|
Post by Beingist on Jun 26, 2013 12:59:00 GMT -5
Well there's that part about changing the things I can. This serenity prayer always seems to fit when coming to terms with or accepting that which can not be changed. And I think the wisdom is realizing how little of a say we actually have in stuff. AFAIK, it's used a lot in addiction circles, especially AA. One goes from feeling like they have control to realizing they don't. It seems like a signpost in the transition. Serenity Prayer - Non-dual versionMay I be granted the realization of that which I already am, so that it may manifest in my life as the acceptance of that which appears, the courage to step into the Truth of my being, and the wisdom to know the difference. Don't sound as purdy, but as a translation, it works very well
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jun 26, 2013 13:11:36 GMT -5
Serenity Prayer - Non-dual versionMay I be granted the realization of that which I already am, so that it may manifest in my life as the acceptance of that which appears, the courage to step into the Truth of my being, and the wisdom to know the difference. Don't sound as purdy, but as a translation, it works very well Thanks, Mr. B.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 13:13:20 GMT -5
Well there's that part about changing the things I can. This serenity prayer always seems to fit when coming to terms with or accepting that which can not be changed. And I think the wisdom is realizing how little of a say we actually have in stuff. AFAIK, it's used a lot in addiction circles, especially AA. One goes from feeling like they have control to realizing they don't. It seems like a signpost in the transition. Serenity Prayer - Non-dual versionMay I be granted the realization of that which I already am, so that it may manifest in my life as the acceptance of that which appears, the courage to step into the Truth of my being, and the wisdom to know the difference. Nice. How's about the last line includes a parenthetical "and the wisdom to know the difference (despite no separation)." This must be why nondual music is so bad!
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Jun 26, 2013 14:08:35 GMT -5
Serenity Prayer - Non-dual versionMay I be granted the realization of that which I already am, so that it may manifest in my life as the acceptance of that which appears, the courage to step into the Truth of my being, and the wisdom to know the difference. Nice. How's about the last line includes a parenthetical "and the wisdom to know the difference (despite no separation)." This must be why nondual music is so bad! Haha! For this forum, you'd have to have the parenthesis. And a disclaimer that this isn't a prayer to someone. No rhythm whatsoever!
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 17:12:18 GMT -5
It all comes down to word usage and meaning. Let me try again. First, if you want to say everyone is capable, fine. I will take that to mean that you agree that everyone is already fully Who they are... But I also say that most of us do not realize that We are That because the clouds of ignorance render us incapable of realizing it. Without clarity there is no capacity to see. Just a simple look around anywhere is enough to show that few are they who have an interest or desire strong enough to become available to that Realization. I agree that if you do not knock, the door will not open. But the point of the OP is that no amount of preaching and truth thumping is going to make anyone knock when they have no interest...or willingness. It is interesting to note that in the Bhagavad Gita it specifically sets out certain qualifications required for a student to be able to understand the Truth it reveals. The first, interestingly enough, is the ability to discriminate between the Awareness that One Is and the objects that come and go within the Awareness field. If this is not present it is said that the student is not capable of understanding. But it doesn't give up on the student. It proscribes certain practices, like Karma Yoga, to help bring the student to clarity. But again, if there is no willingness to clear the mind, to do the work, there is no capacity to discriminate between what is Real and Permanent and the world of objects. One then remains in delusion and is not capable of such discrimination. I will also say as a side note that it is also possible that by Grace one may come to this Realization. There are other qualifications as well, namely, dispassion; the ability to care not about the fruits of ones actions. This basically means that one realizes that the world of objects offers no happiness and ones stops looking for it in objects. Cravings, and desires and angers and resentments are naturally dropped when this is recognized. Another qualification is a clear and quiet mind that allows for inquiry into the nature of Reality...and lastly, one must have, it is said, a burning desire for Liberation. Without these preconditions, or qualifications, Liberation is not possible. Sure, I agree wit all dat. It's just the word 'capable' that doesn't work for me as it seems to imply that the potential for realization is not present, and yet it is always present and nothing more than willingness is required. However, lots of things may need to happen before that willingness to show up.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 17:15:11 GMT -5
