancer illusion from cognitive psychology.

In this illusion it's actually possible to see the spinning dancer as spinning clockwise or anti-clockwise. Here's the caption for the above image from Wikipedia:

If the foot touching the ground is perceived to be the left foot, the dancer appears to be spinning clockwise (if seen from above); if it is taken to be the right foot, then she appears to be spinning anti-clockwise.

In one of Carlos Castaneda's books, Don Juan gives Castaneda the exercise of gazing at leaves. He tells Castaneda to look at the shadows or the spaces between the leaves and not the leaves themselves. In our ordinary day-to-day lives what we do (or at least what I do) is perceive the objects. However it's possible to see the leaves as the spaces, and the spaces as the objects. I think this is what Don Juan was trying to show Castaneda in order to teach him about not doing.

Another not doing which Don Juan talks about is the not doing of the internal dialogue. I personally am of the opinion that the internal dialogue is actually a telepathic dialogue between the predator and an individual, and the reason we don't perceive the predator is because that's something we're not doing...

So, with application of will it's possible to stop engaging in the dialogue. However, engaging in the dialogue with the predator is something we have been conditioned to do since we were small children, and as a result of this the dialogue is a mechanical doing, like perceiving the world as three dimensional.

My understanding of the things Don Juan talks about is that once the subject of not doing is understood, then it's possible to start talking about dreaming and stalking. Dreaming as I understand it is the act of changing perception, although dreaming happens automatically, dreams themselves can be mechanical. So in order to effect the outcome of an event in a dream, will needs to be applied. Also dreaming is state where someone isn't perceiving the day to day world. In other words they're not doing the day to day world.

Stalking on the other hand (from what I understand,) is the act of maintaining a perception of something once it's been attained. So, it requires will to acquire a state of perception, then it requires will to maintain that state of perception. An example for this is that with the cube or the crop circle, once a different way of perceiving has been achieved, the perceiver then needs to learn how to maintain that perception without it changing back.

These perceptual changes might just be neurological in nature, but in the recent session the C's said that doing things creates a vacuum into which energy can flow. This got me thinking about this not doing business and how this might relate to energy flow in the centres.

I think that by not doing something, whether it's an action, an emotional response, or a habitual way of thinking or perceiving, the energy which would have been used as fuel for the respective centres is saved. Then by doing something the energy or fuel is then used by the centres which in turn creates a vacuum which sucks up more energy.

 

[Renaissance]

In The Willpower Instinct, Kelly McGonigal describes a couple of different applications of will: 'I will' power, 'I wont' power, and "I want" power. There's a thread on it here, and there's much overlap between the book and many of the concepts explored and put into practice on the forum.

I think these elements correspond with the things you're talking about, although using different language. "I won't" is the same as 'not doing' in terms of the diet example you gave, and I'd consider them aspects of Doing. Stalking, as you described it could be considered 'I want' power and relates to self remembering in Gurdjieffian terms.

I think the thing with what the C's were talking about goes a step further by doing and giving. So building will is great but there also needs to be some giving involved to create the vacuum for the creative energy flow. There's an ongoing discussion of 'how to give' in that session's thread.

 

[Gawan]

I think these elements correspond with the things you're talking about, although using different language. "I won't" is the same as 'not doing' in terms of the diet example you gave, and I'd consider them aspects of Doing. Stalking, as you described it could be considered 'I want' power and relates to self remembering in Gurdjieffian terms.

I think the thing with what the C's were talking about goes a step further by doing and giving. So building will is great but there also needs to be some giving involved to create the vacuum for the creative energy flow. There's an ongoing discussion of 'how to give' in that session's thread.

I do agree with what Renaissance wrote above and as I understood it that will power alone is not enough, but certainly can be trained with diet in a way and is very important. For example stalking can be helpful in a real work situation to learn not to automatically react to dreadful situations if your boss blames you for example and to hold the tongue so to speak and not reacting mechanically giving into emotions for example, i.e using will not to act. So it could be understood as preserving energy and according to one "law" of stalking (timing) waiting and observing until the right moment occurs to point something out towards your boss. I personally would consider that example with the diet is imo more doing, though it depends on the perception maybe ;), because you make a choice not to eat something and for this definitely will power is needed, beside knowledge and maybe experienced knowledge how food act on you in a negative way.

