|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jan 9, 2018 8:15:34 GMT -5
I'm down with that. What I don't think has been mentioned is the way in which realization 'informs' mind. The goal is not to do away with states of mind or feeling or even ego, but to reveal it all for what it is. There isn't actually a problem with 'what it is'. and what it is is all in our head? "Our heads" are in what it is. As such, what you are is headless (a la Richard Rose, if you wanna read some stuff).
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jan 9, 2018 9:09:12 GMT -5
and what it is is all in our head? "Our heads" are in what it is. As such, what you are is headless (a la Richard Rose, if you wanna read some stuff). SN: True, but it's "a la Douglas harding." I don't think Rose ever got into the headless approach. Etolle: the idea that we are "living in our heads" is a pointer, only. There really isn't a someone who lives in his/her head; this is simply how it appears from a self-referential perspective. The body/mind organism thinks incessantly, and many (or most) of those thoughts are self-referential in nature. Attention stays focused upon thoughts rather than direct sensory perception of the physical world. The body/mind is always present (where else could it be), but when it thinks incessantly, the body/mind is not psychologically present; it lives in a kind of dreamlike state focused on reflective thoughts. Upon waking up from the dream of personal selfhood, it is realized that there is only "what is," and "what is" is a unified intelligent conscious field of being. Thinking is then understood differently than before. Thinking occurs, but there is no person who thinks. The entire process of reality, or "what is," is what thinks and does everything else.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jan 11, 2018 16:45:58 GMT -5
"Our heads" are in what it is. As such, what you are is headless (a la Richard Rose, if you wanna read some stuff). SN: True, but it's "a la Douglas harding." I don't think Rose ever got into the headless approach. Etolle: the idea that we are "living in our heads" is a pointer, only. There really isn't a someone who lives in his/her head; this is simply how it appears from a self-referential perspective. The body/mind organism thinks incessantly, and many (or most) of those thoughts are self-referential in nature. Attention stays focused upon thoughts rather than direct sensory perception of the physical world. The body/mind is always present (where else could it be), but when it thinks incessantly, the body/mind is not psychologically present; it lives in a kind of dreamlike state focused on reflective thoughts. Upon waking up from the dream of personal selfhood, it is realized that there is only "what is," and "what is" is a unified intelligent conscious field of being. Thinking is then understood differently than before. Thinking occurs, but there is no person who thinks. The entire process of reality, or "what is," is what thinks and does everything else. Why thank ya kindly, good sir! I haven't really read the material itself, but by gleening internet stuff, got the gist. Yeah, I mostly agree. The general idea I gathered was that the mind-body (with all thoughts, feelings, perceptions, ideas, memories, etc.) and the universe, in general, happen within the boundless (i.e., bodiless) awareness that one is. A CC experience is one in which this greater presence beyond the bound psychological self is at least glimpsed, and perhaps even realized.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 12, 2018 22:47:19 GMT -5
SN: True, but it's "a la Douglas harding." I don't think Rose ever got into the headless approach. Etolle: the idea that we are "living in our heads" is a pointer, only. There really isn't a someone who lives in his/her head; this is simply how it appears from a self-referential perspective. The body/mind organism thinks incessantly, and many (or most) of those thoughts are self-referential in nature. Attention stays focused upon thoughts rather than direct sensory perception of the physical world. The body/mind is always present (where else could it be), but when it thinks incessantly, the body/mind is not psychologically present; it lives in a kind of dreamlike state focused on reflective thoughts. Upon waking up from the dream of personal selfhood, it is realized that there is only "what is," and "what is" is a unified intelligent conscious field of being. Thinking is then understood differently than before. Thinking occurs, but there is no person who thinks. The entire process of reality, or "what is," is what thinks and does everything else. Why thank ya kindly, good sir! I haven't really read the material itself, but by gleening internet stuff, got the gist. Yeah, I mostly agree. The general idea I gathered was that the mind-body (with all thoughts, feelings, perceptions, ideas, memories, etc.) and the universe, in general, happen within the boundless (i.e., bodiless) awareness that one is. A CC experience is one in which this greater presence beyond the bound psychological self is at least glimpsed, and perhaps even realized. Yes, in a sense a CC means really coming home. Only when that happens can it be understood what A-H mean by 'well-being' and 'worthiness' being the basis of our existence.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jan 23, 2018 15:20:24 GMT -5
Why thank ya kindly, good sir! I haven't really read the material itself, but by gleening internet stuff, got the gist. Yeah, I mostly agree. The general idea I gathered was that the mind-body (with all thoughts, feelings, perceptions, ideas, memories, etc.) and the universe, in general, happen within the boundless (i.e., bodiless) awareness that one is. A CC experience is one in which this greater presence beyond the bound psychological self is at least glimpsed, and perhaps even realized. Yes, in a sense a CC means really coming home. Only when that happens can it be understood what A-H mean by 'well-being' and 'worthiness' being the basis of our existence. I have not explored their interpretations of those words, so I wonder if they are just pointing to a non-self-referential perspective from which one truly senses gratitude welling up from within. That is, the bullshaite has been cut through, and mind games no longer have hold on the attention to drive "lack of well-being" or "unworthiness". I guess that's one of the interesting things about channeled stuff; it comes across as a kind of an intra- or pre-personalized rendition of WIBIGO. It's like an expression pointing to something prior to what is personal. Therefore, ND could be more palatable for some that way. Just an idea...