So if there is a willingness to leap tall buildings in a single bound, you should be able to do that? Right, that's why I said "pretty much the same here." The superpower capability in this case is willingness. Just to be clear, you're saying if there's the willingness to leap tall buildings, the capability is there?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 17:16:57 GMT -5
So if there is a willingness to leap tall buildings in a single bound, you should be able to do that? Bruce Springsteen ''For You''. Great song. ''Didn't you think I knew that you were born with the power of a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound?'' I thought you were more into licking than leaping. Hehe.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 26, 2013 18:31:59 GMT -5
It all comes down to word usage and meaning. Let me try again. First, if you want to say everyone is capable, fine. I will take that to mean that you agree that everyone is already fully Who they are... But I also say that most of us do not realize that We are That because the clouds of ignorance render us incapable of realizing it. Without clarity there is no capacity to see. Just a simple look around anywhere is enough to show that few are they who have an interest or desire strong enough to become available to that Realization. I agree that if you do not knock, the door will not open. But the point of the OP is that no amount of preaching and truth thumping is going to make anyone knock when they have no interest...or willingness. It is interesting to note that in the Bhagavad Gita it specifically sets out certain qualifications required for a student to be able to understand the Truth it reveals. The first, interestingly enough, is the ability to discriminate between the Awareness that One Is and the objects that come and go within the Awareness field. If this is not present it is said that the student is not capable of understanding. But it doesn't give up on the student. It proscribes certain practices, like Karma Yoga, to help bring the student to clarity. But again, if there is no willingness to clear the mind, to do the work, there is no capacity to discriminate between what is Real and Permanent and the world of objects. One then remains in delusion and is not capable of such discrimination. I will also say as a side note that it is also possible that by Grace one may come to this Realization. There are other qualifications as well, namely, dispassion; the ability to care not about the fruits of ones actions. This basically means that one realizes that the world of objects offers no happiness and ones stops looking for it in objects. Cravings, and desires and angers and resentments are naturally dropped when this is recognized. Another qualification is a clear and quiet mind that allows for inquiry into the nature of Reality...and lastly, one must have, it is said, a burning desire for Liberation. Without these preconditions, or qualifications, Liberation is not possible. Even those in the deepest darkest personal hell are capable of being true to themselves in any given instant, of being honest with themselves. There is not a single perspective that considers itself isolated that is not capable of following the prescription to "watch the thinker". I'll not wipe my feet on the BG. That there are traditions that offer structure to those that would seek based on it is a notion that seems to me to ring with comfort, nobility, and I daresay, hope. These traditions deserve respect and reverence. It's never a bad time to tell someone that they are what they are seeking, and not everyone is a student. How could there possibly be any preconditions to being what we are?
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jun 26, 2013 18:49:12 GMT -5
How could there possibly be any preconditions to being what we are? Nobody said that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 21:09:52 GMT -5
Right, that's why I said "pretty much the same here." The superpower capability in this case is willingness. Just to be clear, you're saying if there's the willingness to leap tall buildings, the capability is there? Hehe, no. That's exactly what I'm not saying. There are two different cases. One, leaping tall buildings in a single bound. Probably requires lots of extra special capabilities -- superheroish -- in addition to willingness of course. The other, "Truth Realization," requires, as I understand it, only the superpower of being willing. One could say that that is the only capability required. I realize this doesn't sit well with your internal wordsmith, but it's not really important.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 22:17:22 GMT -5
Just to be clear, you're saying if there's the willingness to leap tall buildings, the capability is there? Hehe, no. That's exactly what I'm not saying. There are two different cases. One, leaping tall buildings in a single bound. Probably requires lots of extra special capabilities -- superheroish -- in addition to willingness of course. The other, "Truth Realization," requires, as I understand it, only the superpower of being willing. One could say that that is the only capability required. I realize this doesn't sit well with your internal wordsmith, but it's not really important. Okey dokey.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 28, 2013 1:33:23 GMT -5
