|
Post by silence on Oct 20, 2013 0:13:54 GMT -5
Greetings.. WHAT?? do you not recognize oneness when you're talking to it.. or an intervention when it's appropriate.. Or, is it the usual slip and slide away from facing your own attachments.. Be well.. You seem deranged.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Oct 20, 2013 0:17:52 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. Only if you believe you're something called an 'ego'.. Be well.. You go on to say "it's the you you wish you weren't, but you are..". What's that part about? 'Ego' is the scapegoat people create to separate the aspects of themselves they don't like from the aspects they do like.. what they don't like they call 'ego', what they do like is 'authentic and genuine', what they do like they call their 'true' self.. and, it's all the same self, the same origin.. Be well..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Oct 20, 2013 0:19:20 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. WHAT?? do you not recognize oneness when you're talking to it.. or an intervention when it's appropriate.. Or, is it the usual slip and slide away from facing your own attachments.. Be well.. You seem deranged. To you, it would seem so.. but, thanks for noticing.. Be well..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2013 0:21:00 GMT -5
Greetings.. To believe that I am an 'ego' doesn't mean that I am an imaginary character. It means that I am perceiving myself as not whole. If you also see me this way, then you are seeing me as if I were absent from the Kingdom or separated from it, thus making the Kingdom itself obscure to both of us. If we obscure the Kingdom we are perceiving what is not God. The characteristics and conditions 'you' label as 'ego' do not coalesce into a separate 'thing' apart from the mind that imagines they do.. I see you as indulging your imagination's conditioned religious beliefs, and trying to fit your beliefs about 'ego' into your beliefs about 'God'.. yes, 'you' are the one that chooses what you believe 'ego' means, and you give the imagined meaning whatever authority you believe it has, same as your beliefs about 'God'.. From my perspective, i try to keep my relationship with existence simple, i see/experience no actual evidence of a cosmic puppeteer, 'God', or a 'kingdom' created by that 'God'.. of course, it's not clear to me what you mean by 'God' and/or 'Kingdom', since there are many differences of beliefs about the meanings of those words.. It is my practice to pay attention to what is happening, without expectations or conditions.. i have read and studied several religious texts, and applied the teachings to my existence with the intention allowing that the teachings could manifest the results they claim.. what is obvious is that the belief-systems condition the believers by invoking some variation of 'faith' (belief) in that which cannot be verified, i.e.: 'God', 'heaven', 'hell', noble truths, truth, etc.. and, most belief-systems create illusions with word-games/word-play that creates a language-system that supports the belief-system.. What i have not seen/experienced is a belief system that empowers the experiencer to have their own authentic experience, without trying to influence the experiencer's understanding of that experience.. if the belief-system is valid it will be self-evident and trust the experiencer's clarity to see the actuality, so.. rather than market beliefs that influence the experiencer, the valid systems empower the experiencer's clarity.. Be well.. Neither TRF nor I have said anything about religions, we have mentioned God and a metaphor or two about being in a state of conscious union with God....the religion paradigm is something that you are introducing.... Regarding that bit in red....observe any eco system on any part of the planet...observe its incredible diversity combined with its incredible balance and harmony in flow with natural laws....when you observe this, how can you not see an overriding Grace to it that is more than a mere amalgamation of chemical and biological anomalies? One thing I've noticed about you Tzu....is that you have a wonderful capacity for just looking at what is...this is truly wonderful about you...but you also appear to avoid or shut out INSIGHT, which is a kind a depth of looking at what is....its as though you are so concerned about any belief overlaying your view of what is, that refuse to look deeper into anything but the most superficial surface view of things....you can look deeper without overlaying beliefs....thats what insight is. in·sight (nst) n. 1. The capacity to discern the true nature of a situation with penetration. 2. The act or outcome of grasping the inward or hidden nature of things or of perceiving in an intuitive manner. You offer a wonderful amount of stating "what is" seen from the surface view, but without insight, you are simply a non-sentient recorder of a sensory and thought field....and in fact, your avoidance of insight often leaves you sounding like a robotic recording that does nothing but record the data it perceives and regurgitates it back in the form of a post here....those regurgitations are often very accurate, but very rarely contain any insight, or penetrative seeing....without insight, you are nothing but a recording device for the most superficial topology of the mental and physical landscape that you encounter. My advice is to use that wonderful clarity of seeing that you have developed to look a little deeper at things, and gain some real insight. Peeling back the layers so to speak, does not mean that you have to add in beliefs. You can look deeper and still keep looking "at what is".
