|
Post by freejoy on Aug 28, 2013 10:12:58 GMT -5
It just seems to this individuated expression that if say any issue the spouse has would gradually dissolve living and interacting with an enlightened individuated expression. For example: She/he doesn't "love truth" then living and interacting with an enlightened individuated expression she/he would developed an appreciation for truth. It would seem that at some point in the mates evolution (if one agrees with consciousness evolution) that at some point one has to somehow start getting the importance of truth unless they never in all eternity get this then they wouldn't never ever get enlightened. With that said, <-- see I'm growing. Then I wonder how come the spouses evolution isn't being acclerated by the interactions with the enlightened mate?That's just one example. Are you talking about your own marriage, Freejoy? Or in general? In my experience, people gravitate into relationships with partners who are on equal level. When there is conflict, it means there are lessons to be learned on BOTH sides - in other words, both are acting unconsciously. If one partner has tackled their lesson and has "evolved" then the relationship would, simply and naturally, dissolve, having served its purpose. Why can I say this? Because everyone in our lives is simply an aspect of our very own selves, a reflection, a mirror. In your example, I could easily suggest that the so-called "enlightened" person needs to work on acceptance and nonjudgment, and needs to learn the lesson that there is no such thing as "levels." There could be an underlying attachment to the whole idea of progress, growth, evolution, and an attachment to MY truth over spouses' truth. You know what they say about the "log in your own eye"... well, that. If you are having relationship problems, change yourself, and the relationship changes. It may naturally dissolve (that was the case with my first marriage). Or improve and flourish (that is the case in my second marriage). No, I'm not talking about my relationship because I don't have a wife or girlfriend.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2013 10:16:18 GMT -5
I agree. But am also inclined to ask "wha?" ;-) Uncaught exception in thread 15 of Topology.exe: Stack trace: Method "readPost" line 53: Method "parseSentences" line 5: Method "parseQuotes" line 32: Method "parseSentences" line 22: Method "parseSentence" line 326: Method "verifyCoherentQuestion" line 92: Exception :: IncoherentQuestion :: "Sentence ends in question mark but no clear instance of one of the five interrogatives 'who,what,where,when,how' were found." LOL .. wha is an informal, perplexed, form of 'what'
|
|
|
Post by freejoy on Aug 28, 2013 10:20:12 GMT -5
It just seems to this individuated expression that if say any issue the spouse has would gradually dissolve living and interacting with an enlightened individuated expression. For example: She/he doesn't "love truth" then living and interacting with an enlightened individuated expression (1) she/he would developed an appreciation for truth. It would seem that at some point in the mates evolution (if one agrees with consciousness evolution) that at some point one has to somehow start getting the importance of truth unless they never in all eternity get this then they wouldn't never ever get enlightened. With that said, <-- see I'm growing. Then (2) I wonder how come the spouses evolution isn't being acclerated by the interactions with the enlightened mate?That's just one example. I really want to address (2) first. The issue here is the assumption of what growth and progress looks like. That needs to be discussed and understood before one can evaluate whether or not living with an "enlightened person" facilitates a person's growth. The next assumption to address is the underlined. Does a person grow because they are in the presence of the enlightened? Or do they grow because they are oriented towards their own growth? If I want to become wiser, it is my own wisdom that surrounds myself with "wiser" more experienced people. A smart learner doesn't need a formal teacher, they just immerse themselves in the knowledge and fraternize with the people that have the knowledge already. Eventually everybody comes into the appreciation of (1). If you don't have that orientation for yourself, life will knock you around until you develop that orientation regardless of who is in your life. How could living with an enlightened person stunt your own growth? Depending on the personalities involved, the " enlightened" person could keep triggering intense unconscious reactions from the "unenlightened" person which prevents that person from having the down time to reflect on themselves. Some of the implicit assumptions you are making, free joy, are that an enlightened person is perfect and that they have perfect knowledge about how to help others grow and become more self-aware. If anything the "enlightened" person doesn't know how to enlighten others and leaves the matter to God to do in God's time frame. It may not be in a person's best interest to become "enlightened". I read once that the way an enlightened person chooses oranges in the super market is a lesson. What you seem to be saying is that the spouse would be continually be confronted with unconscious material until she/he either couldn't stand it any longer or she/he be almost force to grow. Correct?
