|
Post by midnight on Dec 16, 2012 20:01:47 GMT -5
a problem that disrupts their lives, like it has for my lifehmmm. so much for dissociative sounds like an over-active imagination "want your cake and eat it too" is a common problem in this business ? come again?
|
|
|
Post by nobody on Dec 16, 2012 20:16:10 GMT -5
So here's the thing, I believe that many people here have experienced dissociation or are experiencing it now, but not in the way that it becomes a problem that disrupts their lives, like it has for my life.I experienced it to the degree that I couldn't work for a whole year. Lost all my friends. Didn't want to do anything. The terror, confusion, and meaninglessness stripped me to the bone. That lasted approx one year. The only difference was that I didn't try to put a label on it like "disassociation". I was lucky enough to have various mentors and teachers (which you have here) who had been through this before me and assured me it was a normal part of the process and that I had no choice in the matter. Yeah, I definitely am stuck in self-loathing, it's almost like my mind is trying to block out the pain of intense self-hatred. Good observation. That's what the mind does. It keeps the thoughts you want to see at the forefront of attention to distract you from what you are avoiding. I am not sure how to remedy this self-loathing part though, therapy doesn't seem to get to the root of it, though I have been trying. I remember when I was stuck in the stage you were at there was a HUGE amount of self judgement. I didn't like myself. I thought I was broken and flawed. There is nothing I did specifically to get rid of that. Watching thought was enough. In continually seeing that the person was a result of conditioning the mind just accepted the me. Nothing need be done or changed. You are stuck with you whether you like it or not.
|
|
|
Post by whiteshaman on Dec 16, 2012 20:41:37 GMT -5
"If you will permit me this distinction: the difference between the impersonal perspective and the personal perspective. I'm fine with the impersonal perspective being somewhat of a platonic ideal, perhaps never perfectly achieved but that one can create a qualitative measure of what is closer to being impersonal rather than personal. The fundamental difference between these two perspectives deals with how a body-mind interprets and then responds/reacts to perceived events." Topology
If I may...IMO, both are personal because they/we are perceiving from a perspective of personal or impersonal. My feeling is that there is that which is not a perspective and that is unattainable. My feeling is that it is the backdrop of life, the blank canvas of life and we are that as much as we are that which perceives, either personally or impersonally. That is what I observe in life/in me.
James
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2012 21:33:48 GMT -5
hmmm. so much for dissociative sounds like an over-active imagination "want your cake and eat it too" is a common problem in this business ? come again? come again what? it seems ... most .. half-ass this pursuit stop short .. afraid to cut the cord .. or claim victory prematurely but you likely know your own deal .. whatever that is .. if you are brutally honest
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 16, 2012 21:42:01 GMT -5
Patrick I just gotta say this ... this seems to be getting a bit masochistic on your part man. Actually has been for quite some time now.
Do you notice how you put so much energy in responding to what you seem to perceive as a negative challenge ... so much energy into telling people that they simply don't understand?
Here's a challenge for you: can you refrain from responding to someone who you feel calls you out?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 16, 2012 21:59:11 GMT -5
"If you will permit me this distinction: the difference between the impersonal perspective and the personal perspective. I'm fine with the impersonal perspective being somewhat of a platonic ideal, perhaps never perfectly achieved but that one can create a qualitative measure of what is closer to being impersonal rather than personal. The fundamental difference between these two perspectives deals with how a body-mind interprets and then responds/reacts to perceived events." Topology If I may...IMO, both are personal because they/we are perceiving from a perspective of personal or impersonal. My feeling is that there is that which is not a perspective and that is unattainable. My feeling is that it is the backdrop of life, the blank canvas of life and we are that as much as we are that which perceives, either personally or impersonally. That is what I observe in life/in me. James Impersonal doesn't imply the absence of a perspective, it means that the perspective is formed on the basis of what is actually perceived rather than the interpretation of that perception through a personal filter of needs, fears, expectations, etc. It's the result of what I mean by 'coming empty'. As such, it also doesn't imply that some objective truth about the world is being perceived, as it is still a perspective and subject to all the potential errors of perception inherent in a given perspective. It just means everything isn't viewed through the imagined structure of personhood.
