|
|
Post by laughter on May 2, 2013 10:55:57 GMT -5
That's one way to look at it. Hi Laughter. Are you suggesting another that you'd like to share? Nope. Plenty written about the alts 'round here already. I'm familiar with the idea that figs put forth but I haven't have the in-depth conversations with her to know what it means to her exactly. If that happens it happens. |
|
|
|
Post by topology on May 2, 2013 10:56:53 GMT -5
But isn't 'I am a mother, wife, artist, etc.' still an attachment to a self-image, however fluid, however changing, or however ... intense? , attachment to an identity would mean that I am somehow 'bound' by it....that It defines my way of being. & If I'm loving playing the role of mom or artist or whatever, where are the binds or limitations? If they are there, there is no problem with them, so...where's the problem?  If no need is present, there is no attachment. If I am attached to a certain self image, then there is a need present there to be seen by others and to see self, in a particular light. If that need is not there, no attachment. Sometimes I consciously consider the role, sometimes I'm just 'in it.' This morning as I wrote my artists bio, I was consciously putting on the artists hat. What if your understanding fell away? What if your roles fell away? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2013 11:01:40 GMT -5
As I understand it, attachment to an identity would mean that I am somehow 'bound' by it....that It defines my way of being. & If I'm loving playing the role of mom or artist or whatever, where are the binds or limitations? If they are there, there is no problem with them, so...where's the problem? If no need is present, there is no attachment. If I am attached to a certain self image, then there is a need present there to be seen by others and to see self, in a particular light. If that need is not there, no attachment. Sometimes I consciously consider the role, sometimes I'm just 'in it.' This morning as I wrote my artists bio, I was consciously putting on the artists hat. What if your understanding fell away? What if your roles fell away? Then there would be no understanding and no roles played...I guess...  Why do you ask? Again....this incessant inquiry even in the presence of peace. Why? |
|
|
|
Post by topology on May 2, 2013 11:05:36 GMT -5
What if your understanding fell away? What if your roles fell away? Then there would be no understanding and no roles played...I guess... Why do you ask? Again....this incessant inquiry even in the presence of peace. Why? incessant? Would there be a sense of loss if the roles did not arise again? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 2, 2013 11:24:03 GMT -5
Dear Dude/Dudette, Rephrase, please. Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize For clarity, would you restate the concept of 'Identity Poker' so that I can rephrase with specificity? Dear Dude/Dudette, <tzuper-ego>the definition has been given before.. it's already there.. take a deep dive into the post dumpster and then report back</tzuper-ego> Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 2, 2013 11:41:05 GMT -5
This morning I engaged with an identity as an artist, as I sat down to write up an artists bio to describe my particular painting style and where I find inspiration to paint in the way I do, etc. I wrote from the perspective of 'artist' and engaged that aspect of self that is driven to create.
I then broke away from that activity (& dropped the artist hat to don the one of mom) as my son was leaving the house to remind him about finishing up his homework after school before he hangs with his friends....I pondered the fact that I was reminding him once again when I said I'd leave it up to him and noted how I was veering slightly away from my highest ideals surrounding parenting. Attaching would be if I believed the totality of who and what I am, to be "a woman who is an artist, mother,...etc" to the degree that I was no longer free to BE whatever I felt moved to be in any given moment. When we're attached to an identity or role, we often cannot see past it...cannot imagine 'being' anything but 'that.' When we engage with identity(ies) we put them on and take them off easily. The identity does not in any way hem us in, but is rather just one expression amongst unlimited expressions. What's focused or having a focus? I've let go of the need to pin that one down.  Dear Dude/Dudette, That's clutterization in my book. TMT. Why the need for an identity? It's engaging with 'oneself' (or 'oneselves' in your case). If there is no need for an identity then the question of attachment to a certain identity vs. non-attachment and flexibility with unlimited identities would be a non-issue. Letting go would also be an non-issue. I never felt like a husband or parent. That kind of stuff just doesn't arise. Am I missing something essential here? Separation at all costs? Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 2, 2013 11:45:39 GMT -5
This morning I engaged with an identity as an artist, as I sat down to write up an artists bio to describe my particular painting style and where I find inspiration to paint in the way I do, etc. I wrote from the perspective of 'artist' and engaged that aspect of self that is driven to create.