The main problem with Don Juan teachings could be, how to understand it and what he really meant and how to use it in reality. Generally, doing and not doing is then a decision of a certain context, so doing one thing at a time could be totally off and at another time helpful, for yourself or for another person.

As Renaissance stated, giving plays a huge role too. For example I could go on along with my personal inner talkings/internal consideration, thought loops and so on, but through (willing) helping others i.e. on this forum I could learn to overcome it and maybe strengthen my will with that too and to deal better with my predator.

At least these are my two cents.

 

[obyvatel]

[quote author=archaea]

So because this forum's already pretty good at some of this stuff this post is going to be focused on the ideas of not doing in regards to perception. Don Juan said a lot of things regarding perception, and not doing seemed to be at the core of at least some of the things he said. For example in one of the books Don Juan said that we create the world though our doing, I'm paraphrasing here, but it kind of makes sense, even from a neurological perspective.
...............................

It's also possible to two dimensionalize things which are in three dimensions, for example, the corner of a room. This is easier in twilight or when the lighting in the room is darker IMO, but because the corner of a room is really just three lines emanating from a point, it's possible to actually see it as two dimensions.

This leads me to believe that seeing everything in the day-to-day world as three dimensional is a mechanical doing on our part, but with the application of will we can actually stop perceiving the world, or parts of the world, as three dimensional, even if only for a brief time.
[/quote]

We do not see in 3 dimensions from what is known in neuroscience. We see 2D images and the brain infers the third dimension following certain unconscious rules. These rules are automatic and hence perceptual illusions of certain types are not readily removed through the insight that they are illusions. Willpower alone is not enough to change visual perception. It is limited by hardware. Now activating new DNA that modifies the genetic expressions thus potentially modifying the hardware is a different story...

[quote author=archaea]
In one of Carlos Castaneda's books, Don Juan gives Castaneda the exercise of gazing at leaves. He tells Castaneda to look at the shadows or the spaces between the leaves and not the leaves themselves. In our ordinary day-to-day lives what we do (or at least what I do) is perceive the objects. However it's possible to see the leaves as the spaces, and the spaces as the objects. I think this is what Don Juan was trying to show Castaneda in order to teach him about not doing.
[/quote]

This is a little different. We usually focus our vision on object and not spaces. This thread has some research results on focusing on spaces.

[quote author=archaea]
Another not doing which Don Juan talks about is the not doing of the internal dialogue. I personally am of the opinion that the internal dialogue is actually a telepathic dialogue between the predator and an individual, and the reason we don't perceive the predator is because that's something we're not doing...

So, with application of will it's possible to stop engaging in the dialogue. However, engaging in the dialogue with the predator is something we have been conditioned to do since we were small children, and as a result of this the dialogue is a mechanical doing, like perceiving the world as three dimensional.
[/quote]

I have found that stopping this dialog altogether before it starts is not in my control. What is in my control is to
- recognize that the dialog that is taking place
- examine the dialog on the basis of certain basic rules to evaluate its nature
- refocus the dialog in a direction which is in alignment with my aims

All this needs attention and willpower.


We can look at non-doing is to stop some of the harmful automatic habits that have taken root in us as you seem to have understood Archaea, but I think we need to carefully evaluate what is really harmful and can be stopped. I do not see much use in spending energy towards changing visual perception - it works the way it does because of the basic structure of our hardware (arrangement of photoreceptors on the retina, visual signal processing etc) and it suits the environment in which we live (light sources etc).

However, there is value in changing harmful automatic postural and behavioral responses. In these cases, the first step is inhibition or saying "no" to the first response. Since you mentioned neurons, this is something I wrote some time back in the context of the Alexander technique (which is primarily a posture correction/learning technique) elsewhere in the forum.

The term "inhibition" which Alexander used has been shown to have far-reaching consequences from modern neuroscience research. At the functional/behavioral level, inhibition means saying "no" to some automatic impulse to respond arising in ourselves. This internal act of saying no is under voluntary control and uses the prefrontal cortex, which is the seat of selective attention and willpower.

We have two types of neurons - excitatory and inhibitory. Excitatory neurons at a basic level ensures neurons fire and propagate signals across large areas of the brain. Inhibitory neurons regulate the activation response. They stabilize the excitation through negative feedback (subtracting from the excitatory pathways) and through what is known as "lateral inhibition", they can segregate areas of activation thus narrowing and focusing the activation response through more restricted pathways. Weak neural inhibition is associated with temporal lobe epilepsy and brain zaps along with obsessive behavior. It seems weak neural inhibition leading to uncontrolled global activation patterns in the brain can correlate with what in Work terms is described as the wrong work of centers, with unwanted mixing of intellectual, emotional and instinctive responses.

