|
Post by justlikeyou on Jan 23, 2020 20:43:42 GMT -5
What is resistance, to you? There's several different senses of the word (even there I used it in 2 slightly differing ways), but the 'resistance' in parenthesis was akin to the Tolle version, and which he usually contrasts with 'non resistance'. '' Inner resistance to whatever arises in the present moment pulls you back into unconsciousness. Inner resistance is some form of negativity, complaining, fear, aggression, or anger. This is important because whenever you complain about what somebody else does you're already beginning to fall into that trap of unconsciousness.” How do you define "inner resistance"?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 23, 2020 20:54:20 GMT -5
My ego is so small you need tweezer's and a microscope to play with it. How Ego And Pride Are Different Speaking tree (Publish Date: Feb 18 2019) What is the difference between ego and taking pride in oneself? Taking pride in oneself is not ego. Not only is there a difference between them, they are opposites. Ego is the feeling of being superior to others. Ego is a disease. How many people can you believe yourself to be superior to? Someone is more beautiful, someone is healthier, someone is more talented, someone is a genius. An egoist will only suffer his whole life; his life will be full of wounds and yet more wounds. Ego is comparing yourself to others. Ego is ideas such as ‘I am superior to others’. Taking pride in oneself is altogether a different thing. To take pride in oneself is to be very humble. There is not even a question of being superior to others — everyone is unique in his own right. This is the understanding that goes with taking pride in oneself: that nobody is higher than anyone else, nor is anyone lower than anyone else. In this existence, a small grass flower and the greatest star in the sky, both have the same value. If even this small grass flower were missing, something would be missing in the whole existence that even the greatest star could not make up for. Taking pride in yourself is accepting the reality that everyone is unique and there is no race, no competition, no ambition. Yes, if someone is aggressive towards you, because taking pride in yourself has no aggression in it, it will give you the capacity to fight back but not to belittle the other, only to prove that the aggression of the other was wrong, that all aggression is wrong. Taking pride in yourself has no conceit: it is simple and plain. But even the greatest power in the world cannot defeat a person who takes pride in himself. This is a very unique mystery. Such a person is humble, so humble that by his own choice, he will stand last in the queue. And so where else can he be pushed? The disease of ego is commonplace. The health of taking pride in oneself is rare, and when it is born in someone, it is difficult to recognise it, because it makes no claim. But the miracle is that this very ‘no claim’ of pride in oneself becomes its very claim. A man who takes pride in himself never wants to hold himself above anyone, and he will never allow anyone else to impose any slavery upon him. Hence, it can seem a little complex, and misinterpretations can happen. Because of this misunderstanding, there have been tremendously adverse effects upon India. For 2,000 years, we have remained slaves. India is the only country in the history of the whole world that has never attacked anybody, because for centuries the enlightened ones of this country taught people only one thing: non-aggression, nonviolence, compassion, and love. But this teaching remained somewhat incomplete. India completely forgot that violence towards itself should also not be allowed. And so is the case with taking pride in oneself: neither does a person leave the impression of his ego on someone else nor does he give that person the right to leave the impression of their ego on him. Pride is one of the 7 deadly sins, and for good reason.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 23, 2020 21:11:32 GMT -5
ZM Seung Sahn used to talk about the value of having "a strong center," and his use of that term seems to point in the same direction as the idea of "pride in oneself." It has nothing to do with ego, as defined in the article that K posted, and everything to do with standing in the center of one's truth--a truth that rests on the solid ground of being. It is what led a famous ZM who was threatened with death by a samurai warrior to say without any fear or concern, "Do whatever you wish; aggression only harms the aggressor." A strong center is synonymous with the idea of a house being built on solid rock that cannot be moved by capricious external forces. Although competition is usually an attribute of life, in humans it generally results from "a comparing mind," and is often thought of as a zero sum game. Humans who discover the truth underlying the conventional paradigm cease to compare themselves to others and they look for ways to make all engagements win-win rather than win-lose. This difference in outlook points to the same distinction between ego and pride in oneself. However, the word "pride" in this phrase should probably be replaced with something like "inner knowing of one's true nature" because the word "pride" has connotations that point toward ego, as defined by K's article. It not only has such connotations, it's literally defined as "a feeling or deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from one's own achievements". It derives from a belief in one's separateness and volition. I am neither proud nor ashamed as I, the achiever, am pure illusion.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 23, 2020 21:28:06 GMT -5
I like the distinction between pride and how ego is defined here, which I'd say is pretty much the same as jealousy. Competition seems to me to be a fact of life, and is a two-sided coin, although in terms of what we point to with nonduality, "competitive being" is about as laughable an idea as they come. Now, aggression .. that's one of those topics like anger, where it can be recognized that it's usually the result of the existential illusion, but to conclude that it always is the case isn't true. Reefs shouldn't have granted Satch's wish to be banned. We are like family here. There are misunderstandings, of course. But that's human nature. To say how we feel. Satch was hurt when he was accused by Reefs of trolling /crusading. Maybe he was or maybe he was not. I know ST can always find a replacement in the caliber of Satch. The absence of Satch has left an empty space in my heart. We should all are because he's our friend not fiend. I believe Satch was struggling against a perceived oppression. I likely perceive it much as Satch does, I just don't see any particular value in struggling with it.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 23, 2020 21:34:45 GMT -5
Don't you have a realistic question you could ask? In what Tolle calls 'non resistance', one can still say a firm 'No'. But the context starts to fray a bit when we consider that fear/aggression/anger do have their place, and can one actually say a firm 'No' without an instant sense of prior 'complaint'? As with most spiritual ideas, I see both value and problems to it. Perhaps the key is discerning what approach to use that fits the situation. For example the slogan, " Say No To Drugs." Would that be rediculous as a physician if I post that sign in my clinic? Not ridiculous. Ironic and hypocritical perhaps.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 24, 2020 5:08:31 GMT -5
