Unit Two – LOK Ex. 5; TSK Ex 7; Supplementary LOK Ex. xxvii

These notes deal with Jack’s expanded explanations regarding self and I.  I took self to be a narrow perspective and I to be the knowing capacity that can take perspectives. [In the comments below, Jack points out that this is not specifically a TSK view, but at the time, for my inquiry and level of understanding, it helped me develop a certain level of discernment.]

Regards,  David

LOK Exercise 5 – Disowning Tension –
I have noticed while engaging in the other exercises in this unit that when an insight is revealed, not necessarily through logic or deduction, but when an insight or understanding seems to come in a flash, there is a strong pulling tendency to grab that knowledge, the way a rock-climber reaches out and grabs firmly to pull himself to the next level. 

That tendency manifests in me in an immediate rush to narrate to myself a summary of this new insight, as if the self is laying claim to this new higher ground of knowing.  When I observed myself in the act of doing this, space and time seemed to open, and I embraced this tendency right from the root of my childhood ways and attitudes.  I saw myself as I did when I was a child attempting to tame or master my environment, reaching for things, manipulating things, controlling my world as it expanded, right along with my expanding skills of manipulation. 

Through the focus of the exercise I got a taste of that wider, more encompassing perspective that includes the self limiting act of consolidating knowledge, but also the wider space of being aware I was doing it, as I did it.

TSK Exercise 7 – Body-Mind-Thought Interplay –
I want to use this experience because I applied TSK Exercise 7, to this interaction and observed the psycho-physical embodiment.
I was thinking about a response to someone on a thread I was composing on a particular internet Forum.  As I thought about my response, which dealt with examining ourselves and our psychological defenses, and what is required to unearth them, I was remembering my own childhood.  Some of the thoughts and images that bubbled up were of a painful nature.  I realized that in a sense I was reliving some of the emotional content those memories contained, as my eyes began to tear up, and I felt a familiar sinking feeling in my stomach area that was an associative empty and hollow contraction.  The memory content involved my child’s sense of not measuring up to parental expectations, thus resulting in my having a low sense of self esteem.
Those thoughts and feelings then led to a current understanding in that moment of how innocent that child was.  The current constellation or sense of me merged with the memory of that less complex child-self, as if there was no separation in time or distance, and there was a feeling of great warmth and love.  I was that child, as if I were my own son, and not a pitiful person to be embarrassed about or ashamed of.  That child’s innocence was in some sense like the innocence of a puppy, single minded in its desire to play, to please, and to be appreciated, whether or not those desires were met.  The embodied feeling of love for that innocence in me, in the current moment, was felt in my chest, much larger than just the heart area, and my eyes were stinging.

Afterwards, I looked back on that scenario and was struck with how alive the past can be, and how normally I objectified it and assumed it was gone, but in a very real sense there was no distance between then and now.  From beginnings to now, Space just opened and allowed Time to reveal a whole.  The me’s of then and now simply fell away, a more embodied and fundamental knowing seemed to be operating.

Supplementary LOK Ex. xxvii –
Recently, I told a friend and scholar I had difficulty keeping up with some of his writing, however, I didn’t say it as straight forward as that.  Instead, I jokingly made reference to his twelve cylinder mind compared to my four cylinder mind.  I realized later that couching my difficulty in that language contained a hidden judgment.  The judgment developed from a pattern that grew from a subtle fixed position I took up many years ago about myself.  Something was nagging at me about the exchange with my friend that I couldn’t quite catch, but it was this exercise that allowed me to hone in on the process.

First of all, the cylinder/horsepower metaphor was a little polarizing, implying bright at one end and dull at the other.  It expressed at least an implied judgment about me that I was not as bright as I should be.  That idea is a pattern of thinking I recognized as having reappeared in my life numerous times.  Once I recognized the pattern of this repetitive judgment about myself that seemed to arise whenever I had to mentally stretch in order to understand, I was able to trace its origin back to a childhood fixed position.  Without going too deeply into the specifics here, it should be sufficient to say that I lived in a strict parental environment in which measuring up to my father was required but felt by my child’s mind to be impossible.   Hence, the idea of not being as intelligent as I should began there, and was a reinforced perception, until it became a pattern of behaving as if I was less intelligent.