We know that our brain responds to the sensory image presented to it by the external sense organs and the interoceptors (internal receptors) located in key areas like the gut, heart etc. So our "mind" learns from body sensations. What happens during voluntary inhibition in this context is interesting. Some research findings ( link ) indicate that voluntary inhibition structures the subsequent processing of sensory input. Internally saying "no" at the right time can stop an overwhelming response like Peter Levine mentioned in "In An Unspoken Voice" described ( here ).

What Alexander found is that sometimes when the wrong thing is kept from happening by the act of saying no, the right thing happens automatically. At the level of body postures and accompanying instinctive emotions, inhibition helps prevent the wrong response and the right response can take over. To make sure that the right response happens, the second step of "direction" is added which is spatial thinking oriented in the Alexander technique and relates to how the main joints align and move with optimal efficiency.

This technique of "inhibition" followed by "direction" perhaps applies beyond physical posture and helps in "making good use of oneself" as Alexander said.

fwiw

 

[Menna]

And or because u are behaving differently energy reacts with your body diiferently maybe used more efficiently or the quality is better or not as much energy is needed maybe deconstructing the objective meaning of Energy and relating it to life in terms of the work we can then learn about how our bodies use the energy I would have to think there are a few words such as quality, amount and type can be used when talking about energy and also certain tools in the work modify energy in certain ways the energy interacts with the body

 

[Mikey]

I think this relates to the centres, if we stop doing things (in a mechanical way) physically, emotionally and mentally then we can store the various different types of energy which we don't use... I'm not quite clear on the point of this, but I think it has to do with the development of will and creative expression.

Ouspensky's book The Fourth Way expands greatly on In Search of the Miraculous, and goes into great details. Highly suggested reading if you haven't already done so.

 

[Archaea]

In The Willpower Instinct, Kelly McGonigal describes a couple of different applications of will: 'I will' power, 'I wont' power, and "I want" power. There's a thread on it here, and there's much overlap between the book and many of the concepts explored and put into practice on the forum.

I think these elements correspond with the things you're talking about, although using different language. "I won't" is the same as 'not doing' in terms of the diet example you gave, and I'd consider them aspects of Doing. Stalking, as you described it could be considered 'I want' power and relates to self remembering in Gurdjieffian terms.

I think the thing with what the C's were talking about goes a step further by doing and giving. So building will is great but there also needs to be some giving involved to create the vacuum for the creative energy flow. There's an ongoing discussion of 'how to give' in that session's thread.

The Will power thread was very interesting, thanks for the link. It looks like there are parallels between doing/not doing and I will/I won't philosophies. I think that doing would create an energy vacuum whether or not the intent is STS or STO, however, in the Ra material Ra say's that STS polarized beings don't have a functioning heart charka. So perhaps, you're right about want the C's mean, and to have fully connected chakra system an individual does need to be doing and giving. :)

The main problem with Don Juan teachings could be, how to understand it and what he really meant and how to use it in reality. Generally, doing and not doing is then a decision of a certain context, so doing one thing at a time could be totally off and at another time helpful, for yourself or for another person.

I agree that the Castaneda stuff can be a bit hard to understand, and that it's relevance to reality might not be what the books themselves suggest that it is. When I try to understand what they mean in terms of not doing, what I come up with is that when someone's not doing something then they're doing something else.

In the books Don Juan say's that if we can not do the world, I think he calls it stopping the world, then we can perceive things and realities which are outside of our normal perception. For the work I think this could be important in terms of gaining awareness about both our internal and external environment.

We do not see in 3 dimensions from what is known in neuroscience. We see 2D images and the brain infers the third dimension following certain unconscious rules. These rules are automatic and hence perceptual illusions of certain types are not readily removed through the insight that they are illusions. Willpower alone is not enough to change visual perception. It is limited by hardware. Now activating new DNA that modifies the genetic expressions thus potentially modifying the hardware is a different story...

It's could be possible neuro-scientifically for the prefrontal cortex to be able to inhibit these automatic unconscious processes... couldn't it? I mean, sure, the prefrontal cortex is at the front of the brain, and the visual cortex is at the back of the brain, but the flow of information could, as far as I'm aware, travel both ways.