How could there possibly be any preconditions to being what we are? Nobody said that. Nobody said that anybody did. "the more you move toward it ..." Here, I'll get more direct but the whole thing approaches a koan and we thereby run the risk of speaking even more foolishly than even a first casual word on the weather. It proscribes certain practices, like Karma Yoga, to help bring the student to clarity. But again, if there is no willingness to clear the mind, to do the work, there is no capacity to discriminate between what is Real and Permanent and the world of objects. Conditioning that undoes conditioning is still conditioning. It points toward the possibility for all conditioning to fall away to say that the one who is conditioned might be "seen" or "known", but of course there is no seer and no knower. But the point of the OP is that no amount of preaching and truth thumping is going to make anyone knock when they have no interest...or willingness. Well you seem to be beating around the bush here JLU. Do you see some here on this board as preaching and truth thumping and can you link to specific examples? Absent the limitations of the conditioned, what expectations would apply to what would be the observed content of what the mind would carve out as a voice that points away from the conditioned? Aren't such expectations limitations? By way of metaphor, the early Christians weren't a popular bunch by any stretch of the imagination. What we have from history seems to suggest that they pissed off almost everyone they came in contact with. That's not to suggest the converse of course. Not everyone who draws scorn is the embodiment of Christ by any stretch of the imagination, but don't expect the "Truth" to be pretty in all it's guises to all eyes.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jun 28, 2013 8:30:45 GMT -5
Nobody said that anybody did. "the more you move toward it ..." Here, I'll get more direct but the whole thing approaches a koan and we thereby run the risk of speaking even more foolishly than even a first casual word on the weather. It proscribes certain practices, like Karma Yoga, to help bring the student to clarity. But again, if there is no willingness to clear the mind, to do the work, there is no capacity to discriminate between what is Real and Permanent and the world of objects. Conditioning that undoes conditioning is still conditioning. It points toward the possibility for all conditioning to fall away to say that the one who is conditioned might be "seen" or "known", but of course there is no seer and no knower. But the point of the OP is that no amount of preaching and truth thumping is going to make anyone knock when they have no interest...or willingness. Well you seem to be beating around the bush here JLU. Do you see some here on this board as preaching and truth thumping and can you link to specific examples? Absent the limitations of the conditioned, what expectations would apply to what would be the observed content of what the mind would carve out as a voice that points away from the conditioned? Aren't such expectations limitations? By way of metaphor, the early Christians weren't a popular bunch by any stretch of the imagination. What we have from history seems to suggest that they pissed off almost everyone they came in contact with. That's not to suggest the converse of course. Not everyone who draws scorn is the embodiment of Christ by any stretch of the imagination, but don't expect the "Truth" to be pretty in all it's guises to all eyes. I see. You think I was being cute when I answered "Nobody said that" to your question "How could there possibly be any preconditions to being what we are? Again, nobody say that...meaning I didn't say that. I was speaking to the the impediments to Realizing the Truth of what One is. Two very, very different things. Reread what I wrote if you want to know more about it. I am not against speaking Ones truth. My quarrel with some here is not the message, not at all, in fact some have the message part down so well I am sometimes dazzled. But it is the idea of force feeding that Truth to those who have no interest in it that concerns me. I understand the idea of shock therapy. The trance put us to sleep by shocking our sensibilities, and counter shock can sometimes awaken. I get that, and use it sometimes myself, but to do that when it has become clear that the other has no interest in the least, is plain wrong. The true Christians, the Gnostic's, did none of the sort of things you speak of. Ramana said "Those who have experienced (Reality) do not talk about it. Those who talk about it have not experienced it." I believe he was speaking about propounding the Truth injudiciously and indiscriminately, as in throwing pearls to pigs. The Gnostics kept very much to themselves. They were very quiet in the world and kept their texts hidden from the powers that be, sharing only with those who honestly wanted to understand the Truth that sets free. The Church founded mainly upon the letters and teachings of Paul were the ones who had not experienced what Christ points to...and still don't.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 28, 2013 9:30:47 GMT -5
