Thereisaguidanceforeachofus,andbylowlylisteningwe
shallheartherightword.
RalphWaldoEmerson(1803–1882)1 Everyday life presents different sized problems. Ideally, we address them with a seamless blend of procedural skills led by our top-down and bottom-up forms of attentiveness. Liv-ing Zen cultivates this natural, flexible, balanced, best-of-both-worlds approach. Over the decades, an increasingly clear consciousness begins to see through the many veils
infused with unbidden impressions that had previously obscured our vision. Hindsight and foresight let us begin to appreciate our implicit inclusion within the environment
“out there” as IT really is, right now.
Unfortunately, a hectic twenty-first-century culture keeps us missing this “big picture.” Daily, we’re entangled not only with words that are spoken and printed on paper, but now with blizzards of words generated on electronic screens. Overwhelmed in such a world, it’s too easy to fall back on the assumption that the way to solve all complex problems is to use words that we can hear ourselves think, consciously. (After all, if we think these word-thoughts, most must really be true. And if we also say them, they really are true).
Reviewed elsewhere are decades of evidence that sug-gests otherwise [ZB: 358–386; SI: 153–173, 183–188].2 Indeed, our brain often proceeds surprisingly well, thank you, as soon as we start to let go of our high-minded linguistic ap-proach and get out of our own intrusive way. Then, in soli-tude, what do we rediscover? Our lower pathways of “lowly listening.” These wordless insights are our guidance tems. They are innate, tacit, intelligent, Self-correcting sys-tems. Using covert modes of processing, their codes confer
“right” choices intuitively, silently. Sotto voce hunches tap levels of implicit comprehension. These have yet to coalesce into words that we can hear ourselves think.3
• Explore diverse practices that, by minimizing the
intrusive Self, allow your highly competent auto
maticpilottooperateintuitively,insightfully.
Is this why the Zen approach to meditative training tends to favor a style of “no-thought,” silent, global, attentive processing?
Thepathsleadingtowardinsight-wisdomseemtohavebeen
discoveredcenturiesbeforeZenarrived.Thefactthatintuitiveca-pacities emerge from lowly silent listening probably began as a
soft,empiricalobservationinmanylandsandspiritualdisciplines.
Generationssinceappeartohaverediscoveredthesepathsempiri-cally[ZB:633–636].WhenEmersonspokeofbeingguidedbysuch
“lowlylistening,”hebeganbysayingthatinoureverydayeffortsit
would prove fruitless to exercise only our [top-down] willpower
alone. Why? Because that’s not where our real strength comes
from:“Onlyinoureasy,simple,spontaneousactionarewestrong.”
Background: Words that We Hear Ourselves Think, as Distinguished from Silent Modes of Preconscious Processing Table 3 elaborates on the basis for such distinctions. Their attributes are complementary. The table suggests a plausible rationale for a balanced program of meditation. It will be one in which the silent, global forms of spontaneous atten-tive processing could play an increasingly prominent role.
The table blends earlier discussions of preattentive process-ing [ZB: 278–281; SI: 35–39] with a recent review of this im-portant subject by Dijksterhuis and Nordgren.4
The table summarizes the two generic approaches we use when we try to solve difficult problems in daily life. It turns out that our problem-solving performance actually improves when we include covert intervals of intuitive pre-conscious processing. These complement the other intervals during which we can still employ to our advantage some assets of the styles of declarative conscious processing often accompanied by words that we hear ourself think.
Preconscious does not mean something exotic or mysti-cal. Here, it simply refers to one’s potential to include more intuitive mental processes. These subconscious mental pro-cesses can operate highly efficiently at times when no con-sciously heard thought sequences have infiltrated the mental foreground. The neurosciences have not yet adequately mapped the semantic terrain (let alone the neural traffic pat-terns) of such “seemingly no-person-in-there” kinds of deep
Table 3
Complementary Attributes of Conscious and Preconscious Problem Solving
Aspect
comprehension. However, it’s abundantly clear that when no first-person Self intrudes into the procedures of precon-scious processing, intuitive closures and insightful states can then take place with extraordinary speed, skill, and prescience.5
Meanwhile, as this whole field is still in the process of gathering data [SI: 153–173], the contrasts between the con-scious and preconcon-scious styles of processing already give rise to an important testable hypothesis. Let’s state it simply, in the form of a question. When our lower temporo ↔ frontal pathways are less entangled in narrow wordy distractions, will they then become more wide open to engage in the free associations and creative play that give rise to the most adap-tive insights? It is noteworthy that the brain assigns two
major pathways to service a fast-track exchange between our frontal and temporal lobes. In front lies the uncinate fas-ciculus; behind is the superior longitudinal fasciculus.
Centuries of serious Zen training have remained com-patible with paradox, blasphemy, and joyous laughter [ZB:
414 – 415]. Zen’s subtle aspects continue to spring surprises on its unwary trainees, many more than they could possibly imagine at first. A most distinctive aspect of Zen is the way it employs a riddle to entice and baffle the logical, ever-questioning mind. Can the trainees solve this riddle by using their most prized cognitive asset—their conscious, declara-tive thought processes alone?
With this question, we turn in the next chapter to con-sider koan practice at much deeper levels. Here, incubation, re-mindfulness, and lowly listening can be guided by pre-conscious processing.
19