|
|
|
Post by whiteshaman on Dec 16, 2012 22:21:29 GMT -5
"If you will permit me this distinction: the difference between the impersonal perspective and the personal perspective. I'm fine with the impersonal perspective being somewhat of a platonic ideal, perhaps never perfectly achieved but that one can create a qualitative measure of what is closer to being impersonal rather than personal. The fundamental difference between these two perspectives deals with how a body-mind interprets and then responds/reacts to perceived events." Topology If I may...IMO, both are personal because they/we are perceiving from a perspective of personal or impersonal. My feeling is that there is that which is not a perspective and that is unattainable. My feeling is that it is the backdrop of life, the blank canvas of life and we are that as much as we are that which perceives, either personally or impersonally. That is what I observe in life/in me. James Impersonal doesn't imply the absence of a perspective, it means that the perspective is formed on the basis of what is actually perceived rather than the interpretation of that perception through a personal filter of needs, fears, expectations, etc. It's the result of what I mean by 'coming empty'. As such, it also doesn't imply that some objective truth about the world is being perceived, as it is still a perspective and subject to all the potential errors of perception inherent in a given perspective. It just means everything isn't viewed through the imagined structure of personhood. Yes i agree that impersonal doesn't imply lack of a perspective and that was my point. "Coming empty" however, seems unlikely to me unless you come down with Dimenzia.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 16, 2012 22:26:06 GMT -5
Greetings.. The question, " What is actually liberating about 'no self'?", appears to assume the condition of 'no self', which then creates the conflict between the 'self' as an individual's reference and 'self-awareness, and the idea of 'no self'.. It is curious, that there must be an existent 'self', so that other 'selfs', as they distinguish themselves from others, can discuss the concept of 'no self'.. 'self' and 'no self' are ideas, thoughts, and concepts that occur in the mind, what is it that remains when the mind is silent, when the thoughts cease? 'Still the mind', suspend the thinking processes.. thoughts, beliefs, memories, knowing, expectations, fears all fall silent in the still mind.. there is just the seeing, the experiencing, the 'isness'.. Life revealing itself as it 'is', rather than how we 'think' it is.. Don't worry about 'self' or 'no self', Life will happen regardless, and.. from 'my' experience, Liberation happens when i'm not distracted with philosophizing and building a reality of illusions.. what remains when the mind is still? clarity and liberation! Be well.. Are you saying that a 'still mind' means no thoughts? If so, then the philosophizing above can only come from a place of bondage and confusion and not from clarity and liberation.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 16, 2012 22:30:17 GMT -5
Hi WS: What is obvious to you may not be obvious to others.. what i speak of, 'stillness', and even 'silence', is not related to noise or sound, it is a state of mind, a state of awareness.. a state where the is no 'mental dialogue', which is itself an odd condition, i mean the dialogue is happening in your mind, talking with yourself.. Ah! Now I see where you are coming from. You're from the States!
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Dec 16, 2012 22:52:39 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. The question, " What is actually liberating about 'no self'?", appears to assume the condition of 'no self', which then creates the conflict between the 'self' as an individual's reference and 'self-awareness, and the idea of 'no self'.. It is curious, that there must be an existent 'self', so that other 'selfs', as they distinguish themselves from others, can discuss the concept of 'no self'.. 'self' and 'no self' are ideas, thoughts, and concepts that occur in the mind, what is it that remains when the mind is silent, when the thoughts cease? 'Still the mind', suspend the thinking processes.. thoughts, beliefs, memories, knowing, expectations, fears all fall silent in the still mind.. there is just the seeing, the experiencing, the 'isness'.. Life revealing itself as it 'is', rather than how we 'think' it is.. Don't worry about 'self' or 'no self', Life will happen regardless, and.. from 'my' experience, Liberation happens when i'm not distracted with philosophizing and building a reality of illusions.. what remains when the mind is still? clarity and liberation! Be well.. Are you saying that a 'still mind' means no thoughts? If so, then the philosophizing above can only come from a place of bondage and confusion and not from clarity and liberation. Hi reefs: An absolute ('only') built on 'if/then' assumptions? The philosophizing you refer to, may not be philosophizing at all, it might simply be 'my' experience.. but yes, the 'still mind' i refer to is also a reference to a mind that is open and receptive, not engaged in 'thinking'.. will you explain the understanding that you employ to justify your statement, " the philosophizing above can only come from a place of bondage and confusion and not from clarity and liberation".. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Dec 16, 2012 23:23:57 GMT -5
