2016.02.10 - Chapter One, sort of

I'm not following as linear of a course as we seem to be following, or are trying to follow, in sessions. I'm finding that as I move into the exercises in chapter two for instance, I want to go back to reread significant sections of chapter one. Also, as I tend to learn differently by audio, I've been recording the book as I move along. This makes it very easy to "reread" the whole book, as if starting from scratch each time. Stevenaia made an interesting comment in one of our first sessions, when he said that in Tai Chi, his group comes back to the tantien center continually, as if beginning again and again, in what becomes a flow. This may be less possible as we get further into the book, but for now seems quite helpful.

What I write on these pages as Chapter One, are written as we are already well into Chapter Two.

Reflecting on our sessions so far, a few points have come up repeatedly, such as how we each are reading. What, if any, are the differences between visualization and imagination, as we move toward "knowledge?" Are we seeing a hierarchy of space(s) when we read about "higher" and "lower" spaces, and "Great Space?" We've spent some time sharing our impressions, so that as fellow explorers we can continue to find each other as we move into the pages ahead.

One benefit of rereading is coming across sections of text one has somehow missed before, which in itself seems to playfully display what the book is showing. How is it that I can read the same pages and have quite a different experience nearly each time, based on the emphasis I draw out with the eyes situated in a particular world of the moment?

Today, I wondered how I could have missed the lines that spoke of a focus on space to the exclusion of objects, as blankening, when a preference for space has been such a personal challenge. Often in my life I've felt the need to override a distance from "the world" and "others" - making efforst to tether my sense of self in various ways. Many times, I've given up meditation, or prayer, because of my tendency to escape into "my own space", and so I've experienced a kind of pendulum in life, of times of (some might say) extreme "spirituality" or "worldliness."

As opposed to earlier in life when more influenced by religious connotations, I don't place a value judgement on either, and as time goes on I think that I see less swing, greater integration...finding spirituality in worldliness and vice versa, but there is still some effort involved. When I reread Chapter One this week, I was struck by the text addressing this experience, as if sitting with a friend who actually understood. The feeling was not to worry about the effort involved with seeing that this pattern of attachment and aversion, that a natural course was unfolding. In a sense, the push and pull of attachment and aversion is a pattern playing out in a "lower" (not making a value judgement) space, and so moving into a "higher" space reveals more room to move through and play with the pattern than revealed previously.

Another section that stood out for me had to do with the accomodating nature of Great Space. Although I've intended for this group exploration not to rely on teachings that have come from my specifically Buddhist study, in lines concerning the nature of generosity or qualities of "the giver", I couldn't help but let myself move into a sort of Giant Body image of Great Compassion. In this visualization the giant body was there but not there, in being nonseparate from the sky and earth and colorful effects that shone from luminious outlines flashing in and out, not like a neon sign but subtle, as though seeing through a corner of an eye and simultaneously doubting what is seen. The image was grand but also welcoming, and played with me, in the sense that when I was most aware of the giant I am calling Great Compassion, I was most aware of me as being with the giant... my proximity, size, my feeling of good fortune, my awe. As I let the view soften and moved in with the giant, I lost sight of us both.

Bleu made an interesting comment in a session about (paraphrased) being a self that is imagining no self, or something similar, and I thought she phrased a fascinating question that way. We don't need to believe in a non-self any more than we need to believe in a self, although we can play with belief in both for various purposes, like we play with clothes or avatar apearances. It can be interesting to come away from explorations and ask ourselves, "What was that all about?" in a logical way.

Reference:
Bleu Oleander: persons ... I can visualize an opaque body, I can also visualize a translucent body and I can visualize “opening up the translucent outlines themselves until the entire interplay disappears in a kind of openness or space” … but ultimately what does that mean? Its an exercise in visualization that doesn’t take the “me” out of the exercise … I’m still there as knower … knower of the openness feeling.
(2016.02.04 13:00 - TSK Session: A Block, A Trampoline, A Game!)

While in the visualization for me, losing sight of both meant getting in touch with a more energetic and expansive sense of reality. There was no giver of great compassion that I wanted to be like, just some more prominent presence of abundance of spaciousness and generosity of view. Awe, with very little fear. Unlike many visualizations I didn't need to come out of it, but sat in/as the presence/impression a while.