Nobody said that anybody did. "the more you move toward it ..." Here, I'll get more direct but the whole thing approaches a koan and we thereby run the risk of speaking even more foolishly than even a first casual word on the weather. Conditioning that undoes conditioning is still conditioning. It points toward the possibility for all conditioning to fall away to say that the one who is conditioned might be "seen" or "known", but of course there is no seer and no knower. Well you seem to be beating around the bush here JLU. Do you see some here on this board as preaching and truth thumping and can you link to specific examples? Absent the limitations of the conditioned, what expectations would apply to what would be the observed content of what the mind would carve out as a voice that points away from the conditioned? Aren't such expectations limitations? By way of metaphor, the early Christians weren't a popular bunch by any stretch of the imagination. What we have from history seems to suggest that they pissed off almost everyone they came in contact with. That's not to suggest the converse of course. Not everyone who draws scorn is the embodiment of Christ by any stretch of the imagination, but don't expect the "Truth" to be pretty in all it's guises to all eyes. I see. You think I was being cute when I answered "Nobody said that" to your question "How could there possibly be any preconditions to being what we are? Again, nobody say that...meaning I didn't say that. I was speaking to the the impediments to Realizing the Truth of what One is. Two very, very different things. Reread what I wrote if you want to know more about it. I am not against speaking Ones truth. My quarrel with some here is not the message, not at all, in fact some have the message part down so well I am sometimes dazzled. But it is the idea of force feeding that Truth to those who have no interest in it that concerns me. I understand the idea of shock therapy. The trance put us to sleep by shocking our sensibilities, and counter shock can sometimes awaken. I get that, and use it sometimes myself, but to do that when it has become clear that the other has no interest in the least, is plain wrong. The true Christians, the Gnostic's, did none of the sort of things you speak of. Ramana said "Those who have experienced (Reality) do not talk about it. Those who talk about it have not experienced it." I believe he was speaking about propounding the Truth injudiciously and indiscriminately, as in throwing pearls to pigs. The Gnostics kept very much to themselves. They were very quiet in the world and kept their texts hidden from the powers that be, sharing only with those who honestly wanted to understand the Truth that sets free. The Church founded mainly upon the letters and teachings of Paul were the ones who had not experienced what Christ points to...and still don't. Actually no JLU, you don't see. That statement to you points up to you about your reply exactly what you pointed up to me about mine. Different things ... <saying_too_much> well, any word said in reply to that idea is a word too many. </saying_too_much> The only thing that I spoke of was how they riled anger and the story goes that they were actually killed off in an institutional rage and it don't get more pissed off than that. My understanding of history is that they were noisy enough to have been considered a threat worth eradicating.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jun 28, 2013 9:33:42 GMT -5
I see. You think I was being cute when I answered "Nobody said that" to your question "How could there possibly be any preconditions to being what we are? Again, nobody say that...meaning I didn't say that. I was speaking to the the impediments to Realizing the Truth of what One is. Two very, very different things. Reread what I wrote if you want to know more about it. I am not against speaking Ones truth. My quarrel with some here is not the message, not at all, in fact some have the message part down so well I am sometimes dazzled. But it is the idea of force feeding that Truth to those who have no interest in it that concerns me. I understand the idea of shock therapy. The trance put us to sleep by shocking our sensibilities, and counter shock can sometimes awaken. I get that, and use it sometimes myself, but to do that when it has become clear that the other has no interest in the least, is plain wrong. The true Christians, the Gnostic's, did none of the sort of things you speak of. Ramana said "Those who have experienced (Reality) do not talk about it. Those who talk about it have not experienced it." I believe he was speaking about propounding the Truth injudiciously and indiscriminately, as in throwing pearls to pigs. The Gnostics kept very much to themselves. They were very quiet in the world and kept their texts hidden from the powers that be, sharing only with those who honestly wanted to understand the Truth that sets free. The Church founded mainly upon the letters and teachings of Paul were the ones who had not experienced what Christ points to...and still don't. Actually no JLU, you don't see. That statement to you points up to you about your reply exactly what you pointed up to me about mine. Different things ... <saying_too_much> well, any word said in reply to that idea is a word too many. </saying_too_much> The only thing that I spoke of was how they riled anger and the story goes that they were actually killed off in an institutional rage and it don't get more pissed off than that. My understanding of history is that they were noisy enough to have been considered a threat worth eradicating. Thank you for your reply.
|
|