|
Post by enigma on Feb 22, 2014 22:55:04 GMT -5
How does self improvement fit in with non duality? (that sounds like an oxymoron to me) One (supposed) problem after another. Then some (supposed) remedy, after another. Isn't that just swapping one story (guy with a problem needing fixed) with another story (guy who solved problem). Rinse and repeat. The only connection I see is that, typically, we need to approach nonduality with a healthy mind, relatively speaking. IOW, some semblance of sanity.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 22, 2014 22:59:57 GMT -5
Self improvement is often about releasing conditioned limiting beliefs, authenticity, unconditional love, and realizing True Self. Non duality is about releasing conditioned limiting beliefs, unconditional love, and realizing Self/No-Self. Self improvement is never about unconditional love(the self IS a condition) or realizing True Self (as there isn't one). Nonduality points away from everything that self improvement points toward.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 23, 2014 4:49:59 GMT -5
Self improvement is often about releasing conditioned limiting beliefs, authenticity, unconditional love, and realizing True Self. Non duality is about releasing conditioned limiting beliefs, unconditional love, and realizing Self/No-Self. Self improvement is never about unconditional love(the self IS a condition) or realizing True Self (as there isn't one). Nonduality points away from everything that self improvement points toward. Then I would say you havent researched much self-improvement stuff. Whether its EFT, chakra work, Tony Robbins, NLP, Marianne Williamson, NLP, Ho'oponopono, Sedona Method, inner child work....I could go on....its all about unconditional love and realizing True Self (which is another way of talking about Self/No-Self) The only difference is that self-improvement provides a path, whereas non-duality in its purer forms points away from paths. Different approaches, same theoretical result.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 23, 2014 4:54:02 GMT -5
I think the two can fit together quite nicely, but that the fitting needs a bit of care. If you worked from the position that who you really are is complete and whole right here and now just as it is, but that on a relative level you could learn a few things to go a little more lightly, then that seems like a good mix.. Eg, say you were a parent and you had difficulty relating to your kids because your own parents weren't that interested in being parents. You could learn some skills from a parenting course (eg Circle of Security) and become a "better parent", all whilst holding the view that things are complete as they are even if you don't get on with your kids. Where I think the self improvement thing ends up spiraling down into sh!t is when someone believes (knowingly or unknowingly) that there is some magic amount of "being ok" off in the distance, and that they need to do a whole lot of stuff to close the gap between here and there. Also, I think the danger is when one (non-duality) is used as a means to achieve the other (self-improvement). People like John Welwood write about this,. something called spiritual bypassing. I dunno .. but I don't think the two 'sides' can ever be reconciled, cuz I don't think the 'personal aspect' even exists .. except as a fabrication of mind. That's a pure non-dual model that you are speaking of there, and that's fine. But is there are context in which you would say that human beings do exist, or that there are individual experiences happening? Or do you only stick to the non-dual context and say that human beings don't exist and there are no individual experiences?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2014 5:49:00 GMT -5
It seems like it comes down to the case of mistaken identity between 'Who you think you are' and 'Who you really are'. The "think you are" dude wants to release stuff, etc. Do you think the "Really are" aspect needs to release anything, has any problems, needs any improvement? Thats all gobbledy goop stuff man....mentation.Just sit and breath without zoning out...and let all that knowledge seeking go into being perfectly satisfied with not knowing...its a letting go, not a picking up, or understanding....just be, without all this knowledge and knowing....you don't need to know any of this stuff for any functional reason, including Realization. Loves yas Bro Ha! sure, ok. The good news is that I don't wear any of that around my neck like a millstone, I was just offering it up for discussion purposes on a forum. ;-) When I sit around 'not knowing', 'not thinking', etc. ... I don't talk much. ;-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2014 6:07:08 GMT -5
I dunno .. but I don't think the two 'sides' can ever be reconciled, cuz I don't think the 'personal aspect' even exists .. except as a fabrication of mind. That's a pure non-dual model that you are speaking of there, and that's fine. But is there are context in which you would say that human beings do exist, or that there are individual experiences happening? Or do you only stick to the non-dual context and say that human beings don't exist and there are no individual experiences? ya know, those questions are difficult to answer/talk about. even more difficult to understand with crystal clear clarity (which seems why the 'success rate' is so ridiculously low) there is a typer here typing, and a reader over there reading. so seemingly there are "two", but that's not the truth, is it?