Greetings.. Are you saying that a 'still mind' means no thoughts? If so, then the philosophizing above can only come from a place of bondage and confusion and not from clarity and liberation. Hi reefs: An absolute ('only') built on 'if/then' assumptions? The philosophizing you refer to, may not be philosophizing at all, it might simply be 'my' experience.. but yes, the 'still mind' i refer to is also a reference to a mind that is open and receptive, not engaged in 'thinking'.. will you explain the understanding that you employ to justify your statement, " the philosophizing above can only come from a place of bondage and confusion and not from clarity and liberation".. Be well.. Well, that's how it works with this text format. Logic and grammar are the rules of this game, the rules that create meaning by connecting the dots in a certain way. So according to logic and basic grammar, that's the conclusion one should come to according to the basic rules based on what you've said. What else could it mean? even if you only type down your experience, you still have to put it into words which requires some basic analyzing. It's absolute within this format. That's all. Philosophizing is what I call 'minding' (minding = mind taken as a verb to avoid treating mind as an entity but rather as a process). And Minding means personal vantage point, means subject to space, time and all kinds of other stuff - in short: bondage and confusion. Now you could insist that you weren't really aware of what you were typing, that your fingers were just moving and when 'post reply' was clicked and you saw what had been written, you were kinda surprised what just had been coming thru your fingers. I've read similar stories about Anandamayi Ma who very often seemed to be surprised what kind of funny things had just come out of her mouth. Were you implying that? I didn't see that in your post.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Dec 16, 2012 23:26:36 GMT -5
Impersonal doesn't imply the absence of a perspective, it means that the perspective is formed on the basis of what is actually perceived rather than the interpretation of that perception through a personal filter of needs, fears, expectations, etc. It's the result of what I mean by 'coming empty'. As such, it also doesn't imply that some objective truth about the world is being perceived, as it is still a perspective and subject to all the potential errors of perception inherent in a given perspective. It just means everything isn't viewed through the imagined structure of personhood. Yes i agree that impersonal doesn't imply lack of a perspective and that was my point. "Coming empty" however, seems unlikely to me unless you come down with Dimenzia. Oh, yes, it's possible to see without your personal filters. In your case in particular, it would be necessary to give less power to feeling, or at least be clear about where your feelings come from so that they don't manipulate you.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Dec 16, 2012 23:35:38 GMT -5
Greetings.. Hi Tzu, I don't see it so much as a choice but that we exist at an equilibrium of understanding, a harmonic of vibration if you will accommodate that description, or in other words a perspective with some degree of conditioning by the environment, linguistically, ontologically, attitudinally, etc. If you will permit me this distinction: the difference between the impersonal perspective and the personal perspective. I'm fine with the impersonal perspective being somewhat of a platonic ideal, perhaps never perfectly achieved but that one can create a qualitative measure of what is closer to being impersonal rather than personal. The fundamental difference between these two perspectives deals with how a body-mind interprets and then responds/reacts to perceived events. The impersonal perspective sees what is and responds appropriately, adding little interpretation and the response is more practical, precise and effective in general. The personal perspective personalized the events and adds unnecessary interpretation to what is happening. The personal perspective makes itself more of a victim of circumstances, this is what is happening to "me" instead of simply what is happening. The personal perspective adds emotion and drama, worrying, mind chatter, and tends to want to be in control of situations more. Most every "spiritual" practice, when taken to completion of its incremental effects, moves a person from the personal perspective to the impersonal perspective. Quieting the mind, becoming aware of one's unconscious programming, looking at one's direct and immediate experience sans mental interpretation (seeing the qualitative experience directly), mindfulness, being present and non-reactive, Love and Forgiveness, etc. These endeavors are qualitatively transformative, giving the body-mind the opportunity to see clearly and then perhaps realize the truth of the way things are instead of how they are imagined to be. While it is true that we seem to be having individuated experiences, I can't see out your eyes and you can't see out mine, we are still having universal experiences. This can be seen best if we were to stand next to each other in view of the same vista. As you and I look out upon the same view and if we let our minds go quiet, there is more sameness to our experience than difference. With the absence of the personal mind-story which anchors our thinking that we are a person named so-and-so, we can see and realize that we could have been anybody. With the mind quieted we realize our sameness. The consciousness here, the presence, awareness, clarity, it is the same with minor variations in emotion, mental content, and body manifestation. As one continues with these "spiritual" practices, the self-identification shifts from being centered around the story details stored in the body-mind's memory to being centered around these universal qualities. As the attention and orientation shifts towards the impersonal and the universal, the story-content tends to fall away as the details become unimportant, happenstance, and with little significance. As the orientation normalizes through abiding in