|
Post by enigma on Oct 16, 2013 15:45:08 GMT -5
The individuated mind/body through which experience happens IS a perspective, and there's no reason or need for that to change. It might be viewed as a kind of window on creation, or perhaps a lucid dream, but just as in night time lucid dreams, with the knowledge that one is not actually IN the dream, and the dreamscape is mental smoke and mirrors, there is still the individuated perspective and the dream goes on. The 'experience of a separate self' is a different matter and is clearly a conclusion about that experiential perspective that is not necessary in order for the experience of an individuated perspective to continue. We don't need to get rid of perspectives, just beliefs. Correcto. The mirage doesn't have to disappear. It's enough to see it for what it is. Yup. That's why I keep saying the appearance of an oasis off in the distance will continue, but there's no reason to hop on the camel to go fill the canteen. (We'll make an exception for the devoted sand eaters.)
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Oct 16, 2013 16:01:10 GMT -5
Steve: Each body/mind must do what it must do. What a particular body/mind does does not necessarily conform to what is imagined. My interest in the website, which had almost ceased, increased after we began having no-attack threads. It appeared that it might be possible to have discussions without bickering and personal attacks, and that was appealing. :-) Just to be clear, I am not judging or imagining how you or I should be, or you or your actions in any way, I'm just curious about the shift. Shifts are often interesting ;-) The SIG retreat was interesting in many ways, and involved many interesting conversations. Some of those conversations led to insights about how to help folks that are stuck. Although Patrick saw no parallel between his situation and that of Segal, it seemed to me that there was a strong similarity in what happened to each of them. During one conversation I realized that how people think about selfhood varies enormously, and that led me to re-read part of Segal's story. Subsequently, I realized what I would tell Patrick if he ever contacted me again. As you can tell from my posts, I have no interest in engaging with people whose minds are made up. If they're happy, I'm happy. I may engage once or twice out of curiosity, but as soon as it becomes apparent that they're happy with their understanding, I'm content to leave them alone. I enjoy teaching in a wide variety of subjects, but I've learned that its a waste of time trying to teach someone who isn't interested in learning. I'm no longer working as a contractor, but I could probably help an active contractor double his income if he was interested in learning a few simple business strategies. Most small builders listen to their accountants and do a lot of stupid things based on what they're told (like buy new equipment and trucks with borrowed money in order to have things that can be depreciated--ultra-dumb!). They rarely know what their costs are, rarely have a system for tracking costs, rarely have reality-based reasons for doing what they do, and rarely have a good accounting system. They borrow lots of money, pay lots of interest, and end up with very little net profit. I have only met one contractor in the last few years who was interested in learning a smarter approach. In the same way, I could help financially-struggling people get control of their personal finances if they were interested, but most are not. I've probably talked about personal finance with thirty people, and not one of them was sufficiently interested to be willing to change behavior. The enlightenment business is the same sort of thing. Most people are not interested in truth; they're interested in what they imagine. As Byron Katie would say, "That's just the way of it." Only when someone is ready to hear can anything be heard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2013 16:58:46 GMT -5
:-) Just to be clear, I am not judging or imagining how you or I should be, or you or your actions in any way, I'm just curious about the shift. Shifts are often interesting ;-) The SIG retreat was interesting in many ways, and involved many interesting conversations. Some of those conversations led to insights about how to help folks that are stuck. Although Patrick saw no parallel between his situation and that of Segal, it seemed to me that there was a strong similarity in what happened to each of them. During one conversation I realized that how people think about selfhood varies enormously, and that led me to re-read part of Segal's story. Subsequently, I realized what I would tell Patrick if he ever contacted me again. As you can tell from my posts, I have no interest in engaging with people whose minds are made up. If they're happy, I'm happy. I may engage once or twice out of curiosity, but as soon as it becomes apparent that they're happy with their understanding, I'm content to leave them alone. I enjoy teaching in a wide variety of subjects, but I've learned that its a waste of time trying to teach someone who isn't interested in learning. I'm no longer working as a contractor, but I could probably help an active contractor double his income if he was interested in learning a few simple business strategies. Most small builders listen to their accountants and do a lot of stupid things based on what they're told (like buy new equipment and trucks with borrowed money in order to have things that can be depreciated--ultra-dumb!). They rarely know what their costs are, rarely have a system for tracking costs, rarely have reality-based reasons for doing what they do, and rarely have a good accounting system. They borrow lots of money, pay lots of interest, and end up with very little net profit. I have only met one contractor in the last few years who was interested in learning a smarter approach. In the same way, I could help financially-struggling people get control of their personal finances if they were interested, but most are not. I've probably talked about personal finance with thirty people, and not one of them was sufficiently interested to be willing to change behavior. The enlightenment business is the same sort of thing. Most people are not interested in truth; they're interested in what they imagine. As Byron Katie would say, "That's just the way of it." Only when someone is ready to hear can anything be heard. Hi Bob, I've been consulting contractors for over a decade in just those things. I'll give you a tip if you want it. Contractors sometimes do what they need to do for their business, but they ALWAYS do what they want to do for their business if it helps them get what they personally want. So if you want to help them, you cannot begin the conversation with what they are doing wrong or what they can do better. You