|
|
|
Post by zin on Jan 23, 2018 19:05:34 GMT -5
Yes, in a sense a CC means really coming home. Only when that happens can it be understood what A-H mean by 'well-being' and 'worthiness' being the basis of our existence. I have not explored their interpretations of those words, so I wonder if they are just pointing to a non-self-referential perspective from which one truly senses gratitude welling up from within. That is, the bullshaite has been cut through, and mind games no longer have hold on the attention to drive "lack of well-being" or "unworthiness". I guess that's one of the interesting things about channeled stuff; it comes across as a kind of an intra- or pre-personalized rendition of WIBIGO. It's like an expression pointing to something prior to what is personal. Therefore, ND could be more palatable for some that way. Just an idea... I am reading my nth book of Seth, and I can say that *many* of the subjects are what have always been most interesting ones for me. For example the one I read now (Dreams, 'Evolution', and Value Fulfillment) talks about formation of rocks, hills, etc.. These things seem to have some kind of awareness to me but at the same time I usually thought "isn't it difficult to stay motionless?".. Yes sounds nonsense but I can't help thinking so, especially while looking at trees. Seth makes some explanations which partially answer my questions.. One can think they are right or wrong but they do sound 'coming from another perspective' to me. He says that all of the elements that exist on earth got formed from fragments of entities left in trance (and the entities are consciousness units). He says: " Those entities are in trance, in those terms, but their potency is not diminished, and there is constant communication among them always. There is also constant communication between them and you at other levels than those you recognize, so that there is an unending interplay between each species and its environment." ... This communication is felt by many, right? I can say pic-taking is sometimes a 'trying to catch it'.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jan 23, 2018 20:43:52 GMT -5
I have not explored their interpretations of those words, so I wonder if they are just pointing to a non-self-referential perspective from which one truly senses gratitude welling up from within. That is, the bullshaite has been cut through, and mind games no longer have hold on the attention to drive "lack of well-being" or "unworthiness". I guess that's one of the interesting things about channeled stuff; it comes across as a kind of an intra- or pre-personalized rendition of WIBIGO. It's like an expression pointing to something prior to what is personal. Therefore, ND could be more palatable for some that way. Just an idea... I am reading my nth book of Seth, and I can say that *many* of the subjects are what have always been most interesting ones for me. For example the one I read now (Dreams, 'Evolution', and Value Fulfillment) talks about formation of rocks, hills, etc.. These things seem to have some kind of awareness to me but at the same time I usually thought "isn't it difficult to stay motionless?".. Yes sounds nonsense but I can't help thinking so, especially while looking at trees. Seth makes some explanations which partially answer my questions.. One can think they are right or wrong but they do sound 'coming from another perspective' to me. He says that all of the elements that exist on earth got formed from fragments of entities left in trance (and the entities are consciousness units). He says: " Those entities are in trance, in those terms, but their potency is not diminished, and there is constant communication among them always. There is also constant communication between them and you at other levels than those you recognize, so that there is an unending interplay between each species and its environment." ... This communication is felt by many, right? I can say pic-taking is sometimes a 'trying to catch it'. Yeah, it seems A-H often go back to saying "be in alignment first". I'm not sure what Seth would say about such, but to me, this means one finds that place where one is not just filtering/labeling/noticing/experiencing/etc existence through the rutted filters of conditioned attention. There is much more space to notice that which is flowing as/in existence. This might be what Taoists pointed to as the life force or "chi" (not sure), but one's awareness of its subtlety and omnipresence in that relative state of alignment can be conducive to realization. What is motionless and empty overflowing into cognizable existence. I think your exploration of such material as more experiential than conceptual. It comes out in the photos you take in fun attempts to "catch it", which is great. What are your thoughts on the perspective that "entities are conscious units" and that they are in constant communication in " their unending interplay"? What questions remain that you would ask the entity Seth?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 24, 2018 9:14:29 GMT -5