This is a little different. We usually focus our vision on object and not spaces. This thread has some research results on focusing on spaces.

I've read that thread before, I actually had a comment about the idea of brain wave phases and the sense of self. In one of the recent sessions the C's said we need to balance our activities with some self reflection. So what if we should balance our sense of self with some not doing of our sense of self? Instead of just having one state of perception as the goal.

I have found that stopping this dialog altogether before it starts is not in my control. What is in my control is to
- recognize that the dialog that is taking place
- examine the dialog on the basis of certain basic rules to evaluate its nature
- refocus the dialog in a direction which is in alignment with my aims

All this needs attention and willpower.

Hmmm... Maybe you're just telling yourself it's out of your control. ;) In another thread you wrote this:

Yes, this can be useful especially when we are stuck in our own world struggling with some conflict. I have observed that really looking at what is around me, hearing the sounds around me, sensing the air coming through my nose as I breathe and on the skin, sensing the ground beneath my feet as I walk - all these simple mundane things that are always there but mostly ignored, gives me a boost of energy and helps me gather myself together. To me, this is getting in touch with "being" at the basic human level.

Have you payed attention to your internal dialogue while you were paying attention to these things. I've mentioned this before but I think just paying attention to the senses and what they're registering stops the internal dialogue. My understanding would be that the boost of energy you feel is just the energy which isn't being used.

And or because u are behaving differently energy reacts with your body diiferently maybe used more efficiently or the quality is better or not as much energy is needed maybe deconstructing the objective meaning of Energy and relating it to life in terms of the work we can then learn about how our bodies use the energy I would have to think there are a few words such as quality, amount and type can be used when talking about energy and also certain tools in the work modify energy in certain ways the energy interacts with the body

I was thinking something like that while I was writing the first post. In the recent sessions the C's say that doing creates a vacuum into which energy can flow. I looked at the relevant quotes and found that what they actually say for us to do is to network and communicate. I thought this made sense after a little thought because if energy is consciousness (or is it the other way around? :P) then movements or changes in emotion or mentality would create movements or changes in energy.

However, when I tried to apply this kind of thinking to the ideas of doing and not doing what I came up with is that to not do something wouldn't create an energy vacuum into which energy from the outside could flow into, but instead would mix up the energy that's already on the inside. So like you said it would modify it and maybe also modify the way it interacts with the body.

Ouspensky's book The Fourth Way expands greatly on In Search of the Miraculous, and goes into great details. Highly suggested reading if you haven't already done so.

I haven't read any of these books, I've only read some of the stuff on the forum. They're hard books to get, and I don't trust the internet with my money...

 

[Menna]

and I cant see the dancer spinning anti-clockwise its driving me crazy but I got the crop circle and square.

So like you said it would modify it and maybe also modify the way it interacts with the body

Using the lower centers is an energy drain so the closer one gets to using higher centers I feel energy is then used efficiently. But there are three parts to this IMO. The use of energy by draining lower centers (no contact with higher)...Progress being made a mix of non efficient use of energy lower centers mixed with efficient energy higher center but the majority of energy being used is by lower center... and then the tipping point of 51% or more higher center use of energy. At this point I would think that organically little by little the higher centers would take over as the being would get a feel of this efficient energy higher centers being used and would hold this feeling longer n longer n longer. When one is immersed in the lower center or the majority of life is being used by the lower centers it is tough to see what and how to do to live from higher because the person is dominated by lower and draining energy use.

Its tough to put into written words what I actually "feel" about this topic. Sometimes language can limit the meaning of what I want to say especially when it comes to this work...Hence when people say I couldnt find the words they are feeling something but cant discribe it - its true you have to find them and even then it might not be the right find

 

[obyvatel]

We do not see in 3 dimensions from what is known in neuroscience. We see 2D images and the brain infers the third dimension following certain unconscious rules. These rules are automatic and hence perceptual illusions of certain types are not readily removed through the insight that they are illusions. Willpower alone is not enough to change visual perception. It is limited by hardware. Now activating new DNA that modifies the genetic expressions thus potentially modifying the hardware is a different story...

It's could be possible neuro-scientifically for the prefrontal cortex to be able to inhibit these automatic unconscious processes... couldn't it? I mean, sure, the prefrontal cortex is at the front of the brain, and the visual cortex is at the back of the brain, but the flow of information could, as far as I'm aware, travel both ways.