have to begin the conversation as a friend and get them to open up very honestly about what they really want...this includes material things like toys etc...and emotional things, as well as logistical things like work hours per week, job functions they like versus the job functions they can't stand having to do every week etc. If you want, I'll email you a questionnaire that I developed over the years that helps both you and the business owner to understand what the contractor REALLY wants. Unless you do this step first, the contractor will not be very interested in what you have to say, nor will he or she find what you have to say as credible. On the other hand, if the contractor is convinced that you know what they want and understand them as a person, and if you keep tying your recommendations back to what they want, and show them how your recommendations will help them get what they want, then they will listen, and find what you have to say to be credible. People don't want to hear what they are doing wrong, they want to hear how they can get what they want....and if you do not establish a very clear mutual understanding about what they want, they are not going to be very interested in what you have to say.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Oct 16, 2013 17:40:55 GMT -5
Greetings.. :-) Just to be clear, I am not judging or imagining how you or I should be, or you or your actions in any way, I'm just curious about the shift. Shifts are often interesting ;-) The SIG retreat was interesting in many ways, and involved many interesting conversations. Some of those conversations led to insights about how to help folks that are stuck. Although Patrick saw no parallel between his situation and that of Segal, it seemed to me that there was a strong similarity in what happened to each of them. During one conversation I realized that how people think about selfhood varies enormously, and that led me to re-read part of Segal's story. Subsequently, I realized what I would tell Patrick if he ever contacted me again. As you can tell from my posts, I have no interest in engaging with people whose minds are made up. If they're happy, I'm happy. I may engage once or twice out of curiosity, but as soon as it becomes apparent that they're happy with their understanding, I'm content to leave them alone. I enjoy teaching in a wide variety of subjects, but I've learned that its a waste of time trying to teach someone who isn't interested in learning. I'm no longer working as a contractor, but I could probably help an active contractor double his income if he was interested in learning a few simple business strategies. Most small builders listen to their accountants and do a lot of stupid things based on what they're told (like buy new equipment and trucks with borrowed money in order to have things that can be depreciated--ultra-dumb!). They rarely know what their costs are, rarely have a system for tracking costs, rarely have reality-based reasons for doing what they do, and rarely have a good accounting system. They borrow lots of money, pay lots of interest, and end up with very little net profit. I have only met one contractor in the last few years who was interested in learning a smarter approach. In the same way, I could help financially-struggling people get control of their personal finances if they were interested, but most are not. I've probably talked about personal finance with thirty people, and not one of them was sufficiently interested to be willing to change behavior. The enlightenment business is the same sort of thing. Most people are not interested in truth; they're interested in what they imagine. As Byron Katie would say, "That's just the way of it." Only when someone is ready to hear can anything be heard. You, and others, assume that your version of enlightenment is 'the' enlightenment.. and when someone is ready they will hear 'your version'.. sometimes people hear a different but equally valid version of the same enlightenment.. you might say it's 'no-person', another might say it's the fully engaged 'person'.. interest diminishes when the guru sees only 'their' version and denigrates others.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 16, 2013 19:19:15 GMT -5
Yes, either one loses interest in the story or simply sees that the story is a story, only. The logical consequence of seeing that a story is only a story is to shift attention away from all stories to "what is." Klein helped Segal by advising her to stop telling herself a story about a past experience and to embrace the reality of what is always present. I'd say it is not an either or situation. The interest must be lost, period. While the interest remains, the compulsion to be consumed by imagination will continue regardless of how the stories are viewed. Why simply shifting attention away from stories to "what is" does not work for most is precisely because mind is more than happy to juggle multiple conflicting interests. Which is why I see the "shifting attention to what is" piece as actually the end result and not the initial cause that with enough practice breaks the house of cards so to speak. Yeah, that's how I see it too.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 16, 2013 19:22:17 GMT -5
Most likely, yeah, but then mayhaps a moments reflection on how one can contemplate one's own non-existence is in order. One clearly does exist, and there's no reason that issue can't be put out of it's misery. As for that existence having a center that one needs to point to with one a them fancy laser pointers, maybe the absurdity of that one can be seen through too. Well I'm sure you know as well as anyone after years of discussions with Andrew that absurdity can reach limitless proportions. It is, in fact, a glimpse of the infinite. Hehe.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 17, 2013 2:21:36 GMT -5
Yes, either one loses interest in the story or simply sees that the story is a story, only. The logical consequence of seeing that a story is only a story is to shift attention away from all stories to "what is." Klein helped Segal by advising her to stop telling herself a story about a past experience and to embrace the reality of what is always present. I'd say it is not an either or situation. The interest must be lost, period. While the interest remains, the compulsion to be consumed by imagination will continue regardless of how the stories are viewed. Why simply shifting attention away from stories to "what is" does not work for most is precisely because mind is more than happy to juggle multiple conflicting interests. Which is why I see the "shifting attention to what is" piece as actually the end result and not the initial cause that with enough practice breaks the house of cards so to speak. Causality turned inside out and put standing on it's head is still causality.