Yes, in a sense a CC means really coming home. Only when that happens can it be understood what A-H mean by 'well-being' and 'worthiness' being the basis of our existence. I have not explored their interpretations of those words, so I wonder if they are just pointing to a non-self-referential perspective from which one truly senses gratitude welling up from within. That is, the bullshaite has been cut through, and mind games no longer have hold on the attention to drive "lack of well-being" or "unworthiness". Yes, that's it. I guess that's one of the interesting things about channeled stuff; it comes across as a kind of an intra- or pre-personalized rendition of WIBIGO. It's like an expression pointing to something prior to what is personal. Therefore, ND could be more palatable for some that way. Just an idea... I think so too. ND is usually a little lopsided. ND teachers tend to almost exclusively focus on the SR aspect of enlightenment. While A-H and Seth almost exclusively focus on the CC aspect of enlightenment. So both tell only half the story. It's rare that a teacher presents both sides of the coin.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 24, 2018 21:37:35 GMT -5
Yeah, it seems A-H often go back to saying "be in alignment first". I'm not sure what Seth would say about such, but to me, this means one finds that place where one is not just filtering/labeling/noticing/experiencing/etc existence through the rutted filters of conditioned attention. There is much more space to notice that which is flowing as/in existence. This might be what Taoists pointed to as the life force or "chi" (not sure), but one's awareness of its subtlety and omnipresence in that relative state of alignment can be conducive to realization. What is motionless and empty overflowing into cognizable existence. I think your exploration of such material as more experiential than conceptual. It comes out in the photos you take in fun attempts to "catch it", which is great. What are your thoughts on the perspective that "entities are conscious units" and that they are in constant communication in " their unending interplay"? What questions remain that you would ask the entity Seth? Another term for 'being in alignment' is 'seeing the world thru the eyes of Source' and I think that's much clearer. It points to a vantage point where separation isn't the case anymore. What the Taoists refer to as chi (qi) is what A-H call Source Energy or Consciousness streaming. I think Seth is also referring to streams of consciousness somewhere. What both Seth and A-H are pointing to is this larger portion of Self that is the ground of our beingness. Seth calls it Inner Ego (or Inner Self) and A-H call it Inner Being. And both teachings have the same goal, to get you beyond this perceived separation that the ego perspective creates by blending the ego perspective with the Inner Self/ Inner Being perspective. As they point out, in reality, the lines between inner and outer are entirely arbitrary anyway and don't actually exist. They only exist for sake of convenience in order to create a very specific kind of experience, i.e. physical time-space-reality (the consensus trance). Now, Seth's focus is mostly on how this consensus trance works, while A-H focus is mostly on how to live with it. That's why Seth comes along as a bit too abstract and theoretical and A-H as a lot more practical.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jan 24, 2018 23:08:36 GMT -5
Greetings.
Just a quick reminder, that each time we label something, i.e.: 'awareness', we invoke someone else's beliefs about the label we've invoked.. especially the way words are used on this site, there is ample opportunity for misinterpretation/misunderstanding.. people's attachment to the idea of 'awareness', as presented here, is generally inconsistent with a still mind's awareness of what is happening.. fluid in the moment clarity shatters when intellectualizing about such notions as awareness, having discarded a relationship with the happening for the mind's ideas about that situation.. just a reminder...
Be well..
|
|
|
Post by eputkonen on Jan 25, 2018 8:21:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 25, 2018 10:05:29 GMT -5
Greetings. Just a quick reminder, that each time we label something, i.e.: 'awareness', we invoke someone else's beliefs about the label we've invoked.. especially the way words are used on this site, there is ample opportunity for misinterpretation/misunderstanding.. people's attachment to the idea of 'awareness', as presented here, is generally inconsistent with a still mind's awareness of what is happening.. fluid in the moment clarity shatters when intellectualizing about such notions as awareness, having discarded a relationship with the happening for the mind's ideas about that situation.. just a reminder... Be well.. True. But anyone can explore and find the difference, right now. And then awareness can deepen, become more subtle, but it never ~leaves behind~ what awareness-is-now (or should never leave behind. IOW, analogy, the second floor of a house can't be built without the first floor being built, and remaining).
