|
Post by enigma on Oct 18, 2013 17:08:02 GMT -5
If it were alive to begin with, I would understand the dilemma. It must not want to see through itself. And all the enlightened people let it learn all their tricks. So now it romps and plays with the enlightenment people. Free to make a big mess of things if it doesn't get it's way. It knows the enlightened people are going to try to tear down any belief it proclaims. Good little ego. Ego isn't alive. It doesn't want or not want or romp or play or make a mess.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2013 17:08:51 GMT -5
No, I'm not very good at it, so I don't bother. It was kind of a tease about your avatar. Count again
|
|
|
Post by silence on Oct 18, 2013 17:12:05 GMT -5
The not particularly caring piece is a vibe I get from you pretty consistently. It seems like you're just sort of pushing words around maybe putting together a solid theoretical understanding of what teachers are saying and/or experiencing. That's not some sort of a problem but it is worlds apart from what people are trying to point out to you. Your interest seems to be a bit like a water bug pushing itself around on the surface of the lake wondering what the big deal about water is. I agree and intuitively I would say it's sort of a lack of confidence, not being arrogant enough, not trusting oneself enough. All this spiritual discernment business is like reading a physics book, okay it's interesting but I don't really care and I don't seriously expect it to get me anything. I think Max is like everyone, he does care, but it seems that the mind has been confused by all the blah blah and the attention/energy is going to some place where it's imagined that some calculated effort will produce some result, but that's not even really believed in, hence it's all half-ássed and half-cooked. That's why I asked why not be honest and acknowledge one's own psychological truth and just say to hell with all that and be 100% a stupid and ignorant ego/self/whatever. One can't reason with or cheat the psychological truth. Spiritual teachers sometimes say that one has to find one's own question (koan). Some people claim that they don't have one, I would say they do have one but it's really ugly and stupid, namely the psychological truth. There's something that I think most everyone spends a lot of time avoiding. And really it's the fact that you're 100% alone in all of it. Yes, you can talk to other people about what's going on with you and compare notes and read teachings. But at the end of the day, one must discard all of that and stop running from themselves. Face the aspects of themselves they push away and find the confidence and inner authority that doesn't need anything from anyone, including their own thoughts. When or if this happens, the theoretical discussions are nothing but a major sideshow. There really IS something genuine to all of this nonsense but it's not anything anyone can give you or tell you about.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 18, 2013 17:22:08 GMT -5
But I think you're right in a way, I'm just trying figure out basically what folks are saying. It's just figuring out what the pointer is so I can look where it's pointing sort of thing. I wouldn't insult water bugs that way either, I doubt they're cobbled by such silly musings. It's a difficult point to get across because you don't strike me as being very reactive at all and so discussion with you is very fluid and easy. In that sense, just about anyone here could have years of theoretical discussions with you with very little distractions. On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be any oomph or fire lit beneath you. The kind of fire that brings the curiosity you surely have to look much more deeply than simply what the words are spelling out. It's an interesting point (to me). I sometimes talk about how there needs to be some 'energy' in an interaction, and I've mentioned that there's often an attempt to find that point where there is enough emotional involvement that a conversation can wander away from the mental analysis a bit and engage on a meaningful level. It usually leads to resistance and then everybody wants to stop the conversation, but that's a different matter.