|
|
|
Post by silence on Oct 17, 2013 9:26:51 GMT -5
I'd say it is not an either or situation. The interest must be lost, period. While the interest remains, the compulsion to be consumed by imagination will continue regardless of how the stories are viewed. Why simply shifting attention away from stories to "what is" does not work for most is precisely because mind is more than happy to juggle multiple conflicting interests. Which is why I see the "shifting attention to what is" piece as actually the end result and not the initial cause that with enough practice breaks the house of cards so to speak. Causality turned inside out and put standing on it's head is still causality. What?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 17, 2013 9:40:40 GMT -5
Causality turned inside out and put standing on it's head is still causality. What? Conventional wisdom has it that meditation leads to realization. Haven't you said the opposite?
|
|
|
Post by silence on Oct 17, 2013 16:17:51 GMT -5
Conventional wisdom has it that meditation leads to realization. Haven't you said the opposite? I'm saying you'll attend to "what is" when you're no longer interested in your thoughts. Attempting to do the opposite can be achieved but only for short periods of time as mind gets more and more comfortable with longer controlled breaks.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 17, 2013 18:01:51 GMT -5
Conventional wisdom has it that meditation leads to realization. Haven't you said the opposite? I'm saying you'll attend to "what is" when you're no longer interested in your thoughts. Attempting to do the opposite can be achieved but only for short periods of time as mind gets more and more comfortable with longer controlled breaks. chegg
|
|
|
Post by silence on Oct 18, 2013 16:53:41 GMT -5
I'm saying you'll attend to "what is" when you're no longer interested in your thoughts. Attempting to do the opposite can be achieved but only for short periods of time as mind gets more and more comfortable with longer controlled breaks. chegg Nevermind.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 18, 2013 19:15:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 19, 2013 11:45:02 GMT -5
Klein's advice is kinda nonsense, too. Dealing with mind? All the genuine pointers are pointing prior to mind. Mind stays untouched. From my POV Klein was, in E.'s words, pointing beyond the intellect by "informing the intellect" concerning its limitations. What Segal IS includes intellect, and apparently intellect became informed, understood what had been happening, and stopped making up a story about what the lack of an "inside sense of selfhood" meant. This resulted in attention shifting to "what is" rather than a story ABOUT "what is." Klein's advice, in essence, is no different than the advice many of us give people when we say, "stop imagining and look." In this case his words referred to the specific activity that was causing Segal so much fear. I recently listened to a person who was obviously consumed with a particular fantasy. I advised that person that his whole imaginary world revolves around a fantasy, and I advised him to let go of it. His entire identity and sense of self importance is tied up in the fantasy, but it's the same sort of thing. Whether he'll drop the fantasy after being told that its a fantasy remains to be seen. Do you know Klein? Is he still around?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Oct 19, 2013 11:49:50 GMT -5
Yes, either one loses interest in the story or simply sees that the story is a story, only. The logical consequence of seeing that a story is only a story is to shift attention away from all stories to "what is." Klein helped Segal by advising her to stop telling herself a story about a past experience and to embrace the reality of what is always present. I'd say it is not an either or situation. The interest must be lost, period. While the interest remains, the compulsion to be consumed by imagination will continue regardless of how the stories are viewed. Why simply shifting attention away from stories to "what is" does not work for most is precisely because mind is more than happy to juggle multiple conflicting interests. Which is why I see the "shifting attention to what is" piece as actually the end result and not the initial cause that with enough practice breaks the house of cards so to speak. Precisely! If it is done deliberately then it's a mind game. That's why I said Klein's advice is nonsense. When the interest is lost, suddenly everything falls effortlessly into place. Unfortunately, however, losing interest can't be on the to do-list of the seeker since that would be an interest in continuing the story again.
|
|