The biological Self: petty; cruel

Submitted by pin_cushion on
Printer-friendly version

Forgive me for not remembering exactly where it is that Marnia said this, but, I remember an article or something in the book where she talks about how the biological self is very petty and cruel. Believe this!

When I read "Peace", I felt that it offered a world of insight into relations between men and women. Some of Marnia's ideas are clearly backed up by science, and others require that I trust her intuition or rely on her personal experience.

I was visiting a young lady yesterday; once I began paying attention, it is self-evident. I understand that in the past, I have always put my selfish biological impulses ahead of everything, and my relationships turned out like ****. In my efforts to make my relationships better, I have spent time reading books about love and sex, most of which emphasize winning strategies for playing biology's mating game: in other words, how to score, not how to love somebody. While I understood the material, I just couldn't see myself eagerly looking forward to going out for 'hunting'. One day, I came across "Peace". With its overall message of opening up your heart and *loving* someone, as opposed to just thinking about what should I do to score with her, "Peace" is a breath of fresh air; a light in the dark wilderness. I feel like I've finally come across some information that I can put to use to make my world a better place.

Anyhow, I was visiting a young lady. I was keeping in mind to show her love; to not worry about giving in to my biological impulses, because I know that once I "use" her, she will be "used up" almost instantatenously and I will be moving on. Consciously thinking about this, my mind kept coming up with all matter of excuses of why she didn't deserve my love and affection. Then, my biological self let me have it with fear and self-loathing: it told me that I won't be happy with her; it told me that it's silly to try to *love* someone; it told me that it's time to eat the cookies and move on. The toughest part was when I kissed her and my biological self wanted me to let go and "feel her up". I was very mindful that every time I touched her, I was doing it for her, not for me.

To make an analogy, think of the story of Buddha's enlightenment under the Bodhi tree. The story is that he sat under a Bodhi tree for years having sworn that he would not get up until he became enlightened. As he came close to becoming enlightened, Mara ( a malevolent Hindu deity ) unleashed upon him all matter of demons and monsters to distract him from his noble effort. We can think of the cruel, petty biological self as being like Mara and the primitive impulses as being like demons and monsters here.

I don't think of them as "cruel"

I prefer to think of biology as impersonal, instead. You simply have programs in your brain which are good for getting you to procreate, but they happen to be very BAD at other things. Fortunately, your brain can do a lot of different things (thanks, also, to biology!) if you will only put the effort in to train it.

Marnia and I argue over this a lot.:-P There's a certain kind of truth in seeing biology as cruel, but after all biology is just a concept, not a person. I don't like the feeling that something is out to get me, so I just don't think of it that way!

Take your pick

Some of us like to engage our emotions in the process! Yes, evolution is impersonal, but "anthropomorphizing" it can serve a valid purpose in helping us detach, to move into "observer" mode, and to stop assuming that every urge is coming from our actual *will.*

It's almost like having two voices inside, one the mammalian brain's programs, which are like reflexes and don't take consequences into account - and the other something closer to the real *you,* the one who *can* choose, and *can* think about consequences.

For some it works to imagine that these are two separate things - even though, as Mitsiky points out - both are products of our own brain and mind.

I say, "whatever works for you." Obviously, Buddha also anthropomorphized the conflict between them, by calling the limiting thoughts 'demons,' so he found it a useful metaphor. On the other hand, it's always empowering to realize that no matter how much they *feel* like uninvited demons, they are actually your own creations. This means there's no real reason to fear them. They aren't someone else *doing* something nasty to you. Since you made 'em, you can tame 'em.

If it helps to imagine you're in a sort of video game, battling the "enemy," then go for it. Just never let the experience cause you unnecessary fear about "evil spirits beyond your control."

It is worth pointing out

It is worth pointing out that the brain is merely a process; not the 'cause' of the state of somebody's perception and creation of reality. This has been demonstrated through OBE's where people upon apparently dying for a few moments; gave detailed accounts of what appeared in the room and beyond the sight of where their 'brain' could see.

Interestingly however, I feel that there is a somewhat dialectical process between the brain and the mind; the two can reinforce the patterns of each other - and if one is not active in monitoring the mind; then an auto-pilot mode is seemingly initiated and we end up in our hormonal cycles. The brain is affectivley a neuronal tree of knowledge; and the chemical compounds are its default language. We can either grow a tree of ego and animalistic desire; or grow the tree of transcendent gnosis that lies just subtly and reverberates behind the psycho-somatic consciousness. We then become true to our mystical nature.

What is nature anyway? Is nature really OUR nature?

Great post

It's always good to be reminded that we can use the mind to impact the brain...or else just let that mammalian brain programming sweep us around like a single-minded invisible broom.