Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

12625Re: Localization as Focalization - what is a center?

Expand Messages
  • Nina
    Feb 1 4:42 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      There seem to be two understandings of 'center' emerging:

      1. Center as a movable 'origin of work'. For instance,
      the origin of the earth's gravity would be a center, which,
      draws everything within its field towards itself, but also,
      like a movie projector, projects outward, through all bodies
      in space. This highlights the sense of 'gravity' and 'levity'
      about a gravitational center. It may be seen that all centers,
      whether gravitational or mental/ perspectival (which may also be
      understood to be a sort of gravity), have this dual in/out
      2. Center as that which is aware of whatever centers may emerge.
      This is not as definable as regards location - where is it?
      Could it be, like a movie projector, it is 'informing' all of those
      various centers? Or, if you prefer, she is the borglike mothership,
      sending out her minions. :)

      After re-reading Gene's post (#12623 "Focalization - starfish -
      stretching the mind"), what I have written above seems to be
      getting to the same place.

      I like how Gene has made a subtle point with the renaming of
      one of the related threads as 'Focalization'... is what is
      felt to be 'local', or that which 'localizes', really local,
      or is it only how it is seen, ie, how it becomes a 'focal point'.

      I asked Lisa Clark about centers, and the answer was neutral.
      I think perhaps she felt that answering it was 'too big' for
      the time we had. Oh well!


      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Jason Fishman
      <munkiman4u@y...> wrote:
      > Thanks for this Nina!
      > I tend to think it's pretty valid to asess the position of a
      center. I think it also valid to take note that perception really
      never moves (even when it does or is perhaps always moving) it's
      still me that perceives, movement, stillness or absense.
      > I also tend to think that it's this localized format that keeps the
      contrast in play (me verses you). With that said, along the lines of
      anything is possible, would this include "not being me at all"? Maybe
      experiencing anothers experience through thier eyes, as them, without
      a sense of me-ness? That might be pushing the limits, but it does
      seem curious.
      > I have tended to notice through astral travel practice, that there
      is no localized format but vision (some have said sound, I've never
      had a long enoguh journey to notice). This really doesn't jib well
      with non-dualist thunking or even dualist thunking either, since
      there is no real way that one is holding a position or witnessing a
      definite contrast (light vs dark). It's sort of like a cartoon
      without the "flatness". My skills at painting (slow to progress) have
      been somewhat indicative of this effect. I'd be curious as to what,
      if anything at all, this Lisa Clark has to say, if you have a chance.
      > Peace and Love

      > Nina <murrkis@y...> wrote:
      > Hello, Greg, Jason, Michael L. and all,
      > This weekend, I am taking a workshop with Lisa Clark, who
      > teaches Body Mind Centering. I'm enjoying getting her perspective
      > on the things we are discussing.
      > In yogasana, one learns that one must go down to go up. Lisa
      > Clark is particularly adept at explaining how one meets the
      > earth, engaging it, by "yielding" (language in quotes is from
      > the BMC vocabulary). This is a sattvic state, the balance within
      > contact. When one 'befriends' gravity and does not attempt to
      > "prop" (rajasic resistance) against gravity or "collapse"
      > (tamasic release) into gravity, then there may be felt a
      > rebound of energy upwards through the body. Her way of practicing
      > is such that she always finds her support first, such as the
      > floor or the bolster, and her relation to gravity, and then
      > builds the pose upwards along that rebounding energy.
      > It was curious, however, to wonder where she might place her
      > sense of 'center' (in fact, I might ask this question today).
      > Is it at the source of gravity? In this case, she is placing
      > it outside of her body. Or, is it within her body, perhaps
      > behind the navel, which is something I might guess, knowing
      > a bit more about the biomorphic developmental understandings
      > of Body Mind Centering. (This reminds me of the starfish -
      > a shape that we explored last year at her workshop - many
      > asanas resemble this starfish expression - radiance from the
      > center.) Quite possibly, there are multiple centers at
      > work in the way she practices asana, but I suspect that
      > only one is seen to be the 'source' of the asana.
      > This illustrates how 'center' is movable, and more a matter
      > of 'origin of work' or 'origin of perception'. Greg, it would
      > seem that your center moved the moment you attempted to
      > understand the perspective of the dustmote. My center, when
      > practicing your levitation meditation, was very mobile -
      > and depending on the location of it, my movement and perception
      > of the world altered.
      > This was the main reason it was curious to hear Lisa Clark talk
      > about finding the ground/support first and then building the asana:
      > while playing with the levitation meditation, I also
      > played with finding that ground/support somewhere other than
      > 'on the floor'...
      > 'Origin of work' or 'origin of perception' might be ways of
      > describing that. It reminds me of what Michael L. posted in
      > his website dedicated to Awareness watching awareness. That
      > is most definitely the sense one can get from even a mobile
      > center within the levitation meditation.
    • Show all 21 messages in this topic