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 28, 2013 10:30:28 GMT -5
Uncaught exception in thread 15 of Topology.exe: Stack trace: Method "readPost" line 53: Method "parseSentences" line 5: Method "parseQuotes" line 32: Method "parseSentences" line 22: Method "parseSentence" line 326: Method "verifyCoherentQuestion" line 92: Exception :: IncoherentQuestion :: "Sentence ends in question mark but no clear instance of one of the five interrogatives 'who,what,where,when,how' were found." LOL .. wha is an informal, perplexed, form of 'what' It could have been a mistyped "why" or a hybrid "what/why". *Exception Handled.* *Resuming Thread Execution.* ... Uncaught exception in thread 15 of Topology.exe: Stack trace: Method "readPost" line 53: Method "parseSentences" line 5: Method "parseQuotes" line 32: Method "parseSentences" line 22: Method "parseSentence" line 354: Method "AnswerQuestion" line 92: Exception :: UnboundQuestionReference :: "Question 'what?' was in response to statement: 'It may not be in a person's best interest to become "enlightened". ' but no object in the sentence could bind as the subject referenced by 'what'" It looks like I need an upgrade of my question answering subroutine. *clippy pops up on the screen* "I see you are asking a question" "Are you trying to ask: 'How is it not in a person's best interest to become enlightened?' ?"
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 28, 2013 10:36:12 GMT -5
I really want to address (2) first. The issue here is the assumption of what growth and progress looks like. That needs to be discussed and understood before one can evaluate whether or not living with an "enlightened person" facilitates a person's growth. The next assumption to address is the underlined. Does a person grow because they are in the presence of the enlightened? Or do they grow because they are oriented towards their own growth? If I want to become wiser, it is my own wisdom that surrounds myself with "wiser" more experienced people. A smart learner doesn't need a formal teacher, they just immerse themselves in the knowledge and fraternize with the people that have the knowledge already. Eventually everybody comes into the appreciation of (1). If you don't have that orientation for yourself, life will knock you around until you develop that orientation regardless of who is in your life. How could living with an enlightened person stunt your own growth? Depending on the personalities involved, the " enlightened" person could keep triggering intense unconscious reactions from the "unenlightened" person which prevents that person from having the down time to reflect on themselves. Some of the implicit assumptions you are making, free joy, are that an enlightened person is perfect and that they have perfect knowledge about how to help others grow and become more self-aware. If anything the "enlightened" person doesn't know how to enlighten others and leaves the matter to God to do in God's time frame. It may not be in a person's best interest to become "enlightened". I read once that the way an enlightened person chooses oranges in the super market is a lesson. What you seem to be saying is that the spouse would be continually be confronted with unconscious material until she/he either couldn't stand it any longer or she/he be almost force to grow. Correct? Most of my response is geared towards moving away from the postulate that a spouse being enlightened is relevant for one's growth. Meaning if I was the wife/husband, my issues are my issues, and how enlightened or unenlightened my spouse may be is mostly irrelevant for how I process. While you keep stubbing your toe on your own unconscious way of moving through the world, you're going to look for a smarter way of moving through the world. Unless, of course, you have a very high pain tolerance and are averse to changing your own behavior. The enlightened person chooses oranges exactly in the same way an unenlightened person chooses oranges.