|
|
|
Post by tcejer on Oct 18, 2013 17:24:26 GMT -5
My ego doesn't want to die. If it were alive to begin with, I would understand the dilemma. The ego IS alive, and is called 'you' or 'oneself'! It is indeed that part of oneself that is afraid of 'death'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2013 17:52:49 GMT -5
I can't wait to tell my wife that my spiritual work is going to shift to beIng more arrogant and reactive. Ramp up opinions and authority.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Oct 18, 2013 18:31:11 GMT -5
I can't wait to tell my wife that my spiritual work is going to shift to beIng more arrogant and reactive. Ramp up opinions and authority. in b4
|
|
|
Post by silence on Oct 18, 2013 19:34:17 GMT -5
It's a difficult point to get across because you don't strike me as being very reactive at all and so discussion with you is very fluid and easy. In that sense, just about anyone here could have years of theoretical discussions with you with very little distractions. On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be any oomph or fire lit beneath you. The kind of fire that brings the curiosity you surely have to look much more deeply than simply what the words are spelling out. It's an interesting point (to me). I sometimes talk about how there needs to be some 'energy' in an interaction, and I've mentioned that there's often an attempt to find that point where there is enough emotional involvement that a conversation can wander away from the mental analysis a bit and engage on a meaningful level. It usually leads to resistance and then everybody wants to stop the conversation, but that's a different matter. I can understand the mental interest. Even on a conceptual level, it can be fascinating to talk about theories and introduce grand models of reality with the smallest number of logical inaccuracies. It astounds me at times to see some of the people who roll in here with these doctorate style presentations of reality and yet it's next to impossible to point out that the whole thing is lacking any sort of vitality whatsoever. I don't particularly buy into the idea that anyone is here because they have some passing interest in models. What's beneath that is precisely what must come to the surface.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Oct 18, 2013 19:42:50 GMT -5
It's an interesting point (to me). I sometimes talk about how there needs to be some 'energy' in an interaction, and I've mentioned that there's often an attempt to find that point where there is enough emotional involvement that a conversation can wander away from the mental analysis a bit and engage on a meaningful level. It usually leads to resistance and then everybody wants to stop the conversation, but that's a different matter. I can understand the mental interest. Even on a conceptual level, it can be fascinating to talk about theories and introduce grand models of reality with the smallest number of logical inaccuracies. It astounds me at times to see some of the people who roll in here with these doctorate style presentations of reality and yet it's next to impossible to point out that the whole thing is lacking any sort of vitality whatsoever. I don't particularly buy into the idea that anyone is here because they have some passing interest in models. What's beneath that is precisely what must come to the surface.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 18, 2013 21:14:24 GMT -5
If it were alive to begin with, I would understand the dilemma. The ego IS alive, and is called 'you' or 'oneself'! It is indeed that part of oneself that is afraid of 'death'. It is fundamentally an idea about a separate, volitional individual which is identified with, and therefore leads to the fear of death and various other illusions. It is not more than an idea.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Oct 18, 2013 21:48:19 GMT -5
Greetings.. The ego IS alive, and is called 'you' or 'oneself'! It is indeed that part of oneself that is afraid of 'death'. It is fundamentally an idea about a separate, volitional individual which is identified with, and therefore leads to the fear of death and various other illusions. It is not more than an idea. You have a persistent inclination of presuming your beliefs apply to others, they don't.. A separate volitional person exists, and rather than your description of being "identified with", i understand the relationship as 'acknowledging'.. from my perspective, the separate, volitional individual is one of many aspects of the whole person, and of the collective whole of all persons.. you maintain a narrowly defined belief about people, and you remain resistant to any open honest discussion about your beliefs unless the discussion agrees to your preferred terminologies.. Nothing you or anyone posts is "more than an idea", the issue is whether or not the 'idea' represents what is actually happening, what is real.. i suggest that people look and see for themselves, you insist that you know the 'truth'.. i understand that there is no 'truth', only a work in progress, to which we are included participants in the work and the progress through our interactive experiences of Life happening.. you are attached to your conditional belief about 'truth', i am attached to paying unconditional attention to what is happening.. BE well..
|
|
|
Post by acewall on Oct 18, 2013 22:45:31 GMT -5
Greetings.. It is fundamentally an idea about a separate, volitional individual which is identified with, and therefore leads to the fear of death and various other illusions. It is not more than an idea. You have a persistent inclination of presuming your beliefs apply to others, they don't.. A separate volitional person exists, and rather than your description of being "identified with", i understand the relationship as 'acknowledging'.. from my perspective, the separate, volitional individual is one of many aspects of the whole person, and of the collective whole of all persons.. you maintain a narrowly defined belief about people, and you remain resistant to any open honest discussion about your beliefs unless the discussion agrees to your preferred terminologies.. Nothing you or anyone posts is "more than an idea", the issue is whether or not the 'idea' represents what is actually happening, what is real.. i suggest that people look and see for themselves, you insist that you know the 'truth'.. i understand that there is no 'truth', only a work in progress, to which we are included participants in the work and the progress through our interactive experiences of Life happening.. you are attached to your conditional belief about 'truth', i am attached to paying unconditional attention to what is happening.. BE well.. do you have one belief you(a separate volitional person)want to share, something that might be worth-while reading on this website of people sharing of them-self also? Constant denial of others-offerings gives the impression that you know best and ought to be supported here whilst you establish your foothold and stake-out your Kingdom.
