January 30, 2010
- More on Falling Between the Frames -
“The perceptual thresholds are levels where subtle or fast processes can be observed. Below the threshold the process is not observed, and above the threshold the process is observed. A tachistoscope or T-scope is an instrument that can present visual displays at rates of thousandths of a second. The T-scope has been used to determine what humans are capable of becoming aware of at the level prior to conscious attention. Brown’s experiments involved determining how slow objects needed to be flashed, before the subjects were able to perceive them as two separate events. The smallest gap of time between the two events an individual is capable of perceiving the change is that individual’s threshold. Just as IQ will vary among different people, perceptual thresholds vary. Scientists had concluded in 40 years of research before Brown’s work that a threshold for any particular person did not change in a lifetime.
However, Brown’s research produced a startling new finding. After 3-months of vipassana meditation his subjects had significantly lower perceptual thresholds. They were able to perceive much faster and subtler events than before the retreat. The changes were not small changes but big changes. Changes were frequently 100%,200%,500%. One friend of mine had an increase of 1,500%. The results of Brown’s researh give a scientific basis for understanding the results of meditation practice. By focusing the mind in a profound examination of the present moment, processes of the mind which were not accessible to normal consciousness become conscious. These processes are beyond the perceptual threshold of the normal person.”
From Bill Hamilton’s book “Saints and Psychopaths” (pgs 58~59)
(which is pretty much what I was trying to get at here)
Clarity is the name of the game!
I really enjoyed that book, interesting fella. (Although surprised that this needed to be tested as it is pretty clear from practice)
Hope you are well!
Comment by Pavel — January 31, 2010 @ 9:11 am
Hey Pavel, good to hear from you. Happy to see SubPhilo up and running.
Yeah, I really liked this. Read it in the LA airport waiting for connecting flights (a very looooong lay over). And while I agree that this is can be made obvious through practice (though I’m not currently pulling 6 hour days…) scientists don’t always practice, and LOTS of people listen to scientists. And if all it takes to convince scientists is a few tests, well, I say sign me up! There’s a lot of momentum to counter here, but the more info that get out about what really happens when meditation is taken seriously, the better!
Comment by Ian — January 31, 2010 @ 7:36 pm
Yeah, true! I guess that the only problem is that it is not readily apparent why having very precise, accurate and quick awareness is a good idea. For me a really big puzzle piece fell into place when I realized that this heightened awareness is completely and utterly removed from bliss, altered states and profundity of any sort – it just is (with the accompanying normal/abnormal, profound/ordinary experience and reactions to that). And it’s a good idea because it makes it possible to access, or observe what is otherwise too quick, or simply unconscious. Explaining this to someone who does not have any experience in meditation (or at least some psychedelic inclinations) is somehow difficult.
Two weeks ago I was having a conversation with this really nice guy, getting very excited while I was telling him that I believe that awareness is the most important thing to cultivate, that it is (in a way) what makes us human (in the most profound and grand way). I have to admit that I felt like a lunatic while trying to explain this, not having any way of making this idea more accessible, or explaining myself more clearly (perhaps because I do not understand it fully myself).
By the way, did you get a paper copy of the book and if so, where is a cheap place to buy it? (I only have a digital copy)
Comment by Pavel — February 1, 2010 @ 8:29 am
Yeah, it really is that we’re just still (a little bit) asleep. And thanks for the reminder:
“heightened awareness is completely and utterly removed from bliss, altered states and profundity of any sort”
Always good to remember this, I think my pratice has been a bit lacking in this aspect lately.
Couldn’t agree with you more on this. It’s a good feeling to be able to do what you think is the most important thing that needs doing. :)
Unfortunately, I don’t have a paper copy, just the PDF on KFDh.
Comment by Ian — February 1, 2010 @ 10:50 am
Interviewer: Related to unfulfillment, then are you suggesting that will is out of sync with itself which is the cause of suffering?
Dark Zen: Yes. That is a good way to put it. This out of syncness is disparity and suffering. We call it duhkha. Sounding scientific, this out of syncness is a phenomenal moment as well, being the smallest unit of suffering since all phenomena, according to the Buddha, are synonymous with suffering and unfulfillment. I can even declare that the curvilinear nature of the universe is emblematic of suffering [laughing].
From here.
In this case, I am assuming that “will” is meant to point to what others have called “awareness” or “I AMness” or “True Self”. The movement of no-movement, rather than any kind of desire based (and therefore partial) will.
Comment by Ian — February 1, 2010 @ 2:32 pm
It says in the Patisambhida-magga, “The primordial will is the efficient cause of the in and out breath.”
From the same “interview”. Not sure how much I follow the overall viewpoint behind the interview (doesn’t speak to me personally), but there’s some good stuff in there. This in particular is interesting…
Comment by Ian — February 1, 2010 @ 2:43 pm
So then, the magical formula for progress on the spiritual path is… (drum roll, please…) the application of mindfulness and equanimity. – Jackson (from here)
Comment by Ian — February 1, 2010 @ 3:32 pm
Thank you for those :-)
Comment by Pavel — February 1, 2010 @ 8:14 pm
Hope they prove useful. :)
Comment by Ian — February 2, 2010 @ 9:12 am
Wilson attempts to explain why there’s so much about ourselves that we fail to understand, which can lead to misdirected anger. He points to a revised, post-Freudian understanding of how the mind works: the reason that their own judgments, feelings, [and] motives remain mysterious to people is not repression, as Freud argued, but efficiency so that the mind can process and analyze multiple things at once.
Found this book on the street once, but got rid of it during a moment of “I have too damn many books!” Perhaps I should pick up another copy…
Comment by Ian — February 2, 2010 @ 12:03 pm