在頭腦之前 Part E

 

在頭腦之前

我們不是 從頭腦開始 的。我們一開始的生活是無意識的，沒有煩惱的，14 與他人輕鬆自然地相處。對於任何曾經 與嬰兒密切接觸的人來說，我們當然 不是殭屍，而是有意識的，儘管不是 自我意識。 我們對存在沒有 想法，我們只是繼續 下去; 畢竟，真的 沒有 其他可能。

這標誌著什麼 階段 發展是嬰兒 沒有分離感 ，無論是在自己和其他人 之間，還是 在自己 和周圍的世界之間 他們。沒有分離意味著 沒有自我意識，沒有 對他人的看法， 也沒有 對世界的看法。

在許多宗教中，有一些 故事說明了 人類發展的早期 階段; 宗教，如果沒有別的，就是試圖解釋人類的經驗。 在聖經傳統中，這 階段在第對夫婦亞當和夏娃的故事 中 有所代表。15 他們完美地存在



在安全的世界裡彼此和諧相處 伊甸園。 他們是滿足的，是無意識的，因為他們 只是在 自己沒有想到 自己。 他們 從來沒有想過 有什麼不同，這是天真的快樂。 但他們和我們都是天生的選擇。 選擇意味著還有 另一種可能性; 我們可以 選擇以不同的方式思考和行動。

在伊甸園裡與 開悟者相似 16 狀態，特別是在東方宗教背景下討論，作為其最終目標 生命。開悟的狀態就像夏娃和亞當的意識一樣， 統一; 個人確實 對“我”和“他者”沒有分裂的看法。就像意識 一個嬰兒。但嬰兒的意識也不同於 開悟的意識，因為 開悟的狀態是自覺的，而這種狀態 團結不是。

在伊甸園，或者 嬰兒的生活 ，是一種 天堂， 但我們 確實如此。 當我們身處其中時，不要賦予它任何意義;它不是 特殊。 我們與他人在某種 幸福。但我們只認為 這在 回想起來，當我們渴望回到它的溫暖時 擁抱。記憶，很大程度上或完全是言語前的，是一種 感覺 上的認知。

一些浪漫的關係 給我們一個身體記憶和與這個愛的地方的聯繫 而且簡單 關係，這就是為什麼他們 可以 如此陶醉，如此強烈地觸動我們潛意識的渴望。 這也是為什麼它們 出錯時會如此 具有破壞性的部分原因。

我們不需要神話化 嬰兒狀態為了理解它，但事實上它被加工成神話和故事 嵌入在我們的集體神話中 ，無意識強化了它是 主要和普遍體驗的觀點。 然而，這也是 一個普通的、平凡的故事，一個足夠快樂的孩子，他有愛和安慰。 足以將世界作為自己的一部分來體驗。

孩子經歷傷害 當然，和不適，但是，在一段時間 內 ，嬰兒 能夠 忍受 一定量的 失調。特別是如果護理人員 對孩子的痛苦很敏感，威脅被撫 平，放心的孩子 可以在無意識的泡沫中停留更長時間。便 他們時不時地徘徊 在無法忍受的邊緣， 無意識狀態的力量足以 之前多次 將它們從 邊緣拉回來



最後的突破。 即使是一個非常痛苦的孩子也不會 變得自我意識 馬上。這需要一些時間，儘管 在這種情況下可能會更早發生。

但所有的孩子都不可避免地 發展和變化，自我意識是不可避免的。 就像伊甸園中的亞當和夏娃一樣，我們開始測試已知世界並質疑假設 當局。 當我們沒有得到 我們想要的東西時，我們會反抗。


心應運而生

有一定的點當 情感 充電變得如此之大，以至於這個人再也無法忍受它 ，他們開始了 按照他們認為人們希望他們行事的方式行事 。 這可能發生在 任何一點 從概念開始 開，但是 它通常 發生在2-5歲左右。這是你和你的個性之間的分裂，真實感受的自我和 個性之間的 分裂。17

當我們從 我們原本的無我意識狀態，我們獲得了一個心。 最終提示 介意 進入 存在是一個數字的 頂點 的增量步驟。即使是最快樂的童年也有它的威脅： 蜜蜂蜇傷，疲憊無靈動的母親，太亮的燈， 太 粗糙 的遊戲。 在這些 時候， 孩子開始對世界有一些潛在的敵意和外部的暗示 他們的控制。足夠的點 終於夠了當然可以 實際和故意的虐待和忽視，但同樣可以更常見 回想起來似乎是良性和次要的。無論如何，當 關係破裂的痛苦 變得無法忍受。雖然我們可能想像這種困難在邏輯上一定來自於太少的接觸，但事實上，正是他人現實的全部力量和他們對我們生存的威脅才是

