For quite some time now my thinking has been on the issue of the true human condition, without control in it’s natural state. Can it be that the nature of man in it’s natural condition and without interference on itself, be one not of peace at all. And that we are perhaps fooling ourselves into a false sense of being and a un real reality of what we truly are.
Peace and tolerance requires discipline, control and varying levels of effort, yet anger, frustration, resentment, jealousy and other such negative thoughts require no more than a mere provocation for it to occur in us without any sort of effort, control or discipline to bring it forth physically, in feeling or thoughts such as tolerance.
Does it not then stand to say that when peace or tranquillity and tolerance or anything that requires effort or training, however miniscule, is not natural. If internal or external anger or frustration occurs by a mere provocation without any level of effort by us to bring it forth, does this not mean to imply it is indeed natural in us at all. It seems the general view is that we are animal, not necessarily a view that i agree with. But one which leads itself even further to the idea that we are at the very least survivalist and therefore defensive or confrontational to some extent, when required to maintain or defend such things as our family, position, life, religious views and so forth.
Without going into this area too much, there has been conducted vary many experiments on individuals of all sorts, whom all regardless of their supposed natural controlled condition, eventually all succumbed to the power of control over others. If indeed our natural condition was one of peace and tranquillity, then surely our natural condition cannot be so easily conquered by one of power to the extent where some have made it their life’s ambition to meditate and maintain control so as not to be normal.
using the word natural is hard in and of itself. You could say that resisting instincts is natural. You could say everything is natural.
As humans we evolved socially and competitively. Those that exist today are influenced by the successful that came before us. in many ways the most competitive reproduce the most, which can account for our innate attributes like ambition.
The people who try the most are generally the most successful. we are built to be competitive and ambitious. Surely for the human species conflict is a norm. Conflict theory can explain many aspects of our society and aspects of our nature, albiet unrelated to this topic.
A problem with that distinction is that change might also be natural. Without change we cannot exist. I wonder if passivism or peace in general is a natural progression of human kind (if it progressed that way, we would probably call it natural just because of that). Then i wonder if peace was where we started, and that we have only progressed thus far thanks to competition.
Certainly there are people, including myself, who find happiness or satisfaction when they are engaged in something, usually something competitive.
Both control and competitiveness are a part of the human condition. Many humans choose different roads, their conditions are evidently different. What is the best condition i cannot say, one thing i will say is that understanding the way you work can allow you to plan your life in more efficient ways. Does control work for you? It seems to work whenever i try it, but i don;t try it that often.
Meditation isn’t ultimately about control at all, it is about being natural. The natural state is “true peace” because it isn’t created. Anything created falls apart, so the kind of peace you are referring to is just a passing state. It’s tricky though, because a discipline is needed in order to access the natural (as opposed to habitual) state. We can’t just do nothing. I mean, really doing nothing would entail your heart not beating or something… There are a lot of misconceptions out there regarding meditation. Generally though, the “highest” forms of meditation require the least effort - it is not about goal orientation or maintaining some supposedly superior state, such as “peace”.
I think you are conflating control and discipline. I believe that “Controll and Effort v/s Natural Condition”, as in your thread title, is a false dichotomy.
I think war is natural for our species. I think anyone who labels something we do, and have been doing for thousands of years, as ‘unnatural’ is making a claim that needs a huge justification to make it seem plausible.
However, saying that something is ‘natural’ is different from saying it’s good for us. We have to keep in mind the environment we evolved from and what made warring an activity that was conducive to surviving within that environment. We live in quite a different world today, and we’re bring our ‘nature’ with us. Is it still as conducive to survival as it used to be? Consider the level of destruction we’re capable of today, and the toll it takes on the environment, and ask yourself if this is more likely to destroy us or help our species thrive.