the clarity of direct experience and the mind normalizes in quietude, even the story of having made the the thoughts around the process of shifting tend to fall away and lose their significance. One simply acclimates and gets used to living from the impersonal perspective. The life of the personal self is lived purely in imagination as a coloring of the experience as it is interpreted by the mind. The mind has been habituated to a few confirmation biases where it uses the existence of Y in the experience to conclude that Z is true. "people call this body so-and-so, so therefore I exist as so-and-so." this kind of subtle buy-in to the story is very hard to doubt and when initially doubted it plunges the mind's identification process into existential crisis. If I am not this persona, not the past events, not my thoughts, then who or what am I?!? Anything at all? But this is just the mind in its panic, the death throws of the identification with the personal. There are many many people that live in this impersonal perspective. I think most don't even realize it because they haven't thought about the differences significantly. They just live without making a big fuss or taking things personally. From the outside they look like a grounded human being, from the inside they are just present and aware in every situation without thinking about needing to be present and aware. Then there are those of us who have had to resort to philosophy and spirituality to cope with our personal obsessions and that has brought us to the impersonal perspective. In a nutshell it is simply practical living, wisdom in expression, clarity of Mind and emotion in response. But it is impersonal and without reflective or self-obsessed thought or interpretation. Hi Topo: Bravo!! A very insightful description of existence from the 'still mind' perspective.. we may differ in our understandings of the usefulness of Living in one perspective or another, but.. your description is so well crafted as to give me pause for contemplation and absorption, yeah.. it's that good.. I find myself drifting between universal and individual, allowing the demands of 'Now' to inspire the perspective, favoring neither, personally.. thanks for the excellent read, Topo.. Be well.. *tips the Viking hat* What can I say? You bring it out of me, Tzu. ;D
|
|
|
Post by topology on Dec 16, 2012 23:43:42 GMT -5
Hi Tzu, My inquiry is specific to midnight as he seems to be stuck in a form of self-loathing. He says he is in a dissociated state, absent of the feeling of having a self and yet there is something present which hates the feeling of being selfless. The question is meant to turn his attention to what is present with or without a self in these experiences. He thinks his plight is significant or special, and no one else could possibly have the same experience and not have a problem with it. He doesn't believe any of us that say we are dissociated just as he is, but we have accommodated the change in experience and the change in frame of reference. He wants help, but doesn't want help at the same time. He wants to put the genie back in the bottle, to crawl back into the womb of the illusion of being a persona and not the present awareness that is experienced in the absence of individuality and absence of the personal mental content. I don't think my plight is particularly significant in the greater scheme of things any more Topology, I can assure you of that. I definitely did used to think what I was experiencing was really special, but now I see it as an immense inconvenience, still pretty scary, though not mystical anymore (even though some of the symptoms are so bizarre I can't believe this isn't a 'dark night of the soul' still.) Not many on here could possibly be dissociated in the same way, because otherwise there would be many more threads on the forum with people complaining of feeling acute anxiety, panic, dread etc. So here's the thing, I believe that many people here have experienced dissociation or are experiencing it now, but not in the way that it becomes a problem that disrupts their lives, like it has for my life.That's a more fair perspective. Does that make sense? Yeah, I definitely am stuck in self-loathing, it's almost like my mind is trying to block out the pain of intense self-hatred. Good observation. I am not sure how to remedy this self-loathing part though, therapy doesn't seem to get to the root of it, though I have been trying. Have you gotten truly sick and tired of the self-loathing yet? You won't be able to break free of it until you are sick of the negativity and the self-hate. Again, you make yourself special by claiming to have a high degree of suffering. Mate, why can't you accept it on faith that most of us have been there? Jobless, tortured, dysfunctional, not able to focus, disillusioned, experiencing life as ashes or meaningless. You are not special or alone in being there, you just want to be that way, special or alone in your suffering. Until you get sick of this voice that feeds you these lies, self-loathings and despair, you are going to stay right where you are at. Something in you has to fundamentally get fed up with indulging the tape you keep playing over and over. If you lived here I could help you out more. Over the net, you are on your own until you decide you've had enough of the self-defeating inner monologue.
|
|
|
Post by nobody on Dec 17, 2012 0:07:28 GMT -5
No one can help him. I thought that encouragement would help, as it did me, but judging from how long he's been posting about this, he's on his own. What's required is intense suffering and recognizing that he's totally stuck in a rut. Once it dawns that there's no way out, and that it's impossible to know what this is, he'll have to dive into those pockets of resistance and find out what's true experientially.
|
|