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Oct 20, 2013 5:34:48 GMT -5
TRUTH AT ANY COST. Doesn't fit your model very well. Not true.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2013 6:30:18 GMT -5
TRUTH AT ANY COST. Doesn't fit your model very well. Not true. Eh? Cost=condition, non? TRUTH=enlightenment.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Oct 20, 2013 7:18:34 GMT -5
Eh? Cost=condition, non? TRUTH=enlightenment. Imo what you call "truth" is actually "information".
|
|
|
Post by silence on Oct 20, 2013 10:49:03 GMT -5
Hello TRF....as a result of you mentioning it, I read the ACIM last night. Its a wonderful method, and if one is going to follow it, they should follow it fully. It has essentially everything there in it that a good tradition of practice should contain. And it surely contains Christ's message....Faith, Certainty/Concentration, Not Knowing, Surrender unto Oneness, and Forgiveness in its truest meaning of letting go. I cannot help but to give it a rousing endorsement. However, I cannot concur with the bits about God/Not God. I see God's Grace in everything. God's Grace touches all and everything....God is in everything, and everything is OF God and not separate from God. You read all 1156 pages last night? Haha. I reckon Steve could teach us speed reading too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2013 10:51:40 GMT -5
Greetings.. To believe that I am an 'ego' doesn't mean that I am an imaginary character. It means that I am perceiving myself as not whole. If you also see me this way, then you are seeing me as if I were absent from the Kingdom or separated from it, thus making the Kingdom itself obscure to both of us. If we obscure the Kingdom we are perceiving what is not God. The characteristics and conditions 'you' label as 'ego' do not coalesce into a separate 'thing' apart from the mind that imagines they do.. I see you as indulging your imagination's conditioned religious beliefs, and trying to fit your beliefs about 'ego' into your beliefs about 'God'.. yes, 'you' are the one that chooses what you believe 'ego' means, and you give the imagined meaning whatever authority you believe it has, same as your beliefs about 'God'.. From my perspective, i try to keep my relationship with existence simple, i see/experience no actual evidence of a cosmic puppeteer, 'God', or a 'kingdom' created by that 'God'.. of course, it's not clear to me what you mean by 'God' and/or 'Kingdom', since there are many differences of beliefs about the meanings of those words..It is my practice to pay attention to what is happening, without expectations or conditions.. i have read and studied several religious texts, and applied the teachings to my existence with the intention allowing that the teachings could manifest the results they claim.. what is obvious is that the belief-systems condition the believers by invoking some variation of 'faith' (belief) in that which cannot be verified, i.e.: 'God', 'heaven', 'hell', noble truths, truth, etc.. and, most belief-systems create illusions with word-games/word-play that creates a language-system that supports the belief-system.. What i have not seen/experienced is a belief system that empowers the experiencer to have their own authentic experience, without trying to influence the experiencer's understanding of that experience.. if the belief-system is valid it will be self-evident and trust the experiencer's clarity to see the actuality, so.. rather than market beliefs that influence the experiencer, the valid systems empower the experiencer's clarity.. Be well.. 'God' as it pertains to the theology of ACIM refers to the 'Mind' of God, which is described as representing the activating agent of 'Spirit' supplying it's creative energy. 'Spirit' is the Thought of God which He created like Himself. The unified spirit is God's one Son, or Christ. In my world, because the mind is split, I as the Son of God appear to be separate. Nor does my mind seem to be joined to other minds. In this illusory state, the concept of an "individual mind" seems to be meaningful to me. It is therefore described in ACIM 'as if' it has two parts; spirit and ego. 'Kingdom', in ACIM refers to the fact that The Kingdom of Heaven ' is' you. What else but you did the Creator create, and what else but you is His Kingdom?