太麻煩了。 過多的接觸是威脅。

起初，頭腦是解決無法忍受的感覺或感覺的解決方案，而 這種感覺或感覺是你無法忍受的。 理解或只是不願意 體驗。 這是一些東西 身體上，構成 與他人過多 的接觸。 你不信任它



受不了了。 你想要聯繫，但不是 那麼快。 因此，在盡量不 完全中斷與他人的聯繫時 ，你試圖 告訴他們這對你或你來說太過分了 還沒有準備好，或者你 還不願意 有那麼強烈的接觸。並試圖傳達這一資訊 對別人，你願意採取某些心理態度，並且這樣做了。18

情緒困擾 不僅僅是 一個心理事件。 情緒是物理事件; 所以這是我們 不想 體驗的實際身體感覺 。 我們認為 這種感覺可能會殺死我們，因為我們太 小了， 易受攻擊 熊 強度。所以我們阻止它 從意識， 至少在某種程度上。因此，我們與他人的決裂顯現出來 身體和思想。 事實上， 頭腦其實是解決問題的虛假解決方案。 身體;這是所有那些令人討厭的情緒 發生的地方。

自我意識是沒有回頭路的。 在大多數情況下 ，它不會引發任何戲劇性的變化， 至少不是從外面看，這隻是成長的一部分。 但這仍然是一個戲劇性的變化。我們往往記不 清它，但是， 就像下面吉莉安的案例一樣，當我們理解原理時 ，我們也許能夠識別出它的一些 意義。她在這裡所講述的有混合的東西 繼續，但她大致確定的是一種 感覺變化的感覺 ，這標誌著 她對周圍 世界的新態度。

阿嬌：我確實記得很小的時候 很快樂。我不記得太多細節了。但它 仿佛一直陽光明媚，像夏日的午後。我認識人 在那裡，但記憶真的是關於我的。我玩，快樂。有兩三個 我擁有的金色回憶少了。就像我的弟弟出生一樣。我記得一個 當我媽媽把他展示給我看時，有點焦慮。 我 有一個模糊的記憶，被我父親大喊大叫。我不記得為什麼了。但是我有一個獨特的 感覺一切都在變化。我不確定是否有一點，我沒有 記得。但是，是的，當我回想起來時，就像太陽進去了一樣。我沒有 記住很多事情，儘管上學 是一件“壞”的事情。 我確實記得其他人 ，而不是



喜歡一個 老師，為事情哭泣。它在我的氛圍中非常不同 去我很小的時候。 我仍然很高興，但我 對人更加 警惕。 所以我確實看到有一個 改變。曾經有一段時間，一切都是溫暖的，陽光明媚的，友好的，有點 柔軟的。 甚至水坑也很友好，水坑和昆蟲。然後天更黑了，有些人不太 好，昆蟲很可怕。 我的童年 真的很好，在很多方面都很 可愛。 但我 確實感覺到 這種轉變。 不是我變得不快樂，而是我意識到 世界就 在那裡， 我 必須 要更加小心，計算如何與人打交道。



如果阿嬌在這方面做更多的工作，她可能會 能夠理清 不同的思路和線索，找到 標誌著她退後的關鍵事件 從其他人那裡最終。原則上可以修補這種中斷，而不是 回到孩子狀態，但要努力實現統一的自我意識。 這更像 是基督的命令，我們必須（再次） 成為 小孩子。19

背景 這種分離 總是 孩子的 與他人的關係。我們不會有 思想不是我們關係。如果我們不想聯繫，我們就不會 最終有頭腦。我們通常認為的「人類狀況」是 在各個方面，都取決於我們想要 與他人建立 關係。


吃 蘋果：善的知識 和壞

在與他人分離的那一刻，我們成為 無可挽回的自我意識。 當這種情況發生時，我們也成為 意識到他人與我們分離。 這就是 二元性的本質 。 只要 某物或某物存在，就必須有某物或某人 它存在於對立面。

隨著與他人的分裂，我們對生活有了固定的想法 而不僅僅是在當下存在的流動中 。在 亞當和夏娃的故事，這發生在夏娃吃了果子的時候 善惡知識之樹。20 它 是我們變得自我意識並獲得 二元思維的時刻。