|
|
|
Post by serpentqueen on Aug 28, 2013 10:48:46 GMT -5
I'll just say that my hubby was very sweet and patient with me during my intense seeking phase; it makes me embarrassed to consider any such judgmental thought ever passed through my mind. I remember once we watched Eat Pray Love together (admittedly I fell asleep halfway through), and I asked him "would you go off to India with me if I wanted to go on a spiritual journey?" He thought about it and said, "I'd follow you anywhere, though it wouldn't be a spiritual journey for me. I would go for the travel experience, to see the sights, meet new people, and have adventures." Likewise when I've mentioned wanting to go on retreat, he has said he'd join me but not attend the retreat because "I'd rather spend the time walking around and enjoying nature." He was actually a Catholic scholar, long before we met, but he gave all that up. I know he has pondered all the existential questions; I have long suspected there's a story here, his own journey, but he is silent about it and just shrugs. He says he does not believe in God. I once asked if he thought he had a soul, he got quiet, considered, and said "nope." When I have asked, "Well then what do you believe in?" he'll tease and deflect and say, "I believe in you!" When I have asked, "What do you think happens after death?" "I don't know, and I don't care. Why waste time worrying about it?" There was a time when I considered him too sensory-oriented, now I'm not so sure that's a fault. I can talk to him about anything - he will listen to me go on and on about my latest theory, not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing, usually adding helpful historical or scientific context. When syncs happen, he doesn't dismiss it, he just takes it for granted and doesn't see the big deal. He's continually reassured me I'm not crazy - in fact he says "you're the sanest person I know." The closest he gets to revealing any sort of faith is that he is fond of saying "relax, universe always provides." Ultimately he's been the best teacher for me. He teaches without teaching - he teaches by way of role modeling. He's not perfect (he can have a bad temper and be impatient with people he considers "idiots"), but he is 100% Real. And, he's way too busy living, loving, and giving service to others to spend any time navel gazing and reading spiritual books. Aside from the "there's nobody to enlighten" there's the question, "What does an enlightened individual expression look like?" It's my opinion that they do not always look like Buddha or Niz or other gurus. Perhaps they look like my husband? Perhaps the unenlightened spouse was the enlightened one all along? The way I see what you've said here is, for one your spouse seems not enlightened because he calls people "idiots". Just calling people idiots because they pulled out in front of you and in general wouldn't be enlightened. Also, it is projecting ones own shadow on to other people an denying ones on "idiotness". Thereby creating homeless people and other less fortunate people who are the result of mass shadow projections. For an enlightened person to do this seems to me a great evil. "If you know to do good and don't it is evil to you" ~ Bible He always has a great kindness for the homeless, or any people he considers underdogs or downtrodden. People he gets impatient with or calls "idiots" include - those acting rudely to the underdogs - those driving while using a cell phone - anyone who litters or wastes stuff - people who park inconsiderately, or do other inconsiderate things - abusive people He doesn't usually call them idiots to their faces though, but he will step in to defend people, for example, waitresses being treated poorly, or anyone being berated in public...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2013 10:48:48 GMT -5
LOL .. wha is an informal, perplexed, form of 'what' It could have been a mistyped "why" or a hybrid "what/why". *Exception Handled.* *Resuming Thread Execution.* ... Uncaught exception in thread 15 of Topology.exe: Stack trace: Method "readPost" line 53: Method "parseSentences" line 5: Method "parseQuotes" line 32: Method "parseSentences" line 22: Method "parseSentence" line 354: Method "AnswerQuestion" line 92: Exception :: UnboundQuestionReference :: "Question 'what?' was in response to statement: 'It may not be in a person's best interest to become "enlightened". ' but no object in the sentence could bind as the subject referenced by 'what'" It looks like I need an upgrade of my question answering subroutine. *clippy pops up on the screen* "I see you are asking a question" "Are you trying to ask: 'How is it not in a person's best interest to become enlightened?' ?"sure, but the subject (person) kinda makes the question nonsensical to begin with, no?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 28, 2013 11:03:31 GMT -5
Pretty funny topic, but as Laughter pointed out, there have been many enlightened duos, and the Pang family from ancient China supposedly all got enlightened, mother, father, son, and daughter. It's a very famous story in China. Layman Pang and his wife took all their possessions on a boat to the middle of a lake and dumped them overboard. When I travelled through southern China several years ago, I visited a giant pagoda in a Buddhist monastery that was built in honor of Ling Chao, Layman Pang's daughter. On the funnier side, I remember a story by a Zen teacher who was having marital problems. He had been conducting a 90 day silent retreat, and he lived across the street from the Zen Center where the students were staying. One day he and his wife got into a particularly nasty shouting match, and as he left their apartment to return to the students, his wife followed him out the door screaming, "I'm going to come over there and tell them what you're REALLY like!" Priceless story ZD! Max was the one who pointed out the enlightened duo phenomenon. Best of luck, wishes and vibes to you at the TAT retreat this weekend man!
|
|
|
Post by desertrat on Aug 28, 2013 11:12:02 GMT -5
I think the point hear is work on your self . Its up to the spouse if he/she want to be enlightened .
