alpha
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by alpha on Apr 13, 2011 18:34:34 GMT -5
We are not helpless just because we are not to blame for the state of things. I'm not saying that anyone is helpless or otherwise; I'm saying that what's going on has nothing to do with a separate (imagined) entity. "What is" is a unified process doing what it does regardless of what anyone thinks about it. The living truth can either be accepted or resisted, but resisting it usually leads to a lot of suffering. hi ZD, in this sense would you agree that "what is" includes the thinking/resisting/accepting/suffering, and even the imagined entity,or is illusion/dreams/fantasy outside "what is" i wonder does the Universe knows itself through all living things, birdness through birds,catness through cats, truth through enlightened beings, illusions through unenlightened beings, everthing with the same value and nothing left out... |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 13, 2011 20:50:12 GMT -5
Hi Alpha,
Does "what is" include everything, even delusion and suffering? Absolutely!
Does the Universe know itself through all living things? Of course, but that kind of knowing is direct and unmediated by thought. I'm sure that a tree "knows" the nutrients it needs, how to get them, how to interact intelligently with its environment, etc. in only the way that a tree can.
The universe is mind-bogglingly intelligent. If we plant a pole bean and watch it for two days, it is amazing how it "finds" the nearest pole, wraps itself around it, and begins "climbing" it. It obviously senses its environment, rotates its leaves toward the sun, sucks up nutrients and moisture from the earth, and lives the life of a pole bean plant.
There's an interesting account in Bucke's famous book "Cosmic Consciousness" about a woman who realizes that plants are conscious and active participants in the isness of reality.
In the deepest sense there is no such thing as inorganic matter and everything partakes of the universe's aliveness.
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 13, 2011 22:45:10 GMT -5
We are not helpless just because we are not to blame for the state of things. Right, not responsible but also able to respond. |
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Apr 13, 2011 23:01:49 GMT -5
We are not helpless just because we are not to blame for the state of things. Right, not responsible but also able to respond. Are we really able to respond? I know if someone's about to punch me I'll get out of the way, but is it really me that's responding? I thought it was just another 'effect with no cause.' |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 14, 2011 0:47:59 GMT -5
Right, not responsible but also able to respond. Are we really able to respond? I know if someone's about to punch me I'll get out of the way, but is it really me that's responding? I thought it was just another 'effect with no cause.' Well, effects don't actually happen without a cause, it's just that the person is the effect rather than the cause. YOU are the cause, which makes it possible to respond. It is, however, an unmediated (spontaneous) response, which is what you're referring to with the punch thingy. |
|
|
|
Post by dreamerrach on Apr 14, 2011 9:14:27 GMT -5
Mamza, of course it is an actual response.
For another person, about to get punched, the reaction could be to punch back-or to take the hit-or to run away-or to fall on the ground and cry.
|
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Apr 14, 2011 10:48:44 GMT -5
I wasn't trying to say punching back isn't a response, I'm just wondering if it's actually us doing the responding. We're the cause--both punching and dodging/punching back--but I guess the cause causes everything and so it could be said that we're responding.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamerrach on Apr 14, 2011 14:24:54 GMT -5
But you would choose to step aside, and another would choose a different course. If it were just simple reaction, then why would you both not have the same reaction?
|
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Apr 14, 2011 15:00:28 GMT -5
It's not really a matter of choice. Everything in history has lead up to the moment that I did ____. Whether ____ is dodging, punching, or otherwise, whatever 'my choice' is was not based on personal volition.
I personally haven't been in a fight other than maybe with my brothers when I was younger. My mother would yell at me, send me to time-out...whatever. That has conditioned me to be more passive.
Another person may have had a family that just let the kids duke it out. This person, in the same situation, would maybe punch back. That's their conditioning: nobody is going to save them but themselves, so they fight back.
These are just a few variables that may or may not go into the 'decision' to dodge or punch, but there are an infinite amount of other variables involved too. With so many things conditioning us to act in certain ways, personal choice doesn't really enter the picture.
|
|
|
|
Post by dreamerrach on Apr 14, 2011 16:14:14 GMT -5
I hear a lot about conditioning, but I call bullshit.
To look at how I grew up, the experiences I've had, how I was treated, I should be a very nasty person who believes most if not all wish me harm--and would strike out at anyone who tried to at me.
But I chose something different. It was not conditioning that led me to refuse to harm another. Conditioning taught me that people are only out for themselves---so I should be, too. And anyone who would try to hurt me deserves whatever pain I can allot to them. The world's a bitter, hateful place. I should get what I want however I can--that's what everyone else is doing, and anyone who claims otherwise is a damned liar. That's some of my conditioning. Rejected.
|
|
|
|
Post by ivory on Apr 14, 2011 16:54:45 GMT -5
I hear a lot about conditioning, but I call bullnuts. To look at how I grew up, the experiences I've had, how I was treated, I should be a very nasty person who believes most if not all wish me harm--and would strike out at anyone who tried to at me. But I chose something different. It was not conditioning that led me to refuse to harm another. Conditioning taught me that people are only out for themselves---so I should be, too. And anyone who would try to hurt me deserves whatever pain I can allot to them. The world's a bitter, hateful place. I should get what I want however I can--that's what everyone else is doing, and anyone who claims otherwise is a d**ned liar. That's some of my conditioning. Rejected. You sure about that dreamer? I know that you are quite familiar with no-self. So if you think about a child, it is a sponge (a blank slate to begin with). It has has no notion of self, nor does it exhibit any characteristics of self. As the child develops it begins to exhibit a personality. What is the self other than an intricate web of ideas, opinions, beliefs, and concepts? So if conditioning and experience didn't contribute to the "development of self," then how did it? Was that self automagically planted by GOD, or did the non-existant self plant those ideas, opinions, beliefs, and concepts itself? Based on what you've written above it seems that you and I may have similar personalities (maybe). I too grew up NOTICING that it was a dog eat dog world. And like you, I did not adopt those personality traits. Although it wasn't apparent at the surface level, I found that when I dug deep there were certain beliefs and values that were instilled in me that I did not put there. It's all conditioning. |
|
|
|
Post by mamza on Apr 14, 2011 17:04:12 GMT -5
Do you think you'd be the same if everyone had been nice to you? Sometimes the only way to learn how to be nice is to feel what it's like to have everyone be mean to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 14, 2011 23:42:34 GMT -5
Do you think you'd be the same if everyone had been nice to you? Sometimes the only way to learn how to be nice is to feel what it's like to have everyone be mean to you. Yeah, that points to the heart of the conditioning that may cause someone to reject certain conditioning. For example, it's common for a child growing up with abusive parents to be very tolerant parents themselves, understanding full well the suffering a child goes through. |
|