Do you have some data supporting the possibility of the prefrontal cortex voluntarily inhibiting the basic mechanism of automatic visual processing ? Closing one's eyes, turning head away etc does not count.


[quote author=archaea]

I have found that stopping this dialog altogether before it starts is not in my control. What is in my control is to
- recognize that the dialog that is taking place
- examine the dialog on the basis of certain basic rules to evaluate its nature
- refocus the dialog in a direction which is in alignment with my aims

All this needs attention and willpower.

Hmmm... Maybe you're just telling yourself it's out of your control. ;) In another thread you wrote this:

Yes, this can be useful especially when we are stuck in our own world struggling with some conflict. I have observed that really looking at what is around me, hearing the sounds around me, sensing the air coming through my nose as I breathe and on the skin, sensing the ground beneath my feet as I walk - all these simple mundane things that are always there but mostly ignored, gives me a boost of energy and helps me gather myself together. To me, this is getting in touch with "being" at the basic human level.

Have you payed attention to your internal dialogue while you were paying attention to these things. I've mentioned this before but I think just paying attention to the senses and what they're registering stops the internal dialogue. My understanding would be that the boost of energy you feel is just the energy which isn't being used.
[/quote]

I think it depends on how we look at stopping the internal dialog. If somebody is talking to us in real life, we can walk away or tune the other party out by putting our attention elsewhere. This means we are not hearing what is being said. To me inner dialog is the dialog with the unconscious. The unconscious is constantly communicating with the conscious mind. Many times the conscious mind does not hear for it is busy doing something else.

Predator's mind is a personification of one component of the unconscious - a part that does not belong to us. There are also other parts of the unconscious - parts of us that have been psychologically repressed for example. The body also communicates to the mind through the unconscious for issues that have not yet become so pressing that they would result in some full blown illness. The voice of these parts gets mixed up with voices that do not belong to us. The "higher centers" in 4th Way would also belong to the unconscious. The task of the conscious mind is to learn to discern which is which and give each its due.

When I am attending to external sensory stimuli, I cannot attend to the unconscious impressions. It is useful to do sometimes as I wrote in that other thread when the unconscious threatens to overwhelm the conscious mind and rob it of its energy. However, this is a temporary reprieve. The basic issues brought up have to be dealt with in one form or another. We can network about them with others and process the information in various forms - journalling and art being a couple of examples.

Important thing is to engage in the dialog with the unconscious in a balanced way so that healing and growth can take place. Two extremes need to be guarded against. Getting submerged in the inner dialog most of the time with little regard for others and the reality outside is a recipe for madness. Being ceaselessly devoted and occupied with the external world and its activities while ignoring the messages that the unconscious sends out is a recipe for illness - a fact brought out by Gabor Mate's "When the Body Says No". Finding the right balance and integrating unconscious material appropriately in the conscious mind helps in being creative and rendering better service to others.


All that said, practically speaking we have a finite amount of energy and willpower at our disposal to make use of as efficiently as possible. To me, knowing visual illusions exist and can fool us is good enough - I do not see much value in chasing them down repeatedly in an effort to change the way I visually perceive the world. Just for the sake of discussion - what if I am able to accomplish this feat? Does this help others? My present visual abilities are good enough to navigate the reality in which I find myself in. I would rather use the energy I have in simple practical ways that can help others and myself grow instead of focusing on obscure notions like "not doing the world" or "stopping the world" which I do not understand.

My 2 cents

 

[Menna]

When I am attending to external sensory stimuli, I cannot attend to the unconscious impressions. It is useful to do sometimes as I wrote in that other thread when the unconscious threatens to overwhelm the conscious mind and rob it of its energy. However, this is a temporary reprieve. The basic issues brought up have to be dealt with in one form or another. We can network about them with others and process the information in various forms - journalling and art being a couple of examples.

Another dynamic mentioned here. When being active with life observe what is happening in thy inner state. As we talked about in other thread Observing outward and at the same time observing inward produces a change in state. I would think that while being active outward and being able to observe what is happening inward would also produced something. When I have tried it doing this slows down my actions.