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 28, 2013 11:13:50 GMT -5
The way I see what you've said here is, for one your spouse seems not enlightened because he calls people "idiots". Just calling people idiots because they pulled out in front of you and in general wouldn't be enlightened. Also, it is projecting ones own shadow on to other people an denying ones on "idiotness". Thereby creating homeless people and other less fortunate people who are the result of mass shadow projections. For an enlightened person to do this seems to me a great evil. "If you know to do good and don't it is evil to you" ~ Bible He always has a great kindness for the homeless, or any people he considers underdogs or downtrodden. People he gets impatient with or calls "idiots" include - those acting rudely to the underdogs - those driving while using a cell phone - anyone who litters or wastes stuff - people who park inconsiderately, or do other inconsiderate things - abusive people He doesn't usually call them idiots to their faces though, but he will step in to defend people, for example, waitresses being treated poorly, or anyone being berated in public... So if someone is being an idiot and berating others in public, he publicly berates them?
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 28, 2013 11:16:20 GMT -5
I'll just say that my hubby was very sweet and patient with me during my intense seeking phase; it makes me embarrassed to consider any such judgmental thought ever passed through my mind. I remember once we watched Eat Pray Love together (admittedly I fell asleep halfway through), and I asked him "would you go off to India with me if I wanted to go on a spiritual journey?" He thought about it and said, "I'd follow you anywhere, though it wouldn't be a spiritual journey for me. I would go for the travel experience, to see the sights, meet new people, and have adventures." Likewise when I've mentioned wanting to go on retreat, he has said he'd join me but not attend the retreat because "I'd rather spend the time walking around and enjoying nature." He was actually a Catholic scholar, long before we met, but he gave all that up. I know he has pondered all the existential questions; I have long suspected there's a story here, his own journey, but he is silent about it and just shrugs. He says he does not believe in God. I once asked if he thought he had a soul, he got quiet, considered, and said "nope." When I have asked, "Well then what do you believe in?" he'll tease and deflect and say, "I believe in you!" When I have asked, "What do you think happens after death?" "I don't know, and I don't care. Why waste time worrying about it?" There was a time when I considered him too sensory-oriented, now I'm not so sure that's a fault. I can talk to him about anything - he will listen to me go on and on about my latest theory, not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing, usually adding helpful historical or scientific context. When syncs happen, he doesn't dismiss it, he just takes it for granted and doesn't see the big deal. He's continually reassured me I'm not crazy - in fact he says "you're the sanest person I know." The closest he gets to revealing any sort of faith is that he is fond of saying "relax, universe always provides." Ultimately he's been the best teacher for me. He teaches without teaching - he teaches by way of role modeling. He's not perfect (he can have a bad temper and be impatient with people he considers "idiots"), but he is 100% Real. And, he's way too busy living, loving, and giving service to others to spend any time navel gazing and reading spiritual books. Aside from the "there's nobody to enlighten" there's the question, "What does an enlightened individual expression look like?" It's my opinion that they do not always look like Buddha or Niz or other gurus. Perhaps they look like my husband? Perhaps the unenlightened spouse was the enlightened one all along? The way I see what you've said here is, for one your spouse seems not enlightened because he calls people "idiots". Just calling people idiots because they pulled out in front of you and in general wouldn't be enlightened. Also, it is projecting ones own shadow on to other people and denying ones on "idiotness". Thereby creating homeless people and other less fortunate people who are the result of mass shadow projections. For an enlightened person to do this seems to me a great evil. "If you know to do good and don't it is evil to you" ~ Bible I don't know, freejoy, but what you're mixing topics in a dizzying sort of way and freeing yourself to pass judgment on statements that you haven't even asked for clarification on - actually passing judgment on people you don't even profess to knowing - a lot of careless judgments and judgment calls. It's rather disconcerting - your apparent attitude towards others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2013 11:16:36 GMT -5
The way I see what you've said here is, for one your spouse seems not enlightened because he calls people "idiots". Just calling people idiots because they pulled out in front of you and in general wouldn't be enlightened. Also, it is projecting ones own shadow on to other people an denying ones on "idiotness". Thereby creating homeless people and other less fortunate people who are the result of mass shadow projections. For an enlightened person to do this seems to me a great evil. "If you know to do good and don't it is evil to you" ~ Bible He always has a great kindness for the homeless, or any people he considers underdogs or downtrodden. People he gets impatient with or calls "idiots" include - those acting rudely to the underdogs - those driving while using a cell phone - anyone who litters or wastes stuff - people who park inconsiderately, or do other inconsiderate things - abusive people He doesn't usually call them idiots to their faces though, but he will step in to defend people, for example, waitresses being treated poorly, or anyone being berated in public... Hats off to the Serpentking!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2013 11:19:29 GMT -5
The way I see what you've said here is, for one your spouse seems not enlightened because he calls people "idiots". Just calling people idiots because they pulled out in front of you and in general wouldn't be enlightened. Also, it is projecting ones own shadow on to other people and denying ones on "idiotness". Thereby creating homeless people and other less fortunate people who are the result of mass shadow projections. For an enlightened person to do this seems to me a great evil. "If you know to do good and don't it is evil to you" ~ Bible I don't know, freejoy, but what you're mixing topics in a dizzying sort of way and freeing yourself to pass judgment on statements that you haven't even asked for clarification on - actually passing judgment on people you don't even profess to knowing - a lot of careless judgments and judgment calls. It's rather disconcerting - your apparent attitude towards others. I love freejoy's stream of consciousness. He's got endless supply of topics arising from an underlying beef with so-called enlightened peeps, especially those that he fantasized about having a relationship with. Freejoy, you seem to like Jesus pretty much. Why not just stick with what he said? Don't waste your time on this other stuff.
