If biological arousal is basic to individual awareness (allowing for but not commenting on metaphysical consciousness), then sustained concentration as a learned ability is prior to relaxation as a learned, and self-sustainable, ability. Without a certain level of competence in concentration, periods of sustained meditation lead one into mental torpor, sleepiness, or distraction. In such a case, relaxed equanimity is not possible even if one does not feel particularly dissatisfied (and therefore motivated to become relaxed). Restful sleepiness is restful and necessary, but I do not consider that to be meditation.
If intentional concentration and intentional relaxation as attentional skills can be distinguished from each other, then mindfulness may be defined as the balance between focus and receptivity. The more we familiarize ourselves with crossing the lines between concentration and relaxation, the more adept we become at intentionally shifting between different levels of arousal and different mental states, the more we are able to bring receptivity and focus into the same intentional mental state. (This categorization may raise questions about how samatta meditation is both concentrative and relaxing, but I believe these questions can be adequately addressed from a neurobiological perspective once the information has been compiled.)
When we are beginning practice in mindfulness, as with beginning practice in almost anything else, we often practice at a fairly low level of intensity. Most people don’t start off with 30-day Rinzai Zen retreats where 14 hours each day are spent in meditation with someone walking around with a stick, helping people stay awake and aware with occasional, “compassionate” whacks. As our familiarity grows, our capacity for consistent intensity grows. As a sidebar, it is always possible to experience intense “peak” moments, but these are noticeable as unchosen and not sustainable by attempting to sustain them. Once mindfulness is fairly well-established, we tend to look to add intensity to our periods of sitting meditation and/or to spread our moments of mindfulness out into daily activities (walking, breathing, cooking, etc.) other than sitting meditation. (It may be common for people to practice “mindfulness” without beginning with sitting meditation, but there are significant effects due to changes in proprioception that come from periods of sitting. Phenomenologically, sitting meditation has a stabilizing effect that is hard to come by without some consistent form of discipline.)
In looking for flow–either in peak moments or at the stage of Clarity–we add intensity to our balance between receptivity and focus. This has the effects outlined in the book Flow. Familiarizing oneself with the state of flow helps in recognizing harmony. Flow is to Clarity what harmony is to the stage of Nonconceptuality. The relationship between flow and harmony is described by differences in intensity of moments of accord, by the experience of self and “no-self”, and by one’s discernment of activity that either does or does not fit with the situation. Consider the difference between being able to play one’s own instrument well (flow) and being able to play one’s instrument well with others who are playing different instruments similarly well (harmony).
In flow, we may manifest fluidity, one may be in harmony, but this is different than having the wisdom, vision, ability, and equanimity to orchestrate harmony. In states where one concentrates through a sense of self (like flow), there is still a great deal of referencing the self. This is somewhat misunderstood since flow states often subsume awareness of self in awareness of activity. This shows a certain limitation in one’s awareness. One’s relationship to this limitation changes through Nonconceptuality and Abiding. So with Clarity, we reach into flow by referencing the self. What I mean by that is we move towards flow by moving into a particular activity (concentrating) or by moving away from aspects of awareness that we recognize as not-flow (relaxing).
Experience in the stage of Clarity often includes more intense moments, or longer stretches of intensity, than those experienced in Understanding and Appreciation. (While this feels like greater intensity, it may actually be that one’s attention is simply more focused, less distracted or diffuse, more clear without necessarily being more intense. I believe the clarity is more important–whether or not it is more basic–than the intensity at this stage.) While one is not thinking about oneself as much as in Understanding, and one is not intentionally focusing on something other than thoughts–as in Appreciation and some kinds of mindfulness practice–activity is still largely self-directed. This activity is directed more by a sense of psychological balance, progress, or rightness than by understanding or judgmental thinking perhaps, but with moving into Nonconceptuality, conscious attention continues to expand and refine. Clarity is defined by the ability to focus in such a way as to find flow. In Nonconceptuality, smaller numbers from a greater variety of more and less intense cues take on a greater meaning which is more easily assimilated and addressed “immediately”. Moments of flow do not need to be sought as if conditions at any moment are not right as they are.
With harmony, one references one’s familiarity with flow to a greater extent rather than stretching into flow based on self-experience. The achievement is harmony through flow rather than flow through right concentration/activity. As right concentration becomes more familiar, more second nature (based on familiarity with flow) awareness available for receptivity increases. As bliss and the “lightness of being” become more familiar, more consistent, it takes less concentration to find accord. There is more of the feeling that accord arises or simply is. It seems to take less effort and allow greater diversity. The particular certainty that comes of this experience is an increasingly profound peace and an ease of movement. The experience of flow, profundity, peace, and accord–along with pervasive awareness of bliss, impermanence, and lightness–is the harmony of Nonconceptuality.