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 23, 2014 7:08:03 GMT -5
That's a pure non-dual model that you are speaking of there, and that's fine. But is there are context in which you would say that human beings do exist, or that there are individual experiences happening? Or do you only stick to the non-dual context and say that human beings don't exist and there are no individual experiences? ya know, those questions are difficult to answer/talk about. even more difficult to understand with crystal clear clarity (which seems why the 'success rate' is so ridiculously low) there is a typer here typing, and a reader over there reading. so seemingly there are "two", but that's not the truth, is it? Well, truths are always contextual, so while its true in one context that there is no two, in the context of there being experiencing, there are two and more experiences. I don't imagine that you only stick to one context, when your wife says 'hey Dan, can you pass me the ketchup', you don't say 'there is no Dan and there is no ketchup', you respond to the context being offered to you by your wife. If, by 'the truth' you are talking about 'Truth', that's still a context (a non-dual one) its just that there's not much to be said about it. Could perhaps say that 'Truth is what you are', or 'Truth is prior to mind/ideas' or 'Truth is what is left when falsity has been seen through'. What is sometimes not apprehended by those that explore non-duality is that although 'Truth', by definition, it defined to be outside of ideas, it is still created and defined within ideas. In that sense its just something else to talk about, to explore. Its no big deal.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Feb 23, 2014 8:14:40 GMT -5
ya know, those questions are difficult to answer/talk about. even more difficult to understand with crystal clear clarity (which seems why the 'success rate' is so ridiculously low) there is a typer here typing, and a reader over there reading. so seemingly there are "two", but that's not the truth, is it? Well, truths are always contextual, so while its true in one context that there is no two, in the context of there being experiencing, there are two and more experiences. I don't imagine that you only stick to one context, when your wife says 'hey Dan, can you pass me the ketchup', you don't say 'there is no Dan and there is no ketchup', you respond to the context being offered to you by your wife. If, by 'the truth' you are talking about 'Truth', that's still a context (a non-dual one) its just that there's not much to be said about it. Could perhaps say that 'Truth is what you are', or 'Truth is prior to mind/ideas' or 'Truth is what is left when falsity has been seen through'. What is sometimes not apprehended by those that explore non-duality is that although 'Truth', by definition, it defined to be outside of ideas, it is still created and defined within ideas. In that sense its just something else to talk about, to explore. Its no big deal. Great post andrew. sdp
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 23, 2014 8:45:33 GMT -5
It seems like it comes down to the case of mistaken identity between 'Who you think you are' and 'Who you really are'. The "think you are" dude wants to release stuff, etc. Do you think the "Really are" aspect needs to release anything, has any problems, needs any improvement? Nope. Not a bit. From the "outside" it might look like a sage is doing something, but from the "inside" (the sage's perspective) no one is imagined to be doing anything.Zackly.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 23, 2014 8:47:13 GMT -5
It seems like it comes down to the case of mistaken identity between 'Who you think you are' and 'Who you really are'. The "think you are" dude wants to release stuff, etc. Do you think the "Really are" aspect needs to release anything, has any problems, needs any improvement? No. Theoretically non-duality is a brilliant short cut. Its the most direct route, so direct that its not a 'route' and even the word 'direct' is misapplied. Practically though, it doesn't seem to work like that. A lot seem to end up reading book after book, watching video after video, going to seminar after seminar, and usually end up doing some kind of self-improvement exercises of some sort, even if its meditation or forgiveness or non-judgement. Some of the eastern teachings (and western too) have recommended clearing/releasing conditioning, which is basically self-improvement, and I resonate with that. The other problem with the short cut is that its easy to take it, and then think we are 'home', when really its more of an imitation home. So although it is potentially brilliant, it has its problems. Of course, self-improvement has its problems too. What!? No 'figless likes this' above this post?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 23, 2014 8:52:37 GMT -5