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 25, 2018 10:11:17 GMT -5
I have not explored their interpretations of those words, so I wonder if they are just pointing to a non-self-referential perspective from which one truly senses gratitude welling up from within. That is, the bullshaite has been cut through, and mind games no longer have hold on the attention to drive "lack of well-being" or "unworthiness". I guess that's one of the interesting things about channeled stuff; it comes across as a kind of an intra- or pre-personalized rendition of WIBIGO. It's like an expression pointing to something prior to what is personal. Therefore, ND could be more palatable for some that way. Just an idea... I am reading my nth book of Seth, and I can say that *many* of the subjects are what have always been most interesting ones for me. For example the one I read now (Dreams, 'Evolution', and Value Fulfillment) talks about formation of rocks, hills, etc.. These things seem to have some kind of awareness to me but at the same time I usually thought "isn't it difficult to stay motionless?".. Yes sounds nonsense but I can't help thinking so, especially while looking at trees. Seth makes some explanations which partially answer my questions.. One can think they are right or wrong but they do sound 'coming from another perspective' to me. He says that all of the elements that exist on earth got formed from fragments of entities left in trance (and the entities are consciousness units). He says: " Those entities are in trance, in those terms, but their potency is not diminished, and there is constant communication among them always. There is also constant communication between them and you at other levels than those you recognize, so that there is an unending interplay between each species and its environment." ... This communication is felt by many, right? I can say pic-taking is sometimes a 'trying to catch it'. It is curious and somewhat instructive that indigenous cultures knew/know that everything is alive, and related. One example is the Native American view of the world.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jan 26, 2018 18:28:54 GMT -5
I have not explored their interpretations of those words, so I wonder if they are just pointing to a non-self-referential perspective from which one truly senses gratitude welling up from within. That is, the bullshaite has been cut through, and mind games no longer have hold on the attention to drive "lack of well-being" or "unworthiness". Yes, that's it. I guess that's one of the interesting things about channeled stuff; it comes across as a kind of an intra- or pre-personalized rendition of WIBIGO. It's like an expression pointing to something prior to what is personal. Therefore, ND could be more palatable for some that way. Just an idea... I think so too. ND is usually a little lopsided. ND teachers tend to almost exclusively focus on the SR aspect of enlightenment. While A-H and Seth almost exclusively focus on the CC aspect of enlightenment. So both tell only half the story. It's rare that a teacher presents both sides of the coin. I would hope that anyone playing such a role were intent on bringing about a deeper, more abiding sense of Being at Oneness, and letting the rest take care of itself. But yeah, I imagine there are mostly lopsided takes on it. I reckon the difficulty mostly emerges from the fact that there is no idea about SR that can be taught per se. Yet, there is a practical and visceral love and wisdom which can emerge from that realization that might form a teaching or consistent set of pointers. The challenges seem mostly born of the conditioned filtering and thinking through which the teaching points. It's all good.
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Jan 26, 2018 19:09:56 GMT -5
Yeah, it seems A-H often go back to saying "be in alignment first". I'm not sure what Seth would say about such, but to me, this means one finds that place where one is not just filtering/labeling/noticing/experiencing/etc existence through the rutted filters of conditioned attention. There is much more space to notice that which is flowing as/in existence. This might be what Taoists pointed to as the life force or "chi" (not sure), but one's awareness of its subtlety and omnipresence in that relative state of alignment can be conducive to realization. What is motionless and empty overflowing into cognizable existence. I think your exploration of such material as more experiential than conceptual. It comes out in the photos you take in fun attempts to "catch it", which is great. What are your thoughts on the perspective that "entities are conscious units" and that they are in constant communication in " their unending interplay"? What questions remain that you would ask the entity Seth? Another term for ' being in alignment' is 'seeing the world thru the eyes of Source' and I think that's much clearer. It points to a vantage point where separation isn't the case anymore. What the Taoists refer to as chi (qi) is what A-H call Source Energy or Consciousness streaming. I think Seth is also referring to streams of consciousness somewhere. What both Seth and A-H are pointing to is this larger portion of Self that is the ground of our beingness. Seth calls it Inner Ego (or Inner Self) and A-H call it Inner Being. And both teachings have the same goal, to get you beyond this perceived separation that the ego perspective creates by blending the ego perspective with the Inner Self/ Inner Being perspective. As they point out, in reality, the lines between inner and outer are entirely arbitrary anyway and don't actually exist. They only exist for sake of convenience in order to create a very specific kind of experience, i.e. physical time-space-reality (the consensus trance). Now, Seth's focus is mostly on how this consensus trance works, while A-H focus is mostly on how to live with it. That's why Seth comes along as a bit too abstract and theoretical and A-H as a lot more practical. That distinguishes it much betterer and I'm in agreement. The rest of what you've written here also does well to summarize the approaches/focuses of the material. Thanks. How different are Seth/ A-H's personalities to those of the channels through which they speak? Curious... Guess I should just read more.
|
|