I agree that it's a temporary reprieve however during this time I believe that certain things can be felt and learned as not only can are intellectual center become wiser and smarter I also believe our emotional center can become wiser and smarter as well. By producing a temporary state there are new impressions even though you are in the same place I believe if explored and felt maybe one can make it less and less temporary or discover more permanent tools to use...These temporary states do give us something to work with and I believe what we are given to work with at those time has less limits then typical life. This is all new discovery it's like saying I have never been to this part of the world before but I'm not going over there because I know nothing is there...Really how do you know if you haven't experienced if you haven't explored for YOURSELF what works for one may or may not work for another many paths can lead to the same place but one path might suite one better then the other

 

[obyvatel]

When I am attending to external sensory stimuli, I cannot attend to the unconscious impressions. It is useful to do sometimes as I wrote in that other thread when the unconscious threatens to overwhelm the conscious mind and rob it of its energy. However, this is a temporary reprieve. The basic issues brought up have to be dealt with in one form or another. We can network about them with others and process the information in various forms - journalling and art being a couple of examples.

........

I agree that it's a temporary reprieve however during this time I believe that certain things can be felt and learned as not only can are intellectual center become wiser and smarter I also believe our emotional center can become wiser and smarter as well. By producing a temporary state there are new impressions even though you are in the same place I believe if explored and felt maybe one can make it less and less temporary or discover more permanent tools to use...These temporary states do give us something to work with and I believe what we are given to work with at those time has less limits then typical life. This is all new discovery it's like saying I have never been to this part of the world before but I'm not going over there because I know nothing is there...Really how do you know if you haven't experienced if you haven't explored for YOURSELF what works for one may or may not work for another many paths can lead to the same place but one path might suite one better then the other

Not sure how what I wrote led you to the above statement, Menna. The "temporary state" part of post that you quoted was directed towards the exercise of remembering to observe what is going on in the body and the environment around us periodically. I practice this as a means of quick recharging and resetting any thought loops running in the head. I cannot see how that fits in with the bolded part of your post above.


In my previous post directed to Archaea, I was saying that trying to alter the basic mechanics of visual perception of the world through conscious effort, in the context of seeing 3D objects and visual illusions, did not seem to me as useful from the 4th Way Work context. This is what I wrote: are your statements in bold above referring to this?

[quote author=obyvatel]
All that said, practically speaking we have a finite amount of energy and willpower at our disposal to make use of as efficiently as possible. To me, knowing visual illusions exist and can fool us is good enough - I do not see much value in chasing them down repeatedly in an effort to change the way I visually perceive the world. Just for the sake of discussion - what if I am able to accomplish this feat? Does this help others? My present visual abilities are good enough to navigate the reality in which I find myself in. I would rather use the energy I have in simple practical ways that can help others and myself grow instead of focusing on obscure notions like "not doing the world" or "stopping the world" which I do not understand.
[/quote]

I do have some familiarity with what Archaea wrote regarding visual perception alteration. What I shared here is based on my experience and this is a basic part of networking and the feedback process. Whether Archaea chooses to accept or reject the feedback is up to him. If this is what triggered you, then looking into why this happened, if you so choose, may be useful.

 

[Menna]

I practice this as a means of quick recharging and resetting any thought loops running in the head.

What might be a quick recharging for one could be a path that leads someone farther in the work for another.

Really how do you know if you haven't experienced if you haven't explored for YOURSELF what works for one may or may not work for another many paths can lead to the same place but one path might suite one better then the other

This does sound like it was directed personally but it was more a statement for everyone here. If someone progresses to a point using one tool another person could use the same tool but it may help them progress farther then the other.

 

[obyvatel]

I practice this as a means of quick recharging and resetting any thought loops running in the head.

What might be a quick recharging for one could be a path that leads someone farther in the work for another.

Really how do you know if you haven't experienced if you haven't explored for YOURSELF what works for one may or may not work for another many paths can lead to the same place but one path might suite one better then the other

This does sound like it was directed personally but it was more a statement for everyone here. If someone progresses to a point using one tool another person could use the same tool but it may help them progress farther then the other.

Ok, Menna, you did not really address the question I asked in the previous post. Since it looks like you were responding to what I wrote in relation to the exercise you described in the other thread, let me clarify that it was not my intention to devalue the exercise you have shared. I shared how I used it and understood it. Somehow, you took that in a sense which it was not intended to convey.

