On a day not unlike today, a thought scurried out from another of those dark corners of my brain and the following ensued after an inner voice inquired, “If there were no sounds, would there still be hearing?”
The conversation went something like this. “If there were no sounds - none whatsoever, including the sea-shell-like white noise that we notice sometimes when there seems to be total silence – could we say that hearing still exists? Is hearing an entity separate from sound?” A moment’s thought and I answered “no.” My reasoning, whether solid or at best, ephemeral, was that if the process of hearing requires a mechanism of reception – as in our case the brain/ear continuum – as well as a sound for this mechanism to process, then it seems to make sense that no hearing will arise in the absence of the necessary conditions of sound and ear. In the absence of either one of these contingencies hearing does not arise and is therefore not a separate entity.
The same reasoning can be applied to sight. In the absence of an eye, an object, and the presence of the necessary light - seeing will not arise. After a quick perusal, it would appear that the same is true for the other senses. This is because the senses, which we fallaciously consider the arbiter of our truths, are merely contingent processes. That is, the sensations are contingent on the presence of other factors which ultimately rest in biologically determined parameters of operation. For example, there are only a limited number of wavelengths of light and sound that we are, through the operation of these mechanisms, able to register. The same holds true for every sensate experience and each of us can take the time to verify this for ourselves.
Then, as so often happens, I made a mental leap to some conversation I had recently where I was asked about the notion of “transcendence” and what that means in terms of enlightenment as well as its relationship to overcoming Klesha’s or the defilements of mind which separate us from recognizing the Buddha Mind within.
I then imagined a mind experiment concerning this question. I imagined a receptor of some sort that used a monitor to display a circle in the center of the screen. The background was white and inside the black circle appeared the color red in a range from a very light pink to the deepest and brightest red one can imagine. A change in the shade of red would correspond to the degree of anger the person experienced when hooked up to the apparatus. The darker shades indicating a greater degree of anger while less redness within the circle would indicate a diminished experience of anger.
Then I imagined that a subject would move from emotional quiescence up to a state of rage, and progressively move through to a meditative state of calm over a period of several minutes while being monitored through this process by my apparatus. To tie up any loose ends I imagined my apparatus having the ability to register all levels or degrees of anger so that if it was present to any degree whatsoever, we would be able to detect it. Isn't fantasy wonderful?
The subject was then shown a film which he said produced a "homicidal rage" when he first saw it, and upsets him still, if he thinks about it. As the experiment proceeded it became apparent when the subject became extremely angry, as evidenced by fact that the center of the circle would take on a deep red hue. Then as he calmed himself by meditating, the shade of red began to diminish slowly until the circle was the lightest shade of pink….and then melted into the white background outside the circle.
What I gleaned from this little excursion into my imagination was that to "transcend anger" is to be, ultimately, in a state devoid of anger. After the test subject let go of the stream of after-thoughts, which initially arose out of viewing the film, he gradually became "emotionally free of anger" as evidenced by the disappearance of any shade of redness. The man himself however remained. There was no outward physical change to his body. Furthermore, it occurred to me that what would also disappear would be the usual outward consequences of anger in that person’s life. In short there would be no experiential consequence for him, nor would there be a re-birth of anger, or its lesser minions, in anyone with whom he came in contact while angry. The negative karma that arises out of anger would be avoided. He would not have to practice over many life-times in order to achieve what is possible in this one; here and now.
April 29, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)