Thoughts on Unification

[gullindagan]

I've been reading Egil's Saga the last few days, and in my scrying and meditation work, the situation whereby Norway was united under Harald Fairhair keeps popping up. Historians now debate whether or not Harald was a real, historical king, or in fact multiple kings, but that's rather beside the point. At this time in Europe, it seemed like the cosmic tides were turning towards the unification of many petty kingdoms under one King, whereby the petty kings became "earls" or other such titled king's men instead of kings in their own right. This contrasts with the end of the Western Roman era just a half a millennium or so earlier, where the united Roman empire (which had already split up into 2 sections) had been carved up by various barbarian warlords.

So Harald, whether in fact he was one or many, saw what was happening in other countries, his opportunity that he had as a young warlord to subordinate other kingdoms to his will, and set upon task with great commitment. The legend is that he vowed never to brush or cut his hair until the whole of Norway was united under his rule. This is why he is now known as "fair hair" - after he conquered all of Norway, he cut and combed his hair and it was beautiful. Or at least more beautiful than the giant beaver tail dread he probably had during his campaign. In effect, he rode the cosmic tides. There could have been a different young, enterprising, ruthless man to subdue the rest of his neighboring kings, but Harald had the Will, and he had the Luck. 

It seems to me that Harald's vow was a magical act, a physical demonstration of his unified will. There is a much later Danish philosopher who I admire but haven't read much of who titled one of his books Purity of Heart is to Will One Thing. The title alone is such a powerful statement. And it seems to me that Will and Luck are intimately tied. One could say True Will, Aeon, or even just Purpose to express that current of power and meaning that each soul is a part of. When one aligns their actions with their highest purpose, that is when the magic can really happen, as they say. To me, this is why things like journaling, reflection, self inquiry, time alone (which "utiseta" can fit in) are so important for somebody on a spiritual path, this is how conflicting desires can be witnessed and sorted out. How can you know your purpose if you don't even know yourself?

This brings me to reflect on a period in my life where I was practicing Buddhist meditation very enthusiastically. Specifically, I was practicing Culadasa's The Mind Illuminated system, and meditating up to 8 hours a day for periods of time. The kind of meditation taught in the book was a form of "samata-vipassana", where the first several levels were all about unifying the mind. "Samadhi" in fact means "unified mind", and this was all about concentration, which means "to bring to a common center." "Analytic "meditation, which is basically the same thing as "discursive" meditation was also a suggested practice as part of this system, and also the study of ethics, and I did both of these, often meditating on the 8 fold path and various other parts of the Buddhist system. The point of the concentration meditation was to get the mind to a point where it was unified, with all the conflicting voices, desires, etc, subordinated to the purpose of meditation. Then there was supposed to be a "jhana" with lots of pleasure that came from intense concentration, and in that concentration, one practiced "vipassana".

If one does any amount of reflection or self-inquiry, it is easy to see how disunified the mind usually is. I like Ouspensky's diagram of the "many I's" as a representation of all the conflicting desires, "egos" or selves that constitute what we usually consider our own "self." Here of course, one might investigate who is doing the looking.

But to come back to Culadasa, over a year and a half I put in a lot of work into this system(hundreds of hours of meditation) only to realize that I didn't really agree with the basic underpinnings of it, and I wouldn't be able to progress unless I basically became a monk, which conflicted with my purpose in this world (this is despite the book claiming that one could do it with just one hour a day of meditation - maybe for some, but not for me) I did learn a lot of self control though, a lot about Buddism and a lot about myself. What really put the nail in the casket for working Culadasa's system was that it came out that this jolly old fellow who claimed to have unified his mind, and practiced the Buddhist ethics, turned out to have stolen collective money to hire sex workers. Now I don't really think there's anything wrong with hiring sex workers for instance, but for somebody to have practiced this system for many years and then end up performing acts from an unethical self that damaged his relationships, career and reputation meant to me that this system did not really work the way I thought it did. It seems to me that if you dominate your other selves into submission, they just scurry off to Iceland to wait for your weakest moment to come back, stronger than ever.

This is one reason that I like the Western Mystery Tradition, and the Northern Tradition. They see the "lower" selves as valid, with purposes of their own, and seeks not to repress them, but rather to integrate them. This is the point of "shadow work." This is (one of) the point(s) of journaling, scrying and meditation, and ritual work. This is why taking the slow and steady approach is also so powerful and important. It takes a lot of time, and it takes commitment, but learning to listen to yourself(s) is crucial, so they don't surprise you on down the road. It does continue to intrigue me as to who, or what, I really am though...

