K. The fact is that one is not balanced psychologically, mentally, or sexually; in every way we are off balance. Now the important thing is to become aware of it, to know that one is not balanced, not how to become balanced. A neurotic mind cannot become balanced, but if it has not gone to the extremes of neurosis, if it has still retained some balance, it can watch itself. One can then become aware of what one does, of what one says, of what one thinks, how one moves, how one sits, how one eats, watching all the time but not correcting. And if you watch in such a manner, without any choice, then out of that deep watching will come a balanced, sane, human being; then you will no longer be neurotic. A balanced mind is a mind that is wise, not made up of judgments and opinions.
To read people here discussing these ideas, thinking about them, experimenting etc, seems to me very healthy. Weâre unbalanced and neurotic and knowing that, we donât have to worry too much about how we come across, but given the amount of people participating I suppose that is a problem for many. As I see it though, apart from our degrees of neuroticism, weâre all traveling in the same caravan.
Weâre all refugees in the same crowded boat trying to get to the promised land, but weâre misreading the map we have of how to get to it. Weâre too desperate to read the map carefully enough to see that what itâs pointing to is nothing new, but something so old it seems fundamental.
When one has read the map to the promised land carefully and seriously, one sees that there is no way to escape our cursed, uninhabitable land because our ancestors created it a long time ago and we recreate it every moment, every day. The cursed land weâre trying to escape is the consequence of our failure to face the fact that escaping is not the solution but the problem. We are escapists trying to escape the truth about what we are.
He has a âsuggestionâ as to what has to be done: the mind has to watch itself without condemnation or justificationâŚif it is able. But the mind/brain has to âdo itâ.
The conditioned brain cannot do the impossible, i.e., âwatch itself without condemnation or justificationâ, but it can take an interest in its conditioned response and see when it is condemning or justifying.
Self-knowledge is the conditioned brain learning about itself by acknowledging what it is actually doing, thereby becoming increasingly wary of its own movement, more hesitant, less confident, until (Iâm assuming) it ceases and desists altogether.
The brain/ mind is conditioned; neurotic and unbalanced as K put it. But he said if itâs not too neurotic, it can watch itself : âwithout condemnation or justificationâ.
Too bad we canât ask him why he said that because if the conditioned brain is free enough to perceive directly, unconditionally, how conditioned can it be?
It depends on the particular brain. This excercise is probably easy for some and difficult or impossible for others. I put myself somewhere on that scale.
K. A neurotic mind cannot become balanced, but if it has not gone to the extremes of neurosis, if it has still retained some balance, it can watch itself. One can then become aware of what one does, of what one says, of what one thinks, how one moves, how one sits, how one eats, watching all the time but not correcting. And if you watch in such a manner, without any choice, then out of that deep watching will come a balanced, sane, human being; then you will no longer be neurotic.
K. To be so aware demands wide patience and sensitivity; it requires eagerness and sustained attention so that the whole process of thinking can be observed and understood.
Acknowledging that my conditioned response, my reaction, is condemnation or justification is not watching myself without condemnation or justification. Itâs recognizing what Iâm doing without doing anything about it other than calling it what it is.
To say that the conditioned brain can âwatch itself without condemning or justifyingâ is to imply it is not conditioned. But to say that the conditioned brain can recognize and acknowledge its conditioned, reactive response, implies that it is more interested in self-knowledge (knowing what it is doing) than in doing something extraordinary.
So the point as I get is that you watch, listen, etc to all those thoughts you had, as you were having them and any movements accompanying them ; eye movements, scratching, how you were sitting etc,etc. for as long as you could (âsustainedâ) and then pick it up again after youâve âdroppedâ it âŚwhen you canâŚâŚand I do the same with these of mine right now. No correcting anything.
You watch what youâre doing and thinking critically rather than with the intention to feel better about yourself or advance your ambition, achieve, arrive, accomplish, succeed, win, profit, etc.
Self-knowledge is questioning everything youâve been doing and thinking because the evidence shows that you are much mistaken about everything. So your stream of consciousness, your inner monologue, your behavior, come under scrutiny, no longer taken for granted, ignored, improved, but illuminated for inspection.
Let us stick to the question of this particular blog . If you donât relate please donât comment for the sake of this forumâŚPlease be consideredâŚ
This strikes me as a really interesting quote. It suggests that despite our neurosis, we can possibly still have moments of clear observation that can lead to learning and insights.
With this âdeep watchingâ the difference is seeing oneâs (negative ?)emotions, thoughts, feelings, as they are arising, rather than just âbeingâ them?
The âartâ is to let oneself be as one is? To observe yourself totally as you are? As a good scientist observes his experiment careful not to skew the result in any way?