|
|
|
Post by acewall on Oct 18, 2013 22:49:17 GMT -5
Just thinking out loud. I listened to part of an J Katz interview with Fred Davis this morning. Mr. Davis was talking openly about ego. How, before awakening to the falsehood of self, it was confused and driven primarily through addiction, and transferring addiction. After awakening, it continued and manifested as wanting to be a spiritual teacher. And it continues to this day, though appears to have less intensity to it. Would the real Teacher Please Stand-up?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Oct 19, 2013 5:50:42 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. You have a persistent inclination of presuming your beliefs apply to others, they don't.. A separate volitional person exists, and rather than your description of being "identified with", i understand the relationship as 'acknowledging'.. from my perspective, the separate, volitional individual is one of many aspects of the whole person, and of the collective whole of all persons.. you maintain a narrowly defined belief about people, and you remain resistant to any open honest discussion about your beliefs unless the discussion agrees to your preferred terminologies.. Nothing you or anyone posts is "more than an idea", the issue is whether or not the 'idea' represents what is actually happening, what is real.. i suggest that people look and see for themselves, you insist that you know the 'truth'.. i understand that there is no 'truth', only a work in progress, to which we are included participants in the work and the progress through our interactive experiences of Life happening.. you are attached to your conditional belief about 'truth', i am attached to paying unconditional attention to what is happening.. BE well.. do you have one belief you(a separate volitional person)want to share, something that might be worth-while reading on this website of people sharing of them-self also? Constant denial of others-offerings gives the impression that you know best and ought to be supported here whilst you establish your foothold and stake-out your Kingdom. No.. by my understanding, a belief is an unverifiable idea about one's existence that the believer is attached to, and.. by 'attached' i mean that in the face of reasoned and realized evidence to the contrary, the believer remains attached.. i am not attached to ideas or imagined beliefs, or stories conjured to explain that which the experiencer prefers or doesn't understand.. Your characterization of "constant denial" is a double-edged sword, i have a standing offer for those that wish to actually discuss the beliefs i challenge.. you call the challenge "constant denial", and see the avoidance of open hones discussion as "constant denial".. I do not "know best", in fact i do not 'know' much at all, actually.. that is why i keep paying attention, it's why i keep looking with unconditional curiosity.. i'm actually interested in what 'is' happening, rather than marketing beliefs.. I am 'sharing' my understanding of existence by helping others have their own authentic experience of their own existence, rather than telling them about what is 'true/truth'.. most of the suffering in our existence is based on people's 'beliefs and attachments' to ideological 'truths', conditioned stories that shape their self-awareness and intervene in their right to their own clarity and authenticity.. stories that are obstacles to a person's liberation and to their freedom from the known.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by acewall on Oct 19, 2013 6:09:51 GMT -5
Greetings.. do you have one belief you(a separate volitional person)want to share, something that might be worth-while reading on this website of people sharing of them-self also? Constant denial of others-offerings gives the impression that you know best and ought to be supported here whilst you establish your foothold and stake-out your Kingdom. No.. by my understanding, a belief is an unverifiable idea about one's existence that the believer is attached to, and.. by 'attached' i mean that in the face of reasoned and realized evidence to the contrary, the believer remains attached.. i am not attached to ideas or imagined beliefs, or stories conjured to explain that which the experiencer prefers or doesn't understand.. Your characterization of "constant denial" is a double-edged sword, i have a standing offer for those that wish to actually discuss the beliefs i challenge.. you call the challenge "constant denial", and see the avoidance of open hones discussion as "constant denial".. I do not "know best", in fact i do not 'know' much at all, actually.. that is why i keep paying attention, it's why i keep looking with unconditional curiosity.. i'm actually interested in what 'is' happening, rather than marketing beliefs.. I am 'sharing' my understanding of existence by helping others have their own authentic experience of their own existence, rather than telling them about what is 'true/truth'.. most of the suffering in our existence is based on people's 'beliefs and attachments' to ideological 'truths', conditioned stories that shape their self-awareness and intervene in their right to their own clarity and authenticity.. stories that are obstacles to a person's liberation and to their freedom from the known.. Be well.. err, what was the question?
|
|