Negation plays an important role in field dynamics: an object is claimed to exist based on what it is not. We can say that the object is not not-existent, this by no means equivalent to simple negation, but expressing the power of allowing. In encompassing negations the field allows appearance to appear.
To explore the multiplicity of fields we can focus on transitions between fields. What approaches can be used other than via sense perception? Is it not having a programmed course of action, or not not not having a programed frame of mind?
Not programmed in the terms specified by the ‘field’ of ordinary human consciousness, awareness can encompass the ‘field’ of all possible perceptions; perhaps it can even go beyond the range of the possible. KTS 379
Exploring the actual field it came to my mind how many times we tend to act according to past perceptions and what we already know. There is a drive or “gravity†leading us to barriers which limits our possibilities of action. Our field of knowing grows short. How many times we see no way out of a situation; the barriers built by our previous experiences block our ways of action. So, why not? Why not having a way out?
“There is this story about a Persian king and his new bride. He is shocked to discover that his brother’s wife is unfaithful; discovering his own wife’s infidelity has been even more flagrant, he has her executed: but in his bitterness and grief decides that all women are the same. The king, Shahryar, begins to marry a succession of virgins only to execute each one the next morning, before she has a chance to dishonor him. Eventually the vizier, whose duty it is to provide them, cannot find any more virgins. Scheherazade, the vizier’s daughter, offers herself as the next bride and her father reluctantly agrees. On the night of their marriage, Scheherazade begins to tell the king a tale, but does not end it. The king, curious about how the story ends, is thus forced to postpone her execution in order to hear the conclusion. The next night, as soon as she finishes the tale, she begins (and only begins) a new one, and the king, eager to hear the conclusion, postpones her execution once again. So it goes on for 1,001 nights after which the king has already regretted his behavior and gave up executing her.â€
Perhaps Scheherazade asked herself why not marry the king? Why is not possible a different destiny from that of the other wives? Why do not not not choose a different behavior?
Why not move to a field, a field of knowledge, beyond possible? Or in other words why not not not doing it?
Why Not- Not?
Hi Eliana, your assignment post about the not-not got me thinking. I was reminded of Jack’s notes about how we can have a more immediate engagement with a not something than with the something, because we can relate to the not that surrounds a something without assigning it a past-centered label.. Reaching toward a cup of coffee this morning I observed the space through which my hand was moving. This “not the coffee cup space†in turn allowed me to see the coffee cup differently, not as a cup but as not the space (not the-not the cup space) which surrounded and made possible the coffee I wanted to drink. This not-not thereby provided a way for me to remain in the moment while enjoying the coffee.
Some thoughts about Scheherazade. In not ending the story, she allows the king to continue thinking about the not- completed story and she thereby manages to not get executed. Then the next day she is able to finish the story in a way that allows the king to transition from the not-not-ended story with a desire for her to begin another.
Earnest Hemingway always stopped writing for the day at a point when he knew that he could have continued. That allowed him to resume the next day and continue a narrative which was already in motion. (I guess the moral for a writer who wants to avoid writer’s block, is to realize that a not-completed story is the best place from which to resume because it provides a path to not-not-completion. And at the end of a story or a human life, there could always have been more that could have been said) –Michael