I then broke away from that activity (& dropped the artist hat to don the one of mom) as my son was leaving the house to remind him about finishing up his homework after school before he hangs with his friends....I pondered the fact that I was reminding him once again when I said I'd leave it up to him and noted how I was veering slightly away from my highest ideals surrounding parenting. Attaching would be if I believed the totality of who and what I am, to be "a woman who is an artist, mother,...etc" to the degree that I was no longer free to BE whatever I felt moved to be in any given moment. When we're attached to an identity or role, we often cannot see past it...cannot imagine 'being' anything but 'that.' When we engage with identity(ies) we put them on and take them off easily. The identity does not in any way hem us in, but is rather just one expression amongst unlimited expressions. What's focused or having a focus? I've let go of the need to pin that one down. Dear Dude/Dudette, That's clutterization in my book. TMT. Why the need for an identity? It's engaging with 'oneself' (or 'oneselves' in your case). If there is no need for an identity then the question of attachment to a certain identity vs. non-attachment and flexibility with unlimited identities would be a non-issue. Letting go would also be an non-issue. I never felt like a husband or parent. That kind of stuff just doesn't arise. Am I missing something essential here? Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize Reefs is a dude! |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on May 2, 2013 12:28:47 GMT -5
But isn't 'I am a mother, wife, artist, etc.' still an attachment to a self-image, however fluid, however changing, or however ... intense? As I understand it, attachment to an identity would mean that I am somehow 'bound' by it....that It defines my way of being. & If I'm loving playing the role of mom or artist or whatever, where are the binds or limitations? If they are there, there is no problem with them, so...where's the problem? If no need is present, there is no attachment. If I am attached to a certain self image, then there is a need present there to be seen by others and to see self, in a particular light. If that need is not there, no attachment. Sometimes I consciously consider the role, sometimes I'm just 'in it.' This morning as I wrote my artists bio, I was consciously putting on the artists hat.[/quote] Okay. I understand that putting emotional import on anything indicates attachment, but what I'm trying to gather, here, is whether there can be an attachment to a self-image without emotionality. When you 'consciously consider the role' (any role), doesn't such consideration include a particular definition of and/or expectation regarding that role? And if so, would that not still indicate an attachment, however subtle? What if you fail to fulfill the role you've consciously considered? Does not an emotion arise, then (i.e., guilt as a result of failure)? And wouldn't that emotion still indicate an attachment? |
|
|
|
Post by topology on May 2, 2013 12:39:41 GMT -5
Dear Dude/Dudette, That's clutterization in my book. TMT. Why the need for an identity? It's engaging with 'oneself' (or 'oneselves' in your case). If there is no need for an identity then the question of attachment to a certain identity vs. non-attachment and flexibility with unlimited identities would be a non-issue. Letting go would also be an non-issue. I never felt like a husband or parent. That kind of stuff just doesn't arise. Am I missing something essential here? Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize Reefs is a dude! With kids and an as of yet un-sexed life partner. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2013 12:43:57 GMT -5
Dear Dude/Dudette, That's clutterization in my book. TMT. Why the need for an identity? It's engaging with 'oneself' (or 'oneselves' in your case). If there is no need for an identity then the question of attachment to a certain identity vs. non-attachment and flexibility with unlimited identities would be a non-issue. Letting go would also be an non-issue. I never felt like a husband or parent. That kind of stuff just doesn't arise. Am I missing something essential here? Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize Reefs is a dude! Neither husband nor parent nor dude, just dudeing. |
|
|
|
Post by silence on May 2, 2013 12:46:56 GMT -5
Neither husband nor parent nor dude, just dudeing.  |
|
|
|
Post by adventurousman on May 2, 2013 13:16:31 GMT -5
hahaha, what is going on here?
