Post by laughter on Dec 18, 2012 15:25:29 GMT -5
Prescription: Distrust them. Any of them and all of them.
This is not to say to abhor them, but simply to recognize them for what they are, which is to say, ideas and thoughts that are taken to be true and are thereby no longer questioned.
In trusting the first two sentences, you eventually dispel the initial obvious objections to them. (Thinking about this too much leads to a digression on foundation that I've put at the end).
Following the prescription led me toward what Christians would refer to as faith in and love for God. My particular cultural context, while not overtly Christian, was steeped in it, so that's the particular expression of where following this leads that I can best match with my subjective experience.
In what might be referred to as a sort of new-age parlance, which I'm less familiar with, it might be said that it leads toward accepting each moment as it comes fully and completely without resistance.
If there is anyone reading this with a context that could be traced back to Zen, in Japan, or Advaida (neo, or instead, Advaida Vendanta), in India, or the Tao, in China, or any other context, I would be delighted to hear of how you might express where following this has led you.
An idea related to the prescription is skepticism, and that's at the root of my conditioning, but getting through life seems to put limits on the skeptic that can only be exceeded by replacing dis-belief, which is really just a formation of a belief with a "not" in front of it, with something that might be described as in between belief and disbelief. My guess is that some tradition somewhere probably has a really concise description of that ... I'll call it a tool.
I picked up the prescription armed with that tool when enigma brought some of his henchmen over to the Tolle board to mercilessly dig the bliss bunnies from their slumber-holes. At the time, it simply appealed to my then-operative theory, which was a model based in material monism: science, for short. I've already used this forum to express what is at least a major milestone in following the pointer from an impersonal perspective.
Last night, I read past the Q&A that I quoted here, and thereby stumbled upon what might be stated as an authoritative foundation for the prescription. It's the start of Chapter 30 of "I AM THAT", which is entitled: "You are Free NOW".
seeker: Theory may be misleading and earnestness blind.
Niz: Your sincerity will guide you. Devotion to the goal of freedom and perfection will make you abandon all theories and systems and live by wisdom, intelligence and active love. Theories may be good as starting points, but must be abandoned, the sooner the better.
====
This is that intellectual foundation that I referenced in the third para:
<TMT> It is a fire-with-fire strategy. It is taking an axe to the thick ropes that weave the net of the tangled heirarchy of our mistaken identity that is best expressed by the model √-1. Fire with fire in that what I've referred to in the first sentence of this paragraph is the fact that the prescription itself embodies the same type of self-defining, self-referential and self-negating idea that fits the model. The specific expression of the model that applies to our mistaken identity is the "liar's paradox", "I am a liar, you can't believe a word that I say". There is a great inspirational video on this here that was posted by some guy named "andrew" that sadly seems to have left the forum.</TMT>.
This is not to say to abhor them, but simply to recognize them for what they are, which is to say, ideas and thoughts that are taken to be true and are thereby no longer questioned.
In trusting the first two sentences, you eventually dispel the initial obvious objections to them. (Thinking about this too much leads to a digression on foundation that I've put at the end).
Following the prescription led me toward what Christians would refer to as faith in and love for God. My particular cultural context, while not overtly Christian, was steeped in it, so that's the particular expression of where following this leads that I can best match with my subjective experience.
In what might be referred to as a sort of new-age parlance, which I'm less familiar with, it might be said that it leads toward accepting each moment as it comes fully and completely without resistance.
If there is anyone reading this with a context that could be traced back to Zen, in Japan, or Advaida (neo, or instead, Advaida Vendanta), in India, or the Tao, in China, or any other context, I would be delighted to hear of how you might express where following this has led you.
An idea related to the prescription is skepticism, and that's at the root of my conditioning, but getting through life seems to put limits on the skeptic that can only be exceeded by replacing dis-belief, which is really just a formation of a belief with a "not" in front of it, with something that might be described as in between belief and disbelief. My guess is that some tradition somewhere probably has a really concise description of that ... I'll call it a tool.
I picked up the prescription armed with that tool when enigma brought some of his henchmen over to the Tolle board to mercilessly dig the bliss bunnies from their slumber-holes. At the time, it simply appealed to my then-operative theory, which was a model based in material monism: science, for short. I've already used this forum to express what is at least a major milestone in following the pointer from an impersonal perspective.
Last night, I read past the Q&A that I quoted here, and thereby stumbled upon what might be stated as an authoritative foundation for the prescription. It's the start of Chapter 30 of "I AM THAT", which is entitled: "You are Free NOW".
seeker: Theory may be misleading and earnestness blind.
Niz: Your sincerity will guide you. Devotion to the goal of freedom and perfection will make you abandon all theories and systems and live by wisdom, intelligence and active love. Theories may be good as starting points, but must be abandoned, the sooner the better.
====
This is that intellectual foundation that I referenced in the third para:
<TMT> It is a fire-with-fire strategy. It is taking an axe to the thick ropes that weave the net of the tangled heirarchy of our mistaken identity that is best expressed by the model √-1. Fire with fire in that what I've referred to in the first sentence of this paragraph is the fact that the prescription itself embodies the same type of self-defining, self-referential and self-negating idea that fits the model. The specific expression of the model that applies to our mistaken identity is the "liar's paradox", "I am a liar, you can't believe a word that I say". There is a great inspirational video on this here that was posted by some guy named "andrew" that sadly seems to have left the forum.</TMT>.