@thorninmud It’s terribly difficult to talk about these things because they occur in part of the mind that doesn’t use words, and yet I am trying to use words to describe them. So I include communicating and interpreting in my description and yet that is really my linguistic mind trying to makes sense out of this other kind of interaction with self and world.
I call it a direct interaction with the world. I call it direct communication. I say there is no intervening process—the application of a symbol to a thing out there in the world, and then the conveyance of that symbol using sound or picture or (sometimes) movement to another person, who then retranslates that symbol into some more organic meaning making mechanism.
Direct experience of the world doesn’t have any of that. Because of that, it’s hard to see the difference between us and not us. We are one in a way that I can not use words to describe because it is not as simple as oneness. We are ourselves and yet we are one. How is that possible? Words will not suffice, and worse, they can give the wrong impression. In the end, only personal experience can give you any access to this mode of perception at all.
So please forgive me when I use words like process and interpret. They are analogies to the linguistic mode of understanding and they will always be misleading, I think. I am attempting to do something that may be impossible—which is to describe the wordless experience with words. In this, every word I use is a metaphor. It is not the thing or experience itself. It is removed from the thing or experience. It is in a different world. It is an impossible task.
The dancing I do is in a specific context, using forms/structures/exercises that are designed to get us out of our heads and into our bodies. When we dance from our bodies, without conscious thought—I hesitate to even try to say this, but I don’t know what else to do since I can’t take you dancing—a lot of things happen. I have spoken of one several times before, so I’m not sure I’ll go into it here: doing things you cannot do. Instead I want to talk about the interaction between people in this state of awareness. Perhaps I will also touch on “doing nothing.”
My awareness when dancing tends to be kind of diffuse. I don’t focus on any one thing. I don’t focus on a point in space or on another persons specific body part or on what I am doing. My awareness seems to encompass all these things at once somehow. Because of this, I have an awareness of everyone in the room. It is not through sight or touch. Maybe it is vibrations in the air. Maybe it is an imagined sense of what others are doing because we are all hearing the same music. I don’t know.
When I am dancing with a partner—and this is all improvisation and all with random people we meet up with, male or female, we dance more with each other’s energy than anything else. Somehow I am aware of my partners limbs, even though I can not see them all at once. I can see their facial expression at times, but I see the expression of their entire body
expression, too.
Because I am not in my head, my body and their body meet, somehow, with nothing in between. They might or might not be physically touching, but that makes no difference to the direct connection, via which we transfer knowledge. I am my partner—or that’s how it feels. We both know what the other knows.
Now I do have choices to make. In a recent dance, my partner was not comfortable being close to me. So I balanced her by being farther away. I understood her and I “understood” a whole “story” about her that led to her being this way. A lot of that story was in my word mind, but it was being pumped in there by my no-word mind. I can allow my word-mind to observe and even remember while maintaining the presence of the other mind because I am dancing and my body is doing things and my word mind is not trying to control things.
I call this knowing the other person as myself “direct communication.” And it isn’t just people; it’s an awareness of everything around me, including all the people in the room and what they are doing, and then also what is going on outside the room. I know this is a more energetic kind of way. I don’t know what, specifically, is going on, but I can feel the energy of it.
Sometimes we do an exercise called “doing nothing.” The rule here is that you don’t “do” anything, as in you don’t have an intention to do anything. It cannot come from your word mind. Instead, you start in one position and you are still until your body wants to move in order to become comfortable.
At first, it is difficult because you are thinking and wondering if your body is uncomfortable enough to move to make the kind of change you need to be comfortable. Eventually this goes away as you give yourself permission to just “be.” You move, as necessary, not from any volition, but just because that’s what your body needs. Eventually you start interacting with others and your need for comfort drives that, as well. But all along, you are doing nothing. Something else is moving you. It feels like the movement is coming from outside you, as if possessed somehow.
I don’t think it is possession. I think the movement comes from your body-mind; the no-words mind. But we do communicate with others in this state. We do, I think, process and interpret, except through our bodies, or our body-mind, not our minds (or word-mind). But the processing is body processing. It’s not like mind processing. It is hard to be aware of, although the body-mind is aware. It is even possible to have the though-mind be a tiny bit aware, but if you let it out too much, it can block the body-mind out. Then you are thinking again, and planning and interpreting in a cognitive way. Which is fine, but of a very different nature from body awareness thinking.
I agree with @dabbler that we are talking about the same, or at least similar experience. I think the problem is in not so much how we define concepts as why we choose to use words here and not there. I think it is useful to call what the non-word mind does “thinking.” I think that because I want to communicate to skeptics. I do not think of these things as religion of any kind, although I think the various technologies for achieving these states of mind are brought to us mainly by religions. I see these methods for getting to these states of awareness as “spiritual technologies.”
Spiritual, of course, can be a scary word to many. For me, it is this state that I get into through the dance. It is an awareness and an understanding of how I connect to everything. It is that feeling of oneness. We are all connected, although I don’t believe a lot of people understand that. They think that what they do might affect anyone or thing withing ten feet of them, but they don’t either see or believe that it has consequences much much farther away. If you have a feeling of connection with much more than yourself, or if you experience oneness as a thing, not a thought, that, to my mind, is what spirituality is all about.