Purpose shifts as clarity of awareness comes with less effort. Clarity loses some of its impetus as a “should”, is recognized as more of a given, and becomes less of something one wants and more of something one wants to share as a gift for/with others. Clarity becomes less of a special mental state and more of an embodied mode of being. As one allows, instead of achieves, this in oneself, it becomes apparent in other people and larger situations. It is also possible to first notice clarity externally–as with art or nature mysticism–and then bring it into one’s intention.
With Clarity, even though one experiences moments of “no-self”, one is not necessarily able to communicate or share these moments. Like watching Michael Jordan play basketball, watching someone else in such a state can be entrancing, but I would argue that trance is different than flow. Michael could entrance with his performance early in his career, but it took a long time for him to learn how to harmonize his flow states with his teammates’ activity. Being in flow without sharing it has been called the “Michael Jordan effect”. His teammates, fans, and very often his opponents, would watch in amazement rather than participate directly. In meditation traditions, the “Michael Jordan effect” can be seen in how people relate to guru figures. So Jim Jones may be charismatic or entrancing, but his actions are not in accord with society at large or even with his own teachings or desires. Flow without harmony allows the phenomenon of charisma. So we have Charles Manson influencing cult members and Patty Hearst picking up a machine gun. This effect can be relatively inconsequential, as with MJ and the Bulls repeatedly thrashing the Knicks, or it can affect the course of global history, such as when Constantine incorporated the Christian church into the Roman power structure. This phenomenon is noticeable in the difference between radicalism and the positive aspects of bourgeois, middle-class values. Radicalism is intense and enticing, but ultimately a poor ideology on which to raise a family or perform as a team.
As we move from flow into harmony, we begin reconciling the differences between joy and peace. Think of how it feels to be joyful and how it feels to be peaceful. These are different internal states, although aspects of peacefulness may be noticeable in joyful moments and aspects of joyfulness may be noticeable in relatively peaceful moments. Jumping out of an airplane is different than relaxing on the sand at the beach. Harmony brings peace and joy closer together just as mindfulness brings receptivity and focus closer together.
Equanimity reconciles the differences–phenomenological, neurobiological, social, narrative–between joy and peace. This is why I consider harmony and discernment to be the hallmarks of Nonconceptuality and equanimity to be the hallmark of Abiding. One must have developed discernment and flow in order to be able to enact harmony. But as long is there is some remaining desire for consistent or profound peace, for any greater depth of experience or connection, one may have achieved a great deal of balance without having fully developed complete equanimity. Further solidification or integrity and greater ease are possible and must be intentionally pursued to be achieved. One continues to deepen. With depth comes power and tenderness.
Charisma is difficult to get a handle on when one cannot distinguish between one-pointed concentration and flow as compared to equanimity. It is easy to mistake singlemindedness for flow and flow for equanimity.
There is a subtle difference that stands out at the level of Abiding. As one stabilizes one’s awareness of equanimity, it is possible to choose to remain. This is evidenced by a preference for stillness, silence, stability. This is like choosing peace over joy. When saints focus heavily on peace without enacting harmony in the world at large, they choose peace over joy. When charismatics choose joy over peace, and when radicals choose intensity over peace, they do not achieve harmony. In all three cases, preference marks out a lack of profundity, equanimity. These people evidence confidence, faith, serenity, peacefulness, charisma, etc., but they lack harmony with the entirety of this world.
When one chooses mobile or spontaneous Abiding, neither joy nor peace is subsumed or prioritized. If one chooses joy over peace, equanimity is not fulfilled or completed. If one chooses peace over joy, realization may be genuine but is not so resplendent.
Psychological effortlessness comes with complete commitment. Without thoroughly realizing Abiding, one still stretches ideologically or effortfully. This will leave radicals straining in their endeavors, saints stuck on their mountains, and pundits diminishing the larger human potential by expounding limiting or particularist belief systems.
It is not that the self needs to be annihilated but that joy wants complete actualization. Complete actualization of joy is evident in spontaneous and abiding equanimity. When one fully realizes joy, spirit is not something different than the world. Reality does not allow room for absolute divisions between divinity, individuals, and the physical world. There are no gaps through which we can escape from reality, actuality, divinity, or whatever words we use to describe tathata, what is and is not.
Copyright Todd Mertz