Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 22:18:37 GMT -5
Most are after happiness, cuz that's what they know. If somebody is after peace, he doesn't really understand it, cuz peace passeth understandingeth. No, nobody is really looking for peace. IN the throes of deep emotional pain, I doubt most are seeking 'happiness'..way too big of a leap from deep despair......rather an absence of or lifting of the pain is more what they're really after, and I'd call that "Peace." not unduly, but it does make it appear as though you are rather attached to idea of Oneness being true. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on May 24, 2013 22:29:46 GMT -5
How does peace prevail for the separate person in the face of loss? It's about releasing attachment...eventually to ALL ideas...ALL beliefs. Indeed, I think most of us here would agree with this. But, then, wouldn't this also include the belief in a separate, volitional self? I understand what you're getting at, Figs. I honestly cannot assert that self-inquiry is required to release attachment. Only thing is, once you release that attachment, another lies in wait. Eventually, one must come face to face with the core of all attachment, which stems from the belief in a separate self (I'll leave out 'volitional' here, because I think that's another subject, really). It's really not unlike the peeling of the proverbial onion. In the end, the layers of attachment get peeled back, until there's just no onion left. What E is saying (I think) is that the onion itself is the core belief in a separate self. And with that, I couldn't disagree, even if I wanted to. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 24, 2013 22:42:03 GMT -5
[quote author=Enigma: Most of the folks I encounter are cool, loving, kind and intelligent too. Tell me, do other peeps let you get away with manipulating conversations the way you do? I didn't say they were suffering miserably. Do others let you get away with these manipulations? As for insane, yes, most peeps are insane, including you. You're still cool, kind, loving and intelligent.  Too vague. It's like saying getting rich in the market is about buying low and selling high. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 24, 2013 22:48:00 GMT -5
Most are after happiness, cuz that's what they know. If somebody is after peace, he doesn't really understand it, cuz peace passeth understandingeth. No, nobody is really looking for peace. IN the throes of deep emotional pain, I doubt most are seeking 'happiness'..way too big of a leap from deep despair......rather an absence of lifting of the pain is more what they're really after, and I'd call that "Peace." They want to be happy again. Why complicate it? That's the Tzu approach. When somebody says something he disagrees with, it becomes an attachment to a belief. Did you learn that from him? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 24, 2013 22:55:46 GMT -5
It's about releasing attachment...eventually to ALL ideas...ALL beliefs. Indeed, I think most of us here would agree with this. But, then, wouldn't this also include the belief in a separate, volitional self? I understand what you're getting at, Figs. I honestly cannot assert that self-inquiry is required to release attachment. Only thing is, once you release that attachment, another lies in wait. Eventually, one must come face to face with the core of all attachment, which stems from the belief in a separate self (I'll leave out 'volitional' here, because I think that's another subject, really). It's really not unlike the peeling of the proverbial onion. In the end, the layers of attachment get peeled back, until there's just no onion left. What E is saying (I think) is that the onion itself is the core belief in a separate self. Yes. If letting go of attachment were some kind of psychological process or whatever, (she hasn't revealed the secret yet) there wouldn't be a need for noduality teachings. If the separate person can find freedom, nonduality is irrelevant and false. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2013 0:37:25 GMT -5
Indeed, I think most of us here would agree with this. But, then, wouldn't this also include the belief in a separate, volitional self? Yes, if it's a belief, it would be included. An experience of volition though does not necessarily indicate a 'belief' in volition. There are times I engage reality as though I have volition...and yet, it's not something I believe or disbelieve...there is just an experience sometimes of being one who chooses. I dunno. Once it's seen that Peace is independent of circumstances and conditions, there really is nothing left to release. And as I've said, even my children are to a large extent, grasping this. Again, my own experience, personally, and of those in my midst who have released attachment, indicate that There are numerous avenues to releasing attachment/need. Yes, if someone is adamant about insisting there IS separation and volition, I'd say he's attached to that idea, but equally, if someone is adamant about insisting there is not separation and volition, I'd say he's also attached to his idea. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2013 0:58:08 GMT -5
I didn't say they were suffering miserably. Do others let you get away with these manipulations? What you said was: No, 'suffering miserably' was not your exact wording, but is it really such a manipulation on my part to use those terms to summarize what you were saying there? I mean really......' entire lives, with an empty space inside...that they try endlessly to fill with ALL manner of distractions, half awake, half alive, aware of their mortality and desperately trying to control what cannot be controlled...? Yup...sounds like 'suffering miserably' to me. The kindness I encounter in the others I've spoken about, is a kindness based on freedom from attachment to basic security needs, an opening to aiding others in a way that indicates an experiential sense of at-one-ment with them. The love I encounter in most others these days, is a love that is without condition.....a love that is there regardless. And the intelligence I speak of is understanding and acknowledgement that goes deeper than the intellectual. "Insanity" generally does not abide alongside these characteristics. So when you say I am cool, kind and loving AND also, insane, it's quite clear that you do not experience me in the way that I experience those I'm speaking of. I don't have an exact prescription that will be a surefire hit for all. There are a myriad of avenues to releasing attachments, but ultimately, one needs to see through the belief that Peace lies in the fulfillment of desire. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2013 1:14:29 GMT -5
