0: The beginning

This blog is the fulfillment of my long-term dream. Its content will include  systematic and careful work directed to explore and describe human perception. The goal is extremely difficult since my "methodology" is literally my own experience enhanced by years of intensive meditation practice. During the last years I have experienced a series of insights which radically transformed my experience. According to Reginald Ray, I am understanding this process as the transformation of my nervous system. During my Anthropology studies I made qualitative research of several religious communities. This specific field triggered my engagement into various spiritual techniques and undergo  attempt to describe the nature of their mechanisms.  Because of my interests I read a lot of religious and spiritual literature devoted to the methods of spiritual work. Over the years of my studies I have tried to distinguish between the cultural layers and  purely technical methods wrapped in these layers. According to the term created by R. Sharf it is possible to study the  "spiritual technologies” according to their quality, processuality and efficiency. This kind of studies implies to practice these techniques myself. It’s very similar to learning horsemanship, archery, juggling but on a cognitive level. So, the challenge is very subtle and requires a lot of intelligent effort.

I think that cultural anthropology is the only discipline which allows someone to explore and study the spirituality without reductionist frames grounded in quantitative sciences. The knowledge generated by quantitative sciences is just a set of artifacts when it comes to spiritual technologies.

I believe that the approach I propose makes it possible to break through the impasse which inhibit the development of humanities. Humanities have reached the edge of their current range. If we want to go further, we need to transform our experience via spiritual techniques. This whole issue is overloaded with prejudices that arise from both positivist and postmodern paradigms. It all comes from the natural inability of the human mind which is entrapped in ego, desire, naturalized language borders and, in general, leftbrain processing. We have reached the edge of our cognitive condition and we need to transform it in order to move further on.

The ideas of "objectivity" established by quantitative procedures and "subjecticity" grounded in postmodern approach are both extremes. These two extreme categories are just inhibitory and useless if we cannot establish a genuine study of the human interior. They are like crutches. It is necessary to put them aside in order to move forward. The key is to accept the spiritual techniques as scientific methodology. In fact, bodymind and life itself need to become the tool of effective and progressive  studies. It is necessary to reshape your own life to make these study  possible. Here lies the main problem and challenge: one must continually let go of all the attachments and illusions to go beyond ego and the so called "dust of the world". Of course, this "going beyond" is very elusive and dynamic.

It's important to understand it not as the ultimate goal, but as a constant effort. Only then one is able to explore and study his or her own experience and perception. The initial condiction is to escape from the egoic perspective. Then, one becomes able to "see the things as they are", and it is neither difficult nor impossible as it may look like. After years of intelligent and fervent practice one is able to perceive raw sensory/cognitive data. This is the main clue of this bussines which opens the door to depth study. In other words one become able to experience his or her own thoughts and body sensations in a direct way. Moreover ,one become able to study the dialectic relation between bodymind and Reality, between bodyminds of interacting people and between bodymind and bodymind. Also, I would insolently say that one become able to read literally all the rules of the world from him/herself experience. I will try to show it in the following posts.

We need to break through all the linguistic  "white noise" which is generated by modern humanities. The postmodern approach has several advantages but it is also looped and trapped inside its own, negativistic discourse. On the other side, people believe that the only alternative lies in careful, and mostly descriptive, studies which include the complex ritual of quoting the prestigious scholars and so on. It is just another trap. I don't want to negate all modern humanities. My attempt is to create a new, even ever-new alternative and break through the impasse described above.  

On the following posts I will try to outline my approach from various perspectives. I believe that I can offer much to other practitioners and I would be extremely happy to create a healthy and deep dialogue between the practitioners from various religious and secular traditions. Each of my posts is open to discussion and cooperation. I humbly ask anyone who could enrich my work to send some opinions and/or critique.

After all it is not the great mission, but mostly passion and  the need to share and discuss. The most important assumption which lies behind all of my careful attempts is: my approach is strictly technical and phenomenological.

This is it.