The thread has gone way off topic. No one has read or listened to Vernon Howard?
All the teachers are pointing to one thing only (as far I know) and that is to be yourself, your real self. Not role playing not this or that & that is why the direct path is effective. Mooji, adyashanti, ramana even tolle, they all point to it and that's what its about, isn't it? Finding the truth.
If u don't know who u really are, then u r just identifying with a thought, the "I thought" and then u have a past and future.
As far activities is concerned, u can be engaged in different activities, doing different things at different times but the real question to ask yourself or to know, is there someone doing those things?
Ego is very cunning, we've to be serious if we won't to get out of it otherwise we won't wake up and to tell u the truth, most of us don't want to wake up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2013 14:49:42 GMT -5
Then there would be no understanding and no roles played...I guess... Why do you ask? Again....this incessant inquiry even in the presence of peace. Why? incessant? Would there be a sense of loss if the roles did not arise again? With the roles I thoroughly enjoy, sure. But a sense of loss itself is not a problem if it's felt fully and then released. This body has a progressive neurological disorder that is slowly affecting the most basic physical functions. Prior to this, I've always enjoyed peak health, used to perform in a rock band, run every morning, lift weight, and in general,give my kids a run for their money when it came to energy and stamina. Initially there was a sense of having the role of 'healthy energetic woman' ripped out from under me...(and all those other roles that that supported). So yes, initially, a sense of loss. But it did not last long. And the vantage point provided by where I now stand, has opened up new vistas with all sorts of new 'roles' to engage with if/when they beckon. AS I see it, so long as we're physically alive, there will never be a shortage of enjoyable roles to play, so long as we're still interested in participating in the play. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2013 15:01:13 GMT -5
But isn't 'I am a mother, wife, artist, etc.' still an attachment to a self-image, however fluid, however changing, or however ... intense? As I understand it, attachment to an identity would mean that I am somehow 'bound' by it....that It defines my way of being. & If I'm loving playing the role of mom or artist or whatever, where are the binds or limitations? If they are there, there is no problem with them, so...where's the problem? If no need is present, there is no attachment. If I am attached to a certain self image, then there is a need present there to be seen by others and to see self, in a particular light. If that need is not there, no attachment. Sometimes I consciously consider the role, sometimes I'm just 'in it.' This morning as I wrote my artists bio, I was consciously putting on the artists hat. Okay. I understand that putting emotional import on anything indicates attachment, but what I'm trying to gather, here, is whether there can be an attachment to a self-image without emotionality. When you 'consciously consider the role' (any role), doesn't such consideration include a particular definition of and/or expectation regarding that role? And if so, would that not still indicate an attachment, however subtle? What if you fail to fulfill the role you've consciously considered? Does not an emotion arise, then (i.e., guilt as a result of failure)? And wouldn't that emotion still indicate an attachment?[/quote] I don't agree that 'putting emotional import on anything indicates attachment' not in the sense that the absence of it will pull us from our center of Peace. And that's the only reason I see to even invoke the idea of 'attachment'....to denote that which Peace is conditional upon. If I can experience the absence of something and Peace continues to prevail....no attachment worthy of noting. I've loved someone dearly, they died..... but, Peace did not. But, Yes, I do agree that if we're setting up criteria to 'be fulfilled' in the roles we play and the absence of fulfilling them means Peace is no longer, that would mean we were attached. When it comes to labelling something as an attachment, my criteria is: Does Peace depend upon the presence of this thing? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2013 15:03:23 GMT -5
Dear Dude/Dudette, That's clutterization in my book. TMT. Why the need for an identity? It's engaging with 'oneself' (or 'oneselves' in your case). If there is no need for an identity then the question of attachment to a certain identity vs. non-attachment and flexibility with unlimited identities would be a non-issue. Letting go would also be an non-issue. I never felt like a husband or parent. That kind of stuff just doesn't arise. Am I missing something essential here? Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize Reefs is a dude! |
|