|
|
|
Post by topology on Aug 28, 2013 11:21:21 GMT -5
I'll just say that my hubby was very sweet and patient with me during my intense seeking phase; it makes me embarrassed to consider any such judgmental thought ever passed through my mind. I remember once we watched Eat Pray Love together (admittedly I fell asleep halfway through), and I asked him "would you go off to India with me if I wanted to go on a spiritual journey?" He thought about it and said, "I'd follow you anywhere, though it wouldn't be a spiritual journey for me. I would go for the travel experience, to see the sights, meet new people, and have adventures." Likewise when I've mentioned wanting to go on retreat, he has said he'd join me but not attend the retreat because "I'd rather spend the time walking around and enjoying nature." He was actually a Catholic scholar, long before we met, but he gave all that up. I know he has pondered all the existential questions; I have long suspected there's a story here, his own journey, but he is silent about it and just shrugs. He says he does not believe in God. I once asked if he thought he had a soul, he got quiet, considered, and said "nope." When I have asked, "Well then what do you believe in?" he'll tease and deflect and say, "I believe in you!" When I have asked, "What do you think happens after death?" "I don't know, and I don't care. Why waste time worrying about it?" There was a time when I considered him too sensory-oriented, now I'm not so sure that's a fault. I can talk to him about anything - he will listen to me go on and on about my latest theory, not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing, usually adding helpful historical or scientific context. When syncs happen, he doesn't dismiss it, he just takes it for granted and doesn't see the big deal. He's continually reassured me I'm not crazy - in fact he says "you're the sanest person I know." The closest he gets to revealing any sort of faith is that he is fond of saying "relax, universe always provides." Ultimately he's been the best teacher for me. He teaches without teaching - he teaches by way of role modeling. He's not perfect (he can have a bad temper and be impatient with people he considers "idiots"), but he is 100% Real. And, he's way too busy living, loving, and giving service to others to spend any time navel gazing and reading spiritual books. Aside from the "there's nobody to enlighten" there's the question, "What does an enlightened individual expression look like?" It's my opinion that they do not always look like Buddha or Niz or other gurus. Perhaps they look like my husband? Perhaps the unenlightened spouse was the enlightened one all along? The way I see what you've said here is, for one your spouse seems not enlightened because he calls people "idiots". Just calling people idiots because they pulled out in front of you and in general wouldn't be enlightened. Also, it is projecting ones own shadow on to other people and denying ones on "idiotness". Thereby creating homeless people and other less fortunate people who are the result of mass shadow projections. For an enlightened person to do this seems to me a great evil. "If you know to do good and don't it is evil to you" ~ Bible This would be a preconception of what "being enlightened" looks like in your mind. Best to drop such preconceptions until you are enlightened, yourself.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Aug 28, 2013 11:22:12 GMT -5
I don't know, freejoy, but what you're mixing topics in a dizzying sort of way and freeing yourself to pass judgment on statements that you haven't even asked for clarification on - actually passing judgment on people you don't even profess to knowing - a lot of careless judgments and judgment calls. It's rather disconcerting - your apparent attitude towards others. I love freejoy's stream of consciousness. He's got endless supply of topics arising from an underlying beef with so-called enlightened peeps, especially those that he fantasized about having a relationship with. Freejoy, you seem to like Jesus pretty much. Why not just stick with what he said? Don't waste your time on this other stuff. Well, ok......that's one way of looking at it. I wasn't sure if he was fantasizing or talking about a real relationship, tbh.
|
|