|
|
|
Post by silence on Oct 20, 2013 10:56:58 GMT -5
Greetings.. You go on to say "it's the you you wish you weren't, but you are..". What's that part about? 'Ego' is the scapegoat people create to separate the aspects of themselves they don't like from the aspects they do like.. what they don't like they call 'ego', what they do like is 'authentic and genuine', what they do like they call their 'true' self.. and, it's all the same self, the same origin.. Be well.. Okay. I agree that this does seem to happen and what you're talking about is more in line with how (mostly spiritual people) try to deal with ego.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Oct 20, 2013 12:32:58 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. The characteristics and conditions 'you' label as 'ego' do not coalesce into a separate 'thing' apart from the mind that imagines they do.. I see you as indulging your imagination's conditioned religious beliefs, and trying to fit your beliefs about 'ego' into your beliefs about 'God'.. yes, 'you' are the one that chooses what you believe 'ego' means, and you give the imagined meaning whatever authority you believe it has, same as your beliefs about 'God'.. From my perspective, i try to keep my relationship with existence simple, i see/experience no actual evidence of a cosmic puppeteer, 'God', or a 'kingdom' created by that 'God'.. of course, it's not clear to me what you mean by 'God' and/or 'Kingdom', since there are many differences of beliefs about the meanings of those words.. It is my practice to pay attention to what is happening, without expectations or conditions.. i have read and studied several religious texts, and applied the teachings to my existence with the intention allowing that the teachings could manifest the results they claim.. what is obvious is that the belief-systems condition the believers by invoking some variation of 'faith' (belief) in that which cannot be verified, i.e.: 'God', 'heaven', 'hell', noble truths, truth, etc.. and, most belief-systems create illusions with word-games/word-play that creates a language-system that supports the belief-system.. What i have not seen/experienced is a belief system that empowers the experiencer to have their own authentic experience, without trying to influence the experiencer's understanding of that experience.. if the belief-system is valid it will be self-evident and trust the experiencer's clarity to see the actuality, so.. rather than market beliefs that influence the experiencer, the valid systems empower the experiencer's clarity.. Be well.. Neither TRF nor I have said anything about religions, we have mentioned God and a metaphor or two about being in a state of conscious union with God....the religion paradigm is something that you are introducing.... Regarding that bit in red....observe any eco system on any part of the planet...observe its incredible diversity combined with its incredible balance and harmony in flow with natural laws.... when you observe this, how can you not see an overriding Grace to it that is more than a mere amalgamation of chemical and biological anomalies? One thing I've noticed about you Tzu....is that you have a wonderful capacity for just looking at what is...this is truly wonderful about you...but you also appear to avoid or shut out INSIGHT, which is a kind a depth of looking at what is....its as though you are so concerned about any belief overlaying your view of what is, that refuse to look deeper into anything but the most superficial surface view of things....you can look deeper without overlaying beliefs....thats what insight is. in·sight (nst) n. 1. The capacity to discern the true nature of a situation with penetration. 2. The act or outcome of grasping the inward or hidden nature of things or of perceiving in an intuitive manner. You offer a wonderful amount of stating "what is" seen from the surface view, but without insight, you are simply a non-sentient recorder of a sensory and thought field....and in fact, your avoidance of insight often leaves you sounding like a robotic recording that does nothing but record the data it perceives and regurgitates it back in the form of a post here....those regurgitations are often very accurate, but very rarely contain any insight, or penetrative seeing....without insight, you are nothing but a recording device for the most superficial topology of the mental and physical landscape that you encounter. My advice is to use that wonderful clarity of seeing that you have developed to look a little deeper at things, and gain some real insight. Peeling back the layers so to speak, does not mean that you have to add in beliefs. You can look deeper and still keep looking "at what is". What i see is a phenomenal cosmos exploring its own existence, it does so with awesome power, delicate beauty, and brutal authenticity.. the 'grace' i see is not gifted by a creator, it emanates from within each of us as our potential for dancing with the symphony of life, it is the most human of qualities.. to stand amidst chaos and destruction and see the beauty and be the beauty that rebuilds itself from the ruins.. to feel that.. that surge of compassion welling-up from the essence of what we 'are' and compelling us to act selflessly for our brothers and sisters and for this wet little rock we call Earth, we call home.. Robot? no, i weep for my brothers and sisters and the planet almost every day.. i witness the effects of people attaching to beliefs and going at each other because of what they 'believe', because one person's 'God' is worshiped differently than someone else's, or because someone describes their 'God' differently.. the choice to make a real experiential difference can happen with or without invoking the influence of a 'God', my experience/understanding suggests that'God' is best kept in the believer's private mindscape to minimize the potential conflicts.. we can unite as a functional whole and create a synergy with real potential for evolving the human condition beyond its self-inflicted suffering.. but, it begins when we can all meet on the same 'level playing field', letting go of ALL attachments and beliefs.. BE well..
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 21, 2013 1:54:02 GMT -5
You read all 1156 pages last night? Haha. I reckon Steve could teach us speed reading too. Samadhi turbo reading?
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Oct 22, 2013 6:03:24 GMT -5
Greetings.. 'Ego' is a belief, a set of values and ideas that creates an imaginary character that we can blame our unwanted traits on.. it's the you you wish you weren't, but you are.. Be well.. Ego is an ambiguous term that is interpreted in a variety of ways, but it stems from an ancient Greek conceptualisation of 'I'. The set of values and ideals are there and are a product of upbringing or socialisation. In the end though, everyone has some sort of self image and in that sense ego is actually a 'wispy thing', and neuroplasticity actually validates the temperance of self imagery... so being at peace with the changing self is great for contentment, but it's easier said than done.
|
|