在二元論的頭腦中， 第一次 出現了“我”和 “你”。 這些想法 不同於 兩個個體實際存在的現實 。 兩個個體一直 存在，現在仍然存在。 但是現在， 這個簡單的事實又增加了一些。 這些是 我和你的想法 。“我”和“你” 的這些觀念是 心靈的基礎 。這種轉變從 統一意識到二元自我意識 在神話中具有特徵 世界如墜入黑暗。在猶太教 - 基督教傳統中，它是 以從伊甸園墮落到 人類境況的黑暗和痛苦為代表，異化 來自上帝。21 當第一批人類 從知識之樹上吃東西，他們立即意識到自我是客體。 這被鮮明地描述為 瞬間意識到自己的裸體並感到羞恥。他們從 外部意識到 自己。 他們同樣意識到 其他人是分開的。既然 有“兩個”，播下了不和諧 的種子; 現在我們必須 考慮 如何 與這個人建立聯繫。 這種認識是對極樂的 驅逐，從伊甸園的 放逐。

Before the mind 

We did not start out with a mind. We started out in life as unconscious and untroubled,14 relating to other people easily and naturally. As will be obvious to anyone who has ever been in close contact with an infant, we certainly were not zombies but conscious, though not self- conscious. We had no ideas about existence, we just got on with it; after all, there really was no other possibility. 

What marks this stage of development is that the infant experiences no sense of separation, either between themselves and other people or between themselves and the world around them. No separation means that there is no sense of self, no idea of others and no viewpoint on the world. 

In many religions there are stories that illustrate this early phase of human development; religions are, if nothing else, attempts to explain human experience. In the Biblical tradition, this phase is represented in the story of the first couple, Adam and Eve.15 They exist in perfect 



harmony with each other in the safe world of the Garden of Eden. They are fulfilled and unselfconscious for they are simply being themselves without thought of self. It has never occurred to them to be any different, and this is innocently joyful. But they and we were created with inherent choice. Choice means there is another possibility; we could choose to think and act differently. 

Being in Eden is similar to the enlightened16 state, discussed particularly in Eastern religious contexts as the ultimate goal of this life. The enlightened state is, like the consciousness of Eve and Adam, unified; the individual does not have divided perception of ‘me’ and ‘other’. It is like the consciousness of a baby. But the consciousness of a baby is also different from the unity of enlightened consciousness, because the enlightened state is self-conscious, while this state of unity is not. 

Being in Eden, or life as an infant, is a kind of heaven, but we do not give it any meaning while we are in it; it is not special. We are bonded with others in a kind of bliss. But we only think this in retrospect, when we long to return to its warm embrace. The memory, being largely or wholly pre-verbal, is a felt kind of knowing. 

Some romantic relationships give us a body memory and connection to this place of love and easy relating, which is why they can be so intoxicating and touch our unconscious yearning so forcefully. It is also partly why they can be so devastating when they go wrong. 

We do not need to mythologise the infant state in order to understand it, but the fact that it is worked into myths and stories that are embedded in our collective myths and unconscious reinforces the point that it is a primary and universal experience. Yet it is also the common, mundane story of the happy enough child who has love and comfort sufficient to experience the world as part of themselves. 

The child experiences hurts and discomforts, of course, but, for a period of time, infants are able to tolerate a certain amount of dissonance. Especially if carers are sensitive to a child’s distress, threats are smoothed over and the reassured child can stay in their unselfconscious bubble longer. Even if they teeter on the brink of not tolerating it from time to time, the strength of the unconscious state is strong enough to pull them back from the edge many times before 



the final break. Even a very distressed child does not become self- conscious immediately. It takes a bit of time, though it will likely occur earlier in this case. 

But all children inevitably develop and change, and self- consciousness is unavoidable. Like Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, we start to test the known world and question the assumed authorities. When we do not get what we want, we resist. 


The mind comes into being 

There is a certain point when the emotional charge becomes so great that the person can’t take it anymore and they start acting the way they think people want them to act. This could happen at any point from conception on, but it usually happens around 2–5 years old. This is the split between you and your personality, between the real feeling self and a personality.17 

When we fall from our original state of unselfconsciousness we gain a mind. The event that finally prompts the mind to come into being is the culmination of a number of incremental steps. Even the happiest childhood has its threats: a bee sting, a tired and unresponsive mother, too bright a light, too rough a game. At these points, the child starts to have some inkling of the world as potentially hostile and outside their control. The point where enough is finally enough could of course be actual and deliberate abuse and neglect but can equally and more commonly be something that appears benign and minor in retrospect. In any case, a point of no return is reached when the pain of disrupted relationship becomes intolerable. While we might imagine this distress must logically come with too little contact, it is in fact the full force of the reality of others and their threat to our existence that is 

so troubling. Too much contact is the threat. 

