|
Post by enigma on Oct 22, 2013 16:15:38 GMT -5
The point is that self-esteem and self-loathing define one another in that you can't have one without the other. For example, self-love as E' has styled it would mean that one would stop viewing ones body and mind as ugly and polluted on one hand, but wouldn't replace that negative self-image with one of self-aggrandizement on the other. These philosophies of nondualism and dualism are just that, and don't necessarily provide anything truly solid - factual - they are just two ways of looking at stuff in our lives. I think my post holds as much water as Enigma's, tbh. If you tag me as a dualistic type person, you can't necessarily claim that I always see things the way you're saying dualistic people always see them -- a 'dualistic' person doesn't necessarily see things that way (being judgmental, etc.). It's fashionable to call this a philosophical belief, and everybody who talks about it is forced onto a level playing field with all other ideas. It is fact. Your POV is not accurate or equally true.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 22, 2013 16:19:05 GMT -5
Why are you concerned with immortality....thats still all about an imagined future. You are alive and aware in this moment....and this moment is all that exists...the past and future are memories and imagination. Even your memories are imagination. Every spirituat text always talks about immortality. I mean if one were to live forever then there would be nothing one couldn't be, have, or achieve.
Persons (achievers) don't live forever. Sorry.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2013 16:19:49 GMT -5
The point is that self-esteem and self-loathing define one another in that, conceptually speaking, you can't have one without the other. For example, self-love as E' has styled it would mean that one would stop viewing ones body and mind as ugly and polluted on one hand, but wouldn't replace that negative self-image with one of self-aggrandizement on the other. Right, both are equally tenuous. Silver will love herself as long as she can convince herself (and necessarily others) that she's lovable or worthy of affection. The moment someone who's opinion she cares about implies she's done wrong, or the moment she compromises her own principles, there's internal conflict again. This notion of walking off the battle field is mucho important, and applies to forgiveness as well. In fact, it applies to Freedom and Peace. I think I understand your walking off the battle field idea. It seems like an accurate description of what happens, I am imagining. It's interesting, though, like many items in the description vs. prescription category, there is no clear way to do it. It's like the willingness idea. There's clearly no conscious intent to stay on the battlefield just as there appears to be a perhaps even strong willingness. So we're on the battlefield unconsciously even though the battle is right out in the open. Not only is there not much one can do with it, that's the point (in a subversive way). I suppose it re-emphasizes noticing, or meta-awareness.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Oct 22, 2013 16:30:08 GMT -5
The point is that self-esteem and self-loathing define one another in that, conceptually speaking, you can't have one without the other. For example, self-love as E' has styled it would mean that one would stop viewing ones body and mind as ugly and polluted on one hand, but wouldn't replace that negative self-image with one of self-aggrandizement on the other. Right, both are equally tenuous. Silver will love herself as long as she can convince herself (and necessarily others) that she's lovable or worthy of affection. The moment someone who's opinion she cares about implies she's done wrong, or the moment she compromises her own principles, there's internal conflict again. This notion of walking off the battle field is mucho important, and applies to forgiveness as well. In fact, it applies to Freedom and Peace. Jeez, you make me sound like LTN. I've always loved myself. If I didn't, I wouldnt be here, and nobody else who didn't love themselves would be here, either. You make me sound like some sort of serious basket case -- I've quipped about being one, but that's situational and I know you'll be at the ready to make hay with that. I listen to my own self, not someone else -- if I've 'done wrong' -- if indeed there is such a thing in your nonduality handbook. So, are you trying to say that forgiveness is a good thing or a bad thing? And what's this about 'Freedom and Peace'? You made plenty of fun in Andrew's direction when he'd use words like that -- so I don't get what you're getting at.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 22, 2013 16:31:54 GMT -5
You're searching for ways to dismiss what I'm saying with a kind of 'Oh, it's all dualistic and battlefield with you. Blah, blah.', but as an alternative we could actually have a real conversation. The distinction between self affection and the absence of self judgment is critical. Self affection is going to be demanding. What happens when you don't live up to your own expectations? The same thing that happens when others don't; the judgment begins again. Affection for the self is still judgment, and you still have to prove yourself worthy to yourself. Genuine self love is not replacing bad judgment with good judgment, it's simply the end of self judgment, and this naturally leads to the end of judgment of others. In this absence, there is Love. It is not your well considered affection for yourself and others. It is not 'your' Love. Good god, man, you're actually judging me and what I'm trying to say (and trying to have a real conversation with you in the process) right out the gate. sheesh. Uh second paragraph - I'm not seeing it the way you are saying that I'm seeing it there. I don't see it at all (self affection is going to be demanding) in the least. I can't begin to imagine how you came up with saying that 'affection for the self is still judgment, and you still have to prove yourself worthy to yourself.) I'm just not seeing that. Yes, affection is judging someone positively. In this case, you go back in memory and find reasons to justify self affection. This is an attempt to compensate for all those memories that seem to justify self judgment. There's no end to that game. You talk about self love as having affection for the self. If you want to change your story now, then tell me what you've decided self love is. No idea what the duality/cheesecake comment is about.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Oct 22, 2013 16:34:06 GMT -5
Good god, man, you're actually judging me and what I'm trying to say (and trying to have a real conversation with you in the process) right out the gate. sheesh. Uh second paragraph - I'm not seeing it the way you are saying that I'm seeing it there. I don't see it at all (self affection is going to be demanding) in the least. I can't begin to imagine how you came up with saying that 'affection for the self is still judgment, and you still have to prove yourself worthy to yourself.) I'm just not seeing that. Yes, affection is judging someone positively. In this case, you go back in memory and find reasons to justify self affection. This is an attempt to compensate for all those memories that seem to justify self judgment. There's no end to that game. You talk about self love as having affection for the self. If you want to change your story now, then tell me what you've decided self love is. No idea what the duality/cheesecake comment is about. Is affection against the rules of nonduality? Dubious.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2013 16:41:36 GMT -5