 

[Menna]

No I was not referring to the 2D/3D thing. I haven't even tried it out in nature yet. I was just saying that a 4th way exercise may give one a temporary break from their mechanicalness and this same exercise might give another the same break but also connect them with other emotions or thoughts that open new doors or old doors that were forgotten and then the more and more this is done the taste of these new emotions/thoughts might be more prevalent in their life making new things or the old rediscovered permanent.

Did not think you were saying anything negative about my post and I can relate to what you say as it does give me a temporary break but with new knowledge and advice received lately this exercise of experiencing inner world and outer at the same time has opened up new (better) emotions and thoughts. This with the use of EE has brought up new memories and emotions that I have repressed like missing the day my grandmother died I love her and I was unconsciously carrying that guilt around for close to 10yrs now. This will all lead to more them temporary relief for me so I was more saying the Bolded for anyone reading this thread that if they read about an exercise and someone says it temporarily works for them ok great but don't go into the exercise thinking this is only temporary. Not saying that you think all exercises are temporary but someone new to the work might see an advanced person like yourself and think that said exercise only helps temporarily this mindset would be restriction. You have more knowledge in the work then me and are farther along but said exercise has had a bigger impact in my life. People should be open when trying 4th way exercises for themselves it might lead to something greater then temporary or not even help at all. I was piggy backing off your post to make a separate Point. I tend to do this and will be more externally considerate by letting it be known that I am doing so from now on. I use to think that if someone who is above me tried an exercise and it didn't work or only temporarily work then why try it I want to be where they are but won't make it with temporary exercises however through new experience I now know that this isn't how it works

 

[Archaea]

and I cant see the dancer spinning anti-clockwise its driving me crazy but I got the crop circle and square.

I had some luck by staring at her head for a minute of two. So maybe if you try just focusing on her head and ignoring the rest of her body you might have some luck as well. Also I think I remember someone saying that they could do it by focusing on her foot.

Using the lower centers is an energy drain so the closer one gets to using higher centers I feel energy is then used efficiently. But there are three parts to this IMO. The use of energy by draining lower centers (no contact with higher)...Progress being made a mix of non efficient use of energy lower centers mixed with efficient energy higher center but the majority of energy being used is by lower center... and then the tipping point of 51% or more higher center use of energy. At this point I would think that organically little by little the higher centers would take over as the being would get a feel of this efficient energy higher centers being used and would hold this feeling longer n longer n longer. When one is immersed in the lower center or the majority of life is being used by the lower centers it is tough to see what and how to do to live from higher because the person is dominated by lower and draining energy use.

So what you're saying is that in order for the energy or fuel to get to the higher centers, it can't be used up by the lower centers. So we need to stop engaging our lower centers in our relationships with ourselves and others, in order for the energy to be available to the higher centers.

I think this would mean that to truly love someone, you wouldn't be felling jealous or upset or even attached to them emotionally, because this would mean that the lower centers are being used and are therefore soaking up all the fuel. Essentially we need to not do the emotions and thoughts of the lower centers.

Do you have some data supporting the possibility of the prefrontal cortex voluntarily inhibiting the basic mechanism of automatic visual processing ? Closing one's eyes, turning head away etc does not count.

I don't have any empirical data, but I do have a little bit of logic.

If we can change the way we view the cube at will, so we can change whether the lower or upper square pops out on command, and if this perception is created (for lack of a better term) in the visual cortex, then there would have to be a flow of information from the prefrontal cortex to the visual cortex.

However, I'm not sure where this change in perception is created in the brain. I looked up the Wikipedia page for the visual cortex, but I don't really feel like reading it now. I don't suppose you know off the top of your head?


I remember wondering if it made any difference whether the predator's mind was an internal or external influence. I was trying to figure out if it would make a difference in the correct choice of action to take. After reading your post I think it might.

If the predator's mind was an internal influence then gaining the ability to change perceptual modes wouldn't be of any help, and could even be a drain on the energy needed to deal with it. Whereas if the predators mind was an external influence then perceptual flexibility could be useful for being able to perceive the predator and for making informed choices about countering it. OSIT


I'm also reminded about the story in the Wave where the guy hypnotises the other guy, and tells him that a third person has gone down the stairs, out the door, and down the street. But the third guy is still in the room, and he starts messing around with various objects and scares the crap out of the guy who was hypnotised, because he's invisible.

So what if the man behind the curtain isn't really behind a curtain? What if the curtain's inside our mind, and we need to overcome our perceptual inflexibility in order to see behind it?