Comments

[ari_ormstunga]

A very interesting post. The idea of meditating for eight hours at a time is fairly bonkers to me; I've made it about 45 minutes meditating discursively but most days I'm dragging my mind back to the day's topic like an unruly horse the whole time. I sometimes think that I am ill-suited to my chosen path, but I am far too stubborn to ever quit.

[gullindagan]

Well it was broken up into sitting and walking, and I did analytic too, and this was just for a period of time (a self retreat). And the main practice consisted of keeping the attention on the breath. But yeah it's a little nuts. I didn't go crazy though, so that's good. Apparently doing Samatha is less risky than just starting out with Vipassana. I did build concentration to a very high level during those retreats too though, but one of the things I learned is that it doesn't stay that high. There was a period after the retreat where my concentration was much higher than before, but it would just settle back down after a while.

Dragging the mind back to the day's topic is still a common experience for me, and I think a common experience for most people who meditate. That's just the nature of the beast. It does seem to be rewarding enough to put up with the frustration and the boredom though. Stubbornness, or at least perseverance, is an important trait for a successful spiritual path it seems to me.

[otter_girl]

Harald Fairhair’s beaver tail dread, and the selves scurrying off to Iceland, waiting for their chance to conquer “my” kingdom convey two points so humorously:

Determination is a powerful force, but do please apply it wisely. Piss off the crew on your ship, and you will regret it bitterly. If not now, eventually. They will thoroughly ransack your life.

I was re-reading Galina Krasskova’s take on the soul parts when I checked in for your previous post. Synchronicity!

When I think back to my youth, and my conviction that my current personality was/is an independent, unchanging sort of reality, I feel positively claustrophobic.

Thanks for the thoughtful essays. I’m still chortling about that mutinous crew biding their time in Iceland…

Valerie

[gullindagan]

Thank you for the kind words, and nice synch! I love it when that happens. I think you've hit the nail on the head with your synopsis.

[jprussell]

Another thoughtful and engaging post!

When it comes to the historicity of Harald Fairhair, I don't know much about his specific case, but I am generally wary of recent scholarship that tries to make out influential figures as being made up or amalgamations of people. It strikes me as often taking the "trends and forces" school of historical scholarship too far by denying that there were ever important/influential individuals unless the documentation leaves us no choice but to admit they existed and yes, their decisions had impacts on the course of history.

The idea that (true) Will and Luck are tightly bound up is an intriguing one, worth meditating on.

Also, I agree with Ari above - that's a bonkers amount of meditation, but I can definitely see how it was good training for concentration. I agree on "judging the tree by its fruits" and on the usefulness of acknowledging and working to integrate the shadow/body/"lower" self.

Your entire framing of this post also points to something that I think is often lacking in western attempts to learn/practice Buddhism: mythology. Here, I'm using it in a broad meaning that includes history that might be approached like mythology, as a spiritually useful metaphor (like the Harald story above). I don't know Culadasa's system or whether it delved into the history or mythology of Buddhism, but I know that I have found an incredible depth and richness in meditating on mythological themes that I never did when treating meditation primarily as a means of developing concentration or awareness. I think one of the strengths and draws of mythology (especially northern mythology) is the inclusion of all of that earthy, shadowy, "lower" stuff in a spiritually valid context.

[gullindagan]

Well thank you, glad you enjoyed it. I also tend to see Harald and other such figures as historical individuals, but I can also see how there's a bit of a fuzzy area with semi-legendary figures. I liked using the "one-many" thing though as a rhetorical device for this particular essay :-D I also personally would rather consider him a real, historical, figure, as he is ostensibly an ancestor of mine. All of the later Norwegian kings claimed descent from him, and he, as a Ynglinger, claimed descent from Yngvie-Freyr. This is where things can get a little fuzzy, but in a way it doesn't really matter. The myth is more real than fact. And we are all descended from divinity as the Rigsthula expresses!

I also have found meditating on myths to be very productive, and while there are some fantastic Buddhist myths (the Pali cannon has quite a few for instance) they don't seem to be utilized by the Western teachers. It's quite sterile really. Also doing retreats with teachers is impossible unless you're wealthy or have enough oppression points for scholarships. That's why I did self retreats and considered going to a monestary: I had time but no money.

The myths feed images to my subconscious which, with scrying, dreamwork and meditation allows for a conscious conversation with the subconscious, where all those "lower" selves dwell. Yeah, way better than ignoring everything but the sensations of breath at the nose. At least in my case.