Persons (achievers) don't live forever. Sorry. No "action" does....if one wants to be immortal, they might want to find which is the immortal aspect if self, and which is the action of self, and start identifying with the immortal ;-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2013 16:45:05 GMT -5
I would describe Meta Awareness, as I have used it here, as a practice in which one steps back; so to speak, into non-conceptual awareness, but then 'looks' at the body/mind, the environment, and the other body/minds as a single unit, an integrated whole. And, as SDP said, the "practice" is the state....a shift of perspective. In some ways, this "shift" is like the snake oil of old, in that its a kind of "cure all"....only its really a cure all, and not snake oil ;-) It's an interesting exercise, expanding the focus way out, no limits...lots of checking happening, to see if I'm still being aware of behavior, environment, sensations ... throughout a question forming: is meta awareness just imagined? Attention flits from sensations to, for lack of better terms, an 'internal environment.' For example, an internal environment may be openness, or feelings of self loathing, or boredom. There is a constant two step happening. The step back is conscious, the step forward is not. Checking, noticing. :-) You're doing just fine....walking takes practice at first, but becomes easy soon enough without much effort.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2013 16:52:09 GMT -5
Which part of the split mind are you expecting an answer from? I don't see it as split mind so much as just more judgment. It's easy to forget that judging oneself as lovable is just as problematic as judging oneself as unlovable. It's just defecting to the other side of the battle and it's still conditional. There is the aspect of self standing in judgment of self, though. If the mind is not split, what do you think sees that perception follows judgment, and after having judged, we believe what we have perceived?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 22, 2013 17:19:02 GMT -5
These philosophies of nondualism and dualism are just that, and don't necessarily provide anything truly solid - factual - they are just two ways of looking at stuff in our lives. I think my post holds as much water as Enigma's, tbh. If you tag me as a dualistic type person, you can't necessarily claim that I always see things the way you're saying dualistic people always see them -- a 'dualistic' person doesn't necessarily see things that way (being judgmental, etc.). What?? She's trying to deal with her self judgment as she sees you (and me) judging her. That game requires so much attention, she has very little left for actually discussing the topic.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 22, 2013 17:23:06 GMT -5
Self love isn't really about feeling affection for oneself as that's still engagement on the same dualistic battlefield. That affection is also conditional and you're bound to betray yourself. Self love is not self affection but rather self acceptance, which means the absence of self judgment. To end self judgment is to walk off that judgment/affection battlefield all together. If getting off the manic-depressive ups and downs of the self love/hate merry-go-round isn't a clear enough example of transcendence (and free of any woo-woo connotation), I don't know what is. Yes, very down-to-Earth and practical, and even logical and understandable. I don't know how 'real life' we have to get before some of this starts to register.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2013 17:23:47 GMT -5
Persons (achievers) don't live forever. Sorry. No "action" does....if one wants to be immortal, they might want to find which is the immortal aspect of self, and which is the action of self, and start identifying with the immortal ;-) How would one know whether they had found the infinite aspect of self?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2013 17:30:33 GMT -5
No "action" does....if one wants to be immortal, they might want to find which is the immortal aspect of self, and which is the action of self, and start identifying with the immortal ;-) How would one know whether they had found the infinite aspect of self? If you can define a border or shape, its not infinite, if it changes it is not immortal or eternal. What aspect of existence, of your self, has no shape, and remains changeless. Your body has a shape, and it changes. Your mind has no shape, but it changes. What has no observable shape, and no observable changes? Its closer than your own skin.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 22, 2013 17:42:58 GMT -5
If getting off the manic-depressive ups and downs of the self love/hate merry-go-round isn't a clear enough example of transcendence (and free of any woo-woo connotation), I don't know what is. But that's YOUR label for it -- I see it clearly -- self-love has nothing whatsoever to do with self-hate, self-loathing, self-disrespect, or any other self-x label. love is clear enough, isn't it? capital L or small l - love is love is love. I never included any other word but love, and you are misinterpreting what I said. I mean, if you're going to use the word love, it means the same no matter who says it. I admit to being a small bit confused because 'Love' has some special meaning in nondualityland, I guess. *sigh* To reiterate, you and Enigma mis-translated and mis-labeled my post and my meaning behind it. You are adding to what I said and that totally changes the meaning. Evil frog - bad deputy. *muttley snicker* This is what you said: "How to teach yourself self-love? Have you ever had the thought and/or feeling that there's affection you have for yourself cross your mind? If you have, try and recall those moments - for starters. It doesn't matter how old you were when you felt them. Think of moments in your life where you felt reasonably good or on an even keel or just simply confident about yourself." "Feeling reasonably good" about oneself is the counter to feeling bad about oneself. Stop word lawyering. As for love, everybody defines it differently. Do you really think there is a universal definition, or even experience, of love? What Love actually is, is part of this discussion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2013 17:44:51 GMT -5
How would one know whether they had found the infinite aspect of self? If you can define a border or shape, its not infinite, if it changes it is not immortal or eternal. What aspect of existence, of your self, has no shape, and remains changeless. Your body has a shape, and it changes. Your mind has no shape, but it changes. What has no observable shape, and no observable changes? Its closer than your own skin. Do you know what treason is Stevie?
|
|