The mind, in the beginning, was the solution to an intolerable feeling or sensation that you couldn’t understand or were simply unwilling to experience. It was something physical that constituted too much contact with others. You didn’t trust it 



and couldn’t stand it. You wanted contact but not that much that soon. So in trying not to altogether break contact with others, you tried to tell them that it was too much for you, or you weren’t ready yet, or you weren’t yet willing to have that much intensity of contact. And in the attempt to try to get that message across to others, you became willing to adopt certain mental attitudes, and did so.18 

The emotional distress is not just a mental event. Emotions are physical events; so it is an actual body sensation we do not want to experience. We think the feeling might kill us because we are too small and vulnerable to bear the intensity. So we block it from consciousness, at least to an extent. Consequently, our break from others manifests physically as well as in the mind. In fact, the mind is actually a false solution to the problem of the body; it was the body where all those nasty sensations of emotion were happening. 

There is no going back from self-consciousness. In most cases it does not trigger any dramatic change, at least not from the outside, it is just part of growing up. But it is a dramatic change nonetheless. We tend not to remember it clearly, but, like Gillian’s case below, we may be able to identify some sense of it when we understand the principle. What she relates here has a mixture of things going on, but what she broadly identifies is a felt sense of change that marked a new attitude to the world around her. 

Gillian: I do remember being happy as a very young child. I don’t recall much detail. But it was as if it was sunny all the time, like a summer afternoon. I know people were there, but the memory is really about me. Me playing and being happy. There are two or three less golden memories I have. Like my little brother being born. I remember a kind of anxiety when my mum showed him to me. And I’ve got a vague memory of being shouted at by my dad. I don’t remember why. But then I have a distinct sense of it all changing. I’m not sure if there was one point, I don’t remember. But yes, when I think back it’s like the sun went in a bit. I don’t remember anything much, although going to school pops into my head as a ‘bad’ thing. And I do remember other people and not 



liking a teacher and crying about things. It has a really different atmosphere in my head to when I was really small. I was still happy, but I was more wary of people. So I do sort of see that there was a change. There was this time when everything was warm and sunny and friendly and sort of soft. Even puddles were friendly, puddles and insects. Then it was darker and there were people who were not so nice and insects were horrible. My childhood was fine really, actually lovely in many ways. But I do have a sense of this shift. It wasn’t that I became unhappy, but I became aware that the world was out there and I had to be more careful and calculate how to deal with people. 



If Gillian were to work more on this, she might be able to sort out the different thoughts and strands to find the crucial incident that marked the point when she stepped back from others conclusively. This break could in principle be mended, not to return to the child state, but to work towards unified self-consciousness. This is more like Christ’s injunction that we must become (again) as little children.19 

The context of this separation is always the child’s relationship with others. We would not have minds were we not relational. If we did not want to relate we would not end up with minds. What we commonly think of as the ‘human condition’ is dependent, in every respect, on our wanting to be in relationship with others. 


Eating the apple: knowledge of good and bad 

In the moment of separation from others we become irretrievably self-conscious. As this happens, we also become conscious of others as separate from us. This is the nature of duality. As soon as something or someone exists, there has to be something or someone to which it exists in opposition. 

With the split from others we took on fixed ideas about life rather than just being in the flux of in-the-moment existing. In the story of Adam and Eve, this happens when Eve eats the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.20 It is the moment when we become self- conscious and gain a dualistic mind. 


In the dualistic mind, for the first time, there is ‘me’ and ‘you’. These ideas are distinct from the reality of two individuals actually existing. Two individuals existed all along and still exist. But now there are additions to that simple fact. These are the ideas of me and you. These ideas of ‘me’ and ‘you’ are the foundations of the mind. This shift from a unified consciousness to dualistic self- consciousness is characterised in myths the world over as a fall into darkness. In the Judaeo-Christian tradition it is represented by the Fall from Eden into the darkness and suffering of the human condition, alienation from God.21 When the first humans eat from the tree of knowledge, they instantly become aware of self as object. This is starkly described as instantly becoming aware and ashamed of their nakedness. They become aware of themselves from the outside. They equally become aware of others as separate. Now that there are ‘two’, the seed of discord is sown; now we have to think about how to relate to this other. This realisation is a banishment from bliss, from the Garden.