Meditation As A Stage Of Evolution

"Anyone here take the red pill? "

Nice. I'm pretty sure most -- if not ALL -- of us here in the forum have taken the red pill, so to speak.

Let's see how deep the rabbit-hole goes.

"
In its most basic form, natural selection is really only about preserving DNA - the survival of genetic material from one generation to the next, Everything else is just the envelope, so to speak. See Dawkins, et al.

I agree, Jackson, intelligence is like a virus

"

That's how I see it, Chris.

It's weird to me to think that a process like natural selection would lead to sentient life. The universe has literally awakened unto itself, but not due to some plan or purpose. And the more intelligent we become as a species, the more the universe awakens to itself. But our Universe is vast, and probability theory tells us that the likelihood of myriad Universes is very, very good. It possible that there are beings who are already far more intelligent and awake than we are, whether in this Universe or another.

I'm blown away by how impossible all of this initially seems. It really is awe-inspiring.

**Of course, not everyone jibes with this view. It's just the way I see things.**

"Yes. Without a sense of being a differentiated, self-organizing system, the organism wouldn't have much of a survival instinct. "

yeah-- that's sort of how I always understood the term "non-dual", as in not an experience of oceanic oneness and not an experience of separateness, but more like non-separate difference. The Ocean is a Wave is the Ocean is the Wave, and emphasising the wave side more when I gotta do something or communicate and the ocean side when I can just "rest"-- but without excluding either side. That sort of flexibility which doesn't lose either half the equation seems to be where my practiceis trending, but maybe it's really different for others, I don't know!

"One thing that people tend to forget about "evolution by natural selection" is that (in theory) it isn't really all that concerned with individual survival. Rather, the behaviors seen to carry an evolutionary advantage are those that keeps one's genetic material going in the system. Violent and Aggressive behaviors may result in death at an earlier age. But, in polygynous societies (which has been the norm for the greater part of human history), where multiple having multiple "wives" was the rule rather than the exception, men who were aggressive and violent may have been better and defeating their competition. If being aggressive means getting laid and having offspring, dying early isn't much of a consequence (in an evolutionary sense; not in terms of the conscious human psyche)."

If you look at animal behavior, it is often the case that the dominant male in the lion pride, say, will be the only one allowed to mate and produce offspring. If another male comes into the territory and knocks this guy off his throne, the newcomer will then systematically kill the deposed lion king's cubs, in order to replace them with his own in a season or two. The other males can hunt, but they eat last. In other words, the majority of the males are marginalized in favor of the biggest, strongest and presumably meanest and scariest of the males.

You have to wonder whether this kind of structure was the way of the world for, say, australopithecus and our other direct ancestors.
(BTW, what's more fascinating than paleoanthropology? They've been discovering these weird, quasi-human species left and right, from the "hobbits" of Indonesia to Homo Heidelburgensis--a form of giant human that lived in China as recently as 10,000 or 12,000 years ago.)
EDIT: I think it's the females who hunt, in the case of lions!

A classic book on the topic of of evolved mystical consciousness is Cosmic Consciousness by Richard Maurice Bucke, 1901. www.sacred-texts.com/eso/cc/index.htm#contents

Old, likely many errors, instance of sexism, and so on, but for those interesting in the topic it is worth a read.

How to approach this topic depends on how we define "evolution". I prefer to think of the word evolution as the progression of nature, or natural change, via causality. This can be applied to genetics, to social constructs, or to physio-energetic development.

Looking at this practically, to apply it to the here and now, one could argue that there has been a paradigm shift ever since humans began organizing into a society. It could be argued that genetic traits are no longer the dominant factor in determining what genetic traits are passed on or expressed, nor are they the dominant factor that determines what cultural aspects are passed on. The human species, especially in our industrial revolution, has drastically altered our ecosystem.

Supposing we have an unbroken link of tradition, that is capable of passing on knowledge to each successive generation, what seems to be the dominant force in "evolution" from my perspective are social constructs. Our current paradigm seems to favor intelligence, knowledge, innovation, and peace.

In our current society, those that seek out violence, may be less likely to pass on their traits than those who choose peace, and pass on their traditions and knowledge to many individuals over a long time, or who make lasting contributions to society. These are much more powerful big-picture forces than the short-lived spasms of violence or conflict.

So I propose that meditation is complementary to developing the tools that are necessary not only to ensure our genetic traits are passed on, but to ensure that our cultural, psychological, and specialized knowledge are preserved as well. In this way I think meditation and spiritual development is interconnected with the current dominant force that propels evolution, and may be necessary to ensure the long term survivability of a technological civilization, in addition to having always been necessary for true happiness.

Very well said malt! That's why, upon sustained reflection from as many angles as I can find, I keep circling back to the notion of serious reform (preferably multiple different reforms, creating diversity) of the primary education system is the core necessity for surviving and thriving through the current bottleneck.

Secularized mindfulness and insight practices could be an essential element of such a reform, and will become increasingly viable as such as the conventional evidence mounts in neuroscience, cognitive science and so on as to the beneficial effects in terms of brain-change.

Remembering Chris' terminological point as well, I think it's important to bear in mind the associations that people with a mainstream education bring to the term "evolution" as this can indeed be a stumbling block in such conversations. I'm not sure if an entirely new term will emerge, or if the conceptual background of complexity, chaos, and general systems theory will gradually supplant the rationalist conceptual background in the mainstream zeitgeist, thus changing folks' associations with the term "evolution".
--Jake

"Have any of you guys listened to Shinzen Young's "Science of Enlightenment"? He speculates a-la Tom Brown that early peoples having fewer distractions had a stark choice with daily hardships to pay attention mindfully, and speculates that they probably lived with greater mindfulness and equanimity than we do today. "

I´ve listened to his audiobook. He states, as far as I remember, that people maybe went into absorbtion states much easier. This makes sense to me, less stress of "civilized" life, less input on the nervous system, less distractions... basically keeping the body alive.
We all know that shamans first of all enter absorbtion states and move into "otherworldly realms". That knowledge is maybe as old as mankind and is maybe not only present in cultures as highly developed as e.g. in India.

Ther west-germanic word HEXE means fence rider (the etymology is more complex), e.g. a person wich rides between the worlds.