They want to be happy again. Why complicate it? Happy 'again'? In your estimation, are folks really ever 'happy'? You're complicating it with your beliefs about how 'most' people are. If someone is knee deep in emotional despair, from that position, is he really likely to be so optimistic as to reach for happiness? Isn't it far more likely that he's simply looking to be absent of the pain? Imagine being in excruciating physical pain. Is your immediate goal to feel wonderful and go skipping energetically through the tulips or is your focus more on just being absent of the physical pain? As someone who has gone through labour without drugs, I can tell you, my focus the entire 12 hours was on that tiny little window of a few pain free moments between contractions. Those upcoming fleeting moments of absence of contraction pain were what I was aiming for....not some idea of being at my physical peak. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2013 1:22:49 GMT -5
Yes. If letting go of attachment were some kind of psychological process or whatever, (she hasn't revealed the secret yet) there wouldn't be a need for noduality teachings. There are a myriad of teachings for letting go. Non-duality is but one. IN your estimation, are non-duality teachings really more successful than others in terms of folks actually letting go? And what do you base this on? Freedom does not require embracing any teaching, non-duality included. real freedom is freedom from belief in all ideas...and after all, 'non-duality' is itself just an idea about what 'actually' is. All ideas about 'this' become irrelevant once all attachments have been released. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 25, 2013 6:02:14 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. The core of suffering is attachment.. your suffering is wrought by attachment to beliefs about oneness, non-duality, neo-advaita, etc.. The core of suffering is misunderstanding.. misunderstanding what is seen/experienced as something that fit into a belief/model.. Be well.. There is no attachment until there is someone to be attached. The core of suffering is the belief in the separate, volitional self that then becomes attached. Hi E: It is fantasy to pretend that there is no 'someone', just so you can make such a statement as quoted here.. When people can pretend there are no 'persons' and therefore those non-person body-minds don't suffer, then.. as history has revealed, there is no compelling understanding for respect, compassion, or interest for easing the actual suffering that afflicts the human experience.. the bastardized incarnation of communism that was the Soviet Union, or Mao's China set the State as the 'One' true function of human existence, the expression of individuality was punished with suffering beyond the failed model of that belief.. communal awareness balanced with individual participation as a unified and consciously evolving exploration of the human experience in relationship with its environment will actually approach suffering with compassionate intellectual solutions rather than the fantasy of pretending there are no persons, and therefore no suffering.. try explaining to the 10 year old child who's 'suffering' in a war-zone, starving and homeless, that if they will just believe that there is no 'person' suffering, that the 'suffering' will go away.. What you are suggesting is ' separating' 'that which is' from 'that' which 'it is'.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on May 25, 2013 6:13:57 GMT -5
Greetings.. That's the Tzu approach. When somebody says something he disagrees with, it becomes an attachment to a belief. Did you learn that from him? No, the "Tzu approach" is drop the beliefs, just pay attention with genuine curiosity, and.. the clarity will reveal what is actually happening, it will reveal the functional relationships the human experience has with its environment and with each other 'part' of the organic 'whole'.. the "Tzu approach" doesn't attach to beliefs about what is 'true or truth', it is present for what is actually happening, open and adaptable to the Cosmos exploring its own existence.. the "Tzu approach" is not stuck in 'beliefs about' what it 'has experienced', it is present for the actual experience happening.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 25, 2013 10:29:43 GMT -5
Dear Dude/Dudette,  Sincerely, The Great Blue Hole Of Belize |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 25, 2013 10:48:42 GMT -5
Greetings.. The belief in the separate, volitional self is at the core of suffering. The core of suffering is attachment.. your suffering is wrought by attachment to beliefs about oneness, non-duality, neo-advaita, etc.. The core of suffering is misunderstanding.. misunderstanding what is seen/experienced as something that fits into a belief/model.. Be well.. Understanding is a double-negative. It's misunderstanding with a not in front of it. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 25, 2013 10:51:19 GMT -5
You think I'm saying there's a oneness doohickey beyond the illusion somewhere? I think I reached my insanity threshold for the day.  I said nothing about a 'doohickey'....just that beyond the illusion of separation, you see something as being 'actual' and that is Oneness. IN this case 'actual' hinges upon the identification of something else that is not. Actual lies beyond/behind that which is not. figs' ... if you read objectification in something Enigma has written there is a deception at play. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2013 11:01:19 GMT -5
I said nothing about a 'doohickey'....just that beyond the illusion of separation, you see something as being 'actual' and that is Oneness. IN this case 'actual' hinges upon the identification of something else that is not. Actual lies beyond/behind that which is not. figs' ... if you read objectification in something Enigma has written there is a deception at play. No, 'objectification' was not my point. I'm referring to the whole paradigm of actual vs. illusive. There is a point where it collapses and I'm trying to discuss that. |
|