It would be more realistic, and a more open stance regarding my scholarly friend, to say that he is mentally gifted, and rather than comparing minds, I could simply expend some effort and enjoy learning what I’m able of what he may offer, and be warmly appreciative of our relationship.  That way I will not have limited ‘knowing’ in advance by a self-imposed fixed position, allowed to repeat as a pattern, often enough to become a subtle judgment, about my limits for knowing.  Or perhaps more simply stated: A personal value judgment left unchallenged tends to perpetuate itself, affecting how one thinks, lives, and perceives the world.  And it has recently dawned on me that is exactly what I allowed to happen until I challenged that value judgment.

About David Filippone

David Filippone has been a student of Tarthang Tulku’s Time, Space, Knowledge (TSK) vision for over twenty-five years. For the past fourteen years, he has studied TSK and Full Presence Mindfulness with Jack Petranker, director of the Center for Creative Inquiry (CCI). He also participated in programs offered by Carolyn Pasternak of the Odiyan Center. David curated the CCI Facebook page for five years, which is often TSK-focused, and he currently serves on the CCI Board of Directors. The CCI Facebook page can be found at the following link... https://www.facebook.com/CenterforCreativeInquiry/
This entry was posted in blog home, uncatagorized, TSK online program 2007-2008. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Unit Two – LOK Ex. 5; TSK Ex 7; Supplementary LOK Ex. xxvii

  1. davidf says:

    Hi Ron and Jack,

    Ron, I realized after rereading your post I only answered the 2nd part of you question, but did not address the 1st part. You asked, “I wonder if you can tie that [Supplemental LOK Exercise] into Exercise 7 of Body-Mind-Thought Interplay? Given your insight into how your judgment was rooted in a fixed position ? does that play out (or read-out?) in some fashion in terms of body sensations, thoughts, feelings, etc.?”

    Yes. The pattern of thinking I recognized, in the use of the twelve cylinder/four cylinder mind metaphor has a dampening feel, that seems to illicit in me a tendency to hold back. It is a pattern of behavior that insinuates itself between a more direct experience. If experience is already interpretive to some degree, this pattern seems to add an additional dampening layer of interpretation. So it seems to have a dull feel that in a sense reinforces or verifies the presupposition of dullness. It’s a bad habit that self-fulfills, if you see what I mean. The self has come to depend on it, I suppose. I think recognizing the pattern in the act is what unravels the tendency, or at least helps.

    David

  2. jackp says:

    David,

    I appreciate these examples as well. Your use of TSK Ex. 7 in particular shows the practice “in action” in a very fruitful way.

    I understand your distinction between ‘I’ and ‘self’ as you describe it in this Post, but be forewarned that that is not how the TSK books distinguish the terms. In fact, I don’t think there is much of a distinction at all. But that discussion can wait till later in the course.

    Jack

  3. davidf says:

    Hi Ron,

    You asked: “Does the structure of value judgments that close down knowing (as in your case–it affected your self-image) have a Time, Space, Knowledge signature in terms of body-mind-thought-feeling interplay?”

    Yes, although I didn’t realize it quite as clearly until I worked with the exercises in some later Units. The embodiment of me, here, now, was the anchor of that structure initially. All references to memory of the recent past, and the distant past of childhood were based on that foundational anchoring to that presumed fixed me, here, now. Then, when I seemed to spontaneously let go of that fixation, there was a release or opening to some greater awareness, however, I seem to remember, after that opening and understanding, there was a rush of me, here, now, to appropriate that experience.

    The structure of the attempt to fix me, here, now, seems to consist of underlying sense feelings, and mental activity engaged in near continuous thoughts that refer to memories, current activities, or future intentions.

    David

  4. ronaldp says:

    Hi David

    I really enjoyed your post on the Supplemental LOK Exercise. I wonder if you can tie that into Exercise 7 of Body-Mind-Thought Interplay? Given your insight into how your judgment was rooted in a fixed position — does that play out (or read-out?) in some fashion in terms of body sensations, thoughts, feelings, etc.? Does the structure of value judgments that close down knowing (as in your case–it affected your self-image) have a Time, Space, Knowledge signature in terms of body-mind-thought-feeling interplay? Seems we live with these ongoing patterns based on fixed positions but seems just “who we are” (after all, we are “only human”) — it’s our “personality”…seems many of these labels (e.g., personality) are conventional excuses to simply “accept” and live out our limitations?

    Ron

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *