|
Post by silver on Jun 26, 2013 12:44:39 GMT -5
Greetings.. As long as you're fondling imagery that makes your beliefs 'about' what is actually happening seem real or true, it's likely you'll continue fondling that imagery.. just look, no beliefs, no right/wrong, no attachment to 'being right/wrong', if you really want to 'get it'.. just look, with unconditional sincerity.. Be well.. Not a bad way of looking at it, either. :^)
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 16:21:21 GMT -5
That we don't have volition doesn't have direct implications for our day to day choices, but rather for our attachment to outcome, judgment and mind/body identification. As such, it is mucho important. seeing no volition didn't shift my need to attach and identify but I would say that it can be good for non-judgement, understanding, empathy and compassion, but only when we are starting from a place of judgement and rigidity. When you see that there is no driving force in the mind/body, it cannot be identified as what you are. Whatever you are must be the life force that is driving; whatever makes it possible fro stuff to happen. It may not be known what that is, but it's clearly not the mind/body. Whether you feel the need to identify or not, you cannot identify with the body any more than you can identify with a stone rolling down a hillside.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 16:23:18 GMT -5
I don't see how it's any more volitional than choosing chicken Mcnuggets over a Big Mac. How about choosing to drop the feeling that what I post is of great importance, self-righteous and preachy... Same volition as choosing chicken McNuggets over a Big Mac? What is it about it that makes you see it differently?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 16:26:37 GMT -5
I don't see how that applies at all. I wasn't saying it just seems like we have volition, though that's true. I'm saying the idea that we can change a preference is nothing more than the arrival of a new preference that somebody wants to claim authorship of. Your perspective comes across to me as somewhat...Newtonian i.e. one thing leads to the next thing. Is that your perspective...that what is happening in one moment determines what is happening in the next moment? A different preference showing up doesn't lead anywhere or cause something. It's just another preference happening.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 26, 2013 16:28:10 GMT -5
seeing no volition didn't shift my need to attach and identify but I would say that it can be good for non-judgement, understanding, empathy and compassion, but only when we are starting from a place of judgement and rigidity. When you see that there is no driving force in the mind/body, it cannot be identified as what you are. Whatever you are must be the life force that is driving; whatever makes it possible fro stuff to happen. It may not be known what that is, but it's clearly not the mind/body. Whether you feel the need to identify or not, you cannot identify with the body any more than you can identify with a stone rolling down a hillside. I 'saw' that there was no driving force in the mind/body and it didn't shift my deeper subconscious fears. They have come to the surface to be released over a much longer period of time. These days I would not say that its clear cut that 'there is no chooser'.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 26, 2013 16:30:28 GMT -5
Your perspective comes across to me as somewhat...Newtonian i.e. one thing leads to the next thing. Is that your perspective...that what is happening in one moment determines what is happening in the next moment? A different preference showing up doesn't lead anywhere or cause something. It's just another preference happening. So you are not saying that one moment leads to the next moment? But you acknowledge that choices are made?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 16:34:40 GMT -5
When you see that there is no driving force in the mind/body, it cannot be identified as what you are. Whatever you are must be the life force that is driving; whatever makes it possible fro stuff to happen. It may not be known what that is, but it's clearly not the mind/body. Whether you feel the need to identify or not, you cannot identify with the body any more than you can identify with a stone rolling down a hillside. I 'saw' that there was no driving force in the mind/body and it didn't shift my deeper subconscious fears. They have come to the surface to be released over a much longer period of time. What sort of fears? Surely not fear of death or self image fears and the like? So how could you have realized nonvolition and then retracted your realization? Or did mind step in with a different idea about that?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 16:38:18 GMT -5
A different preference showing up doesn't lead anywhere or cause something. It's just another preference happening. So you are not saying that one moment leads to the next moment? But you acknowledge that choices are made? I acknowledge that choices happen, but there is no causer of the choice. Even the declaration of a choice is just identification wanting to claim authorship/cause.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 26, 2013 16:42:39 GMT -5
I 'saw' that there was no driving force in the mind/body and it didn't shift my deeper subconscious fears. They have come to the surface to be released over a much longer period of time. What sort of fears? Surely not fear of death or self image fears and the like? So how could you have realized nonvolition and then retracted your realization? Or did mind step in with a different idea about that? I noticed that seeing no-volition was based on certain assumptions....linearity being just one of them. I looked from a different angle...a non-linear angle, and saw that 'volition' can be said to be the case. Ironically, there appears to be no-volition from the perspective of conditioning, which is the perspective of 'the person'. IOW, denying volition actually acknowledged 'the person'.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 26, 2013 16:45:38 GMT -5
So you are not saying that one moment leads to the next moment? But you acknowledge that choices are made? I acknowledge that choices happen, but there is no causer of the choice. Even the declaration of a choice is just identification wanting to claim authorship/cause. By causer, you also mean chooser? And are you saying that one moment leads to the next moment?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Jun 26, 2013 16:53:43 GMT -5
Greetings.. seeing no volition didn't shift my need to attach and identify but I would say that it can be good for non-judgement, understanding, empathy and compassion, but only when we are starting from a place of judgement and rigidity. When you see that there is no driving force in the mind/body, it cannot be identified as what you are. Whatever you are must be the life force that is driving; whatever makes it possible fro stuff to happen. It may not be known what that is, but it's clearly not the mind/body. Whether you feel the need to identify or not, you cannot identify with the body any more than you can identify with a stone rolling down a hillside. I identify with the "driving force", the mind/body, the stone rolling down the hillside, and the hillside.. why do you believe the driving force is not present in all that 'is'? Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2013 17:02:13 GMT -5
How about choosing to drop the feeling that what I post is of great importance, self-righteous and preachy... Same volition as choosing chicken McNuggets over a Big Mac? What is it about it that makes you see it differently? Nothing...
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 19:58:19 GMT -5
What sort of fears? Surely not fear of death or self image fears and the like? So how could you have realized nonvolition and then retracted your realization? Or did mind step in with a different idea about that? I noticed that seeing no-volition was based on certain assumptions....linearity being just one of them. I looked from a different angle...a non-linear angle, and saw that 'volition' can be said to be the case. Ironically, there appears to be no-volition from the perspective of conditioning, which is the perspective of 'the person'. IOW, denying volition actually acknowledged 'the person'. The whole question of volition is really misconceived.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 20:00:43 GMT -5
I acknowledge that choices happen, but there is no causer of the choice. Even the declaration of a choice is just identification wanting to claim authorship/cause. By causer, you also mean chooser? And are you saying that one moment leads to the next moment? I can't see where I've said anything about that.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 26, 2013 20:04:07 GMT -5
Greetings.. When you see that there is no driving force in the mind/body, it cannot be identified as what you are. Whatever you are must be the life force that is driving; whatever makes it possible fro stuff to happen. It may not be known what that is, but it's clearly not the mind/body. Whether you feel the need to identify or not, you cannot identify with the body any more than you can identify with a stone rolling down a hillside. I identify with the "driving force", the mind/body, the stone rolling down the hillside, and the hillside.. why do you believe the driving force is not present in all that 'is'? Be well.. Appearances are empty.
|
|