How does self improvement fit in with non duality? (that sounds like an oxymoron to me) One (supposed) problem after another. Then some (supposed) remedy, after another. Isn't that just swapping one story (guy with a problem needing fixed) with another story (guy who solved problem). Rinse and repeat. I think the two can fit together quite nicely, but that the fitting needs a bit of care. If you worked from the position that who you really are is complete and whole right here and now just as it is, but that on a relative level you could learn a few things to go a little more lightly, then that seems like a good mix.. Eg, say you were a parent and you had difficulty relating to your kids because your own parents weren't that interested in being parents. You could learn some skills from a parenting course (eg Circle of Security) and become a "better parent", all whilst holding the view that things are complete as they are even if you don't get on with your kids. Where I think the self improvement thing ends up spiraling down into sh!t is when someone believes (knowingly or unknowingly) that there is some magic amount of "being ok" off in the distance, and that they need to do a whole lot of stuff to close the gap between here and there. Also, I think the danger is when one (non-duality) is used as a means to achieve the other (self-improvement). People like John Welwood write about this,. something called spiritual bypassing. Are you talking about rainbow chasing?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 23, 2014 8:59:42 GMT -5
As an aside...a big part of modern 'self improvement' is really about gaining confidence....but what do you need confidence for, if your attention is on being Kind, and Loving, and Grateful? Confidence is useful for winning, getting, and achieving....but you will have greater Joy if you shift your attention from what you can get, to what you can give.shift attention from getting to giving, and letting go of stuff, and see how un-important 'self improvement' becomes :-) Confidence is the natural byproduct of knowing who you are.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 23, 2014 9:01:01 GMT -5
Self improvement is often about releasing conditioned limiting beliefs, authenticity, unconditional love, and realizing True Self. Non duality is about releasing conditioned limiting beliefs, unconditional love, and realizing Self/No-Self. Self improvement is never about unconditional love(the self IS a condition) or realizing True Self (as there isn't one). Nonduality points away from everything that self improvement points toward. Precisely.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 23, 2014 9:14:42 GMT -5
Self improvement is never about unconditional love(the self IS a condition) or realizing True Self (as there isn't one). Nonduality points away from everything that self improvement points toward. Then I would say you havent researched much self-improvement stuff. Whether its EFT, chakra work, Tony Robbins, NLP, Marianne Williamson, NLP, Ho'oponopono, Sedona Method, inner child work....I could go on....its all about unconditional love and realizing True Self (which is another way of talking about Self/No-Self) The only difference is that self-improvement provides a path, whereas non-duality in its purer forms points away from paths. Different approaches, same theoretical result. That's bouncy house stuff, i.e. improving personal experiences. Has nothing to do with non-duality pointers. Not even theoretically. Non-duality pointers are about what is already the case, which can be seen clearly as soon as the bouncy housey music stops. That's why non-duality pointers can never be Tools TM and why those who see it as a tool have not yet left the bouncy house.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 23, 2014 9:20:01 GMT -5
Then I would say you havent researched much self-improvement stuff. Whether its EFT, chakra work, Tony Robbins, NLP, Marianne Williamson, NLP, Ho'oponopono, Sedona Method, inner child work....I could go on....its all about unconditional love and realizing True Self (which is another way of talking about Self/No-Self) The only difference is that self-improvement provides a path, whereas non-duality in its purer forms points away from paths. Different approaches, same theoretical result. That's bouncy house stuff, i.e. improving personal experiences. Has nothing to do with non-duality pointers. Not even theoretically. Non-duality pointers are about what is already the case, which can be seen clearly as soon as the bouncy housey music stops. That's why non-duality pointers can never be Tools TM and why those who see it as a tool have not yet left the bouncy house. So, you took me off the ignore list...I have time to talk today so you're in luck You are correct that non-duality pointers are about what is already the case, and that is a context. Self-improvement is a different context, but it is still pointing to what non-dualists would say 'is already the case' i.e. True Self (same as No-Self/Self), unconditional love and authenticity. The coding is different but the result is the same. So, someone that has been to counselling or done a load of EFT and has released a truck load of limiting conditioned beliefs will end up in the same 'place' as the individual that took a non-dual 'direct route'. Of course, the success rate of the 'direct route' is questionable. By the way, 'bouncy house' is a musical genre not a term that applies to either non-duality or self-improvement.
|
|