Each and every person, culture, philosophy, and religion has a particular “fingerprint”. While change is constantly occurring, these fingerprints allow us to recognize psychic continuation or identity. If we admit constant change, our ideas may be able to make identity explicit without making identity limiting.
In order to make accurate comparisons that do not dissuade progress, it is helpful to have at least five characteristics or aspects available for comparison. But I believe that using six is more desirable since a sixth allows greater appreciation of the concrete present. The importance of this numerology has been expressed in esoteric numerology, but can be explored and defined by cognitive science, tying into short-term memory limitations, digits (fingers and toes), and senses. Esoteric numerology–whether disliked or enjoyed–developed from the matrix of interaction between human body and mind. We may be able to discover the appeal of nostalgia, superstition, astrology, and numerology by developing cognitive science, or on the other hand, we can simply enjoy the metaphorical and somewhat nonspecific nature–admitting connections between metaphor, narrative, and intuition–if we can appreciate intuition or being “in the flow”.
The six aspects that I suggest, properly understood, sidestep personal reluctance to engage and unnecessary sectarian disputes. They are chosen for offering individuals and groups the opportunity at any moment for exploring spiritual solutions to any sort of problem. In the same way that mathematics is set on a system of tens because of our bodies, these characteristics are described as they are because they grew out of an appreciation of multiple cultural and religious backgrounds as expressed by many phenomenal individuals–the human corporate cultural “body” or human history and actuality.
These six aspects are not closed or immobile categories, rather they are recognized through one’s experience of exploring what they stand for. In other words, the words used to designate these categories are the symbols that direct us to finding out the identity of the actual aspects through personal exploration and development of one’s capacity to understand and utilize these aspects. Or, I could say that they are only valuable insofar as you are capable of finding them valuable. But this is true for everything we consider. This paper is an exploration and explication of metacognition (in cognitive science terms) but could also be taken as a discussion on spiritual potential.
Briefly and most simply, these six aspects are: mindfulness, will, understanding, practice, depth, and communion. These are common to all people, all cultures, all religions, but they are expressed in an infinite number of ways. Because these are experienced by individuals, these characteristics overlap and interact. The human neurophysiological system is complex, and so are our experiences of life. For our concepts to be communicable, they must necessarily be simplifications of experience or reality. For our concepts to be somewhat accurate to experience, they must be somewhat complex and flexible. Please address these concepts as complex and flexible as you consider whether they are worthwhile of further consideration.
Mindfulness is best seen as the Sanskrit word tathata. This can be translated as suchness or actuality. We can say that while one’s experience of tathata or capacity for mindfulness develops, it is also possible to say that tathata is always simply what it is. When an individual is in tune with tathata or “expresses” tathata, we can say that individual is mindful, and we will likely see their actions as spontaneous. I use tathata since it is a fairly new word for most people. It would be possible to use reality, but reality tends to be taken in an abstract manner, and it may imply unreality to some readers. Tathata includes “concrete” sensations, abstractions, that which exists, and that which can be called nonexistent.
Will is nearly impossible to describe adequately, but we can think of it as "personal psychological force". In developing clarity of will, one develops an experience and possibly an understanding of what Buddhists call emptiness (sunyata: objective term) and also selflessness (anatta: semi-subjective term). Will may be seen as the same for everyone in the sense that it does not describe the individual self but it is common to everyone. Will is something like “force”–we may describe individuals as strong- or weak-willed, but we need to include other characteristics in order to recognize them. So we can see will as personal force.
Understanding is comprehension, the ability to know along with knowing. It is most accurate to say that one’s understanding is complex and often involves being able to take various perspectives. Because of the “messy” nature of development, we very often hold very strong contradictions within our understanding. Understanding can be seen to develop into wisdom. In some cases, one’s understanding is very direct and personal and in others it is relatively systemic or dispassionate.
Practice is also close to actuality, suchness. We may distinguish mindfulness as awareness of tathata and practice as full-bodied interaction of tathata. Practice connects actions with the rest of these aspects. In one sense of the word, as in “my practice”, practice describes one’s personal path. In a similar sense of the word, we can see one’s practice as intentional expression. Every action is more or less intentional. As one’s practice develops, one aligns actions with intention. One of the connotations that comes with practice is the idea and actuality of consistency. In order to align actions with attention, it is necessary to develop consistency with the help of will. When actions fit with intention rather than impulse, we can say that one’s practice fits one’s understanding. For some people mindfulness is purposefully included in one’s practice, while for others, mindfulness is more natural and is not so directly tied to will and understanding.
Depth means many things to many people. Depth may be seen as exemplified in Islam. Islam includes an emphasis that God is One. (How does one realize this oneness?) If we concentrate on oneness rather than whether or not God exists, believers can speak of God and one’s connection with God while nonbelievers can speak of oneness or depth. I use “depth” in order to include various viewpoints rather than to show personal preference; in speaking with individuals or groups, I am happy to use the word God or divinity instead. We can recognize that there is the possibility of developing one’s personal “depth” if one believes in God, if one believes in atheistic enlightenment or nonduality, and also if one believes in neither.
Communion is relationship. Communion includes but is not limited to: love, compassion, etc. Predators and prey make for intimate communion. Without predators to limit population size of their prey, populations of non-predatory animals are limited by disease, internal struggles, and starvation. Without enough prey, predators starve. So predators and prey are in communion, mother and child are in communion, opposing armies are in intimate communion, it may be said that everything that exists is in communion.
Each individual and group has a particular fingerprint or character. Some have strengths where other have weaknesses concerning these aspects. It makes sense to me to appreciate and develop one’s strengths while one appreciates and develops one’s weaknesses. We all might have something to learn from those who are strong where we are weak.
In any given situation, there are spiritual solutions that are suggested by different individuals and traditions for various problems. Depending on development and ability, it is possible to improve the situation by any type of suggestion, although some attempts are more effective than others. In some situations it makes the best sense to explore our relative weaknesses and in some situations, it makes better sense to rely on our relative strengths. Choosing wisely expresses our relative understanding and choosing foolishly tests our mettle and offers an opportunity to grow in spirit–or metacognition. Describing metacognitive development is different in some ways from describing spirituality. Obviously, cognitive science is different than religious traditions and wisdom traditions. But they all come from the same corporate body of human history, culture, resilience, and individuality. It is possible to develop our understanding by including both idioms, both traditions. In developing conscious understanding, we can develop the possibility of mutual understanding, communion, clarity and serenity of will, appreciation in mindfulness, consistency of practice, and depth or union.
Utilizing these six aspects makes it possible to believe in a world of unbelievers without crusading or looking for apocalypse and makes it possible to be a “nonbeliever” in a world where so many people are religiously inclined without confusing religious dogma with the human beings who often support religious dogma. This allows us to appreciate those who are different from us, to learn from them, but also to affirm our individuality, our communal traditions, our personal beliefs, and our varied lifestyles. Most conflicts arise from a lack of mindfulness, but problems arise from a lack in any of these aspects. A focus on problems keeps us focused on what we have already seen or on conflict, and it can be helpful to learn to appreciate reality rather than avoiding or solving problems. In developing appreciation for reality, we will unavoidably address problems, but in addressing problems, we may not develop appreciation for reality.
Copyright 2007 Todd Mertz