Don't you have a realistic question you could ask? In what Tolle calls 'non resistance', one can still say a firm 'No'. But the context starts to fray a bit when we consider that fear/aggression/anger do have their place, and can one actually say a firm 'No' without an instant sense of prior 'complaint'? As with most spiritual ideas, I see both value and problems to it. Perhaps the key is discerning what approach to use that fits the situation. For example the slogan, " Say No To Drugs." Would that be rediculous as a physician if I post that sign in my clinic? no, it wouldn't. Though what we resist, tends to persist, so it's not a great slogan.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 24, 2020 5:09:20 GMT -5
There's several different senses of the word (even there I used it in 2 slightly differing ways), but the 'resistance' in parenthesis was akin to the Tolle version, and which he usually contrasts with 'non resistance'. '' Inner resistance to whatever arises in the present moment pulls you back into unconsciousness. Inner resistance is some form of negativity, complaining, fear, aggression, or anger. This is important because whenever you complain about what somebody else does you're already beginning to fall into that trap of unconsciousness.” How do you define "inner resistance"? It's a sense of contraction, a subtle refusal.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 24, 2020 5:09:41 GMT -5
For example the slogan, " Say No To Drugs." Would that be rediculous as a physician if I post that sign in my clinic? Not ridiculous. Ironic and hypocritical perhaps.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jan 24, 2020 7:21:42 GMT -5
ZM Seung Sahn used to talk about the value of having "a strong center," and his use of that term seems to point in the same direction as the idea of "pride in oneself." It has nothing to do with ego, as defined in the article that K posted, and everything to do with standing in the center of one's truth--a truth that rests on the solid ground of being. It is what led a famous ZM who was threatened with death by a samurai warrior to say without any fear or concern, "Do whatever you wish; aggression only harms the aggressor." A strong center is synonymous with the idea of a house being built on solid rock that cannot be moved by capricious external forces. Although competition is usually an attribute of life, in humans it generally results from "a comparing mind," and is often thought of as a zero sum game. Humans who discover the truth underlying the conventional paradigm cease to compare themselves to others and they look for ways to make all engagements win-win rather than win-lose. This difference in outlook points to the same distinction between ego and pride in oneself. However, the word "pride" in this phrase should probably be replaced with something like "inner knowing of one's true nature" because the word "pride" has connotations that point toward ego, as defined by K's article. It not only has such connotations, it's literally defined as "a feeling or deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from one's own achievements". It derives from a belief in one's separateness and volition. I am neither proud nor ashamed as I, the achiever, am pure illusion. Agreed, but I was interpreting K's post as poor language usage trying to point to what lies beyond pride or shame.
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Jan 24, 2020 7:22:14 GMT -5
Not ridiculous. Ironic and hypocritical perhaps. It's a front... Since Duterte took office in late June, more than 6,000 people have been killed in his campaign to purge the Philippines of illegal drugs and those associated with them, according to reliable estimates by local media. The victims—suspected users and pushers—do not enjoy due process, and they are always killed at night, sometimes inside their own homes. The perpetrators are vigilantes, hired guns and likely cops too. Duterte made no secret that this would happen. “All of you who are into drugs, you sons of bitches, I will really kill you,” he said last April, a month before he was elected. It wasn’t just campaign bluster. For 22 years Duterte had served as mayor of the southern city of Davao, where he took a pathological approach to restoring order to the city’s streets. Under his leadership, the extrajudicial killings of suspected criminals and drug users in Davao by vigilantes was practically state policy. In December, speaking to a group of businesspeople, Duterte admitted to personally killing a few himself while he was mayor. The reaction of the international community has been one of outrage and reproach: Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, said on Dec. 20 that Duterte should be investigated for murder. Duterte’s fiercest critic is Senator Leila de Lima, a former Secretary of Justice who has attempted to wage a war in the legislature against a strongman President who she says is actually “rather meek.” Duterte and his allies have struck back, and de Lima fears impeachment, arrest or worse. But, she says, “Will I stop fighting? Over my dead body.” —Nash Jenkins/Manila
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 24, 2020 7:52:03 GMT -5
It's a front... Since Duterte took office in late June, more than 6,000 people have been killed in his campaign to purge the Philippines of illegal drugs and those associated with them, according to reliable estimates by local media. The victims—suspected users and pushers—do not enjoy due process, and they are always killed at night, sometimes inside their own homes. The perpetrators are vigilantes, hired guns and likely cops too. Duterte made no secret that this would happen. “All of you who are into drugs, you sons of pregnant doges, I will really kill you,” he said last April, a month before he was elected. It wasn’t just campaign bluster. For 22 years Duterte had served as mayor of the southern city of Davao, where he took a pathological approach to restoring order to the city’s streets. Under his leadership, the extrajudicial killings of suspected criminals and drug users in Davao by vigilantes was practically state policy. In December, speaking to a group of businesspeople, Duterte admitted to personally killing a few himself while he was mayor. The reaction of the international community has been one of outrage and reproach: Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, said on Dec. 20 that Duterte should be investigated for murder. Duterte’s fiercest critic is Senator Leila de Lima, a former Secretary of Justice who has attempted to wage a war in the legislature against a strongman President who she says is actually “rather meek.” Duterte and his allies have struck back, and de Lima fears impeachment, arrest or worse. But, she says, “Will I stop fighting? Over my dead body.” —Nash Jenkins/Manila There's a great line in Star Wars which struck me even as a child... Leia says to the evil Tarkin....'the more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers' (He then blows up a planet!) But, systems of 'control' only work for so long (our planet is arguably under a system of control). Sovereignty/Freedom is too strong in the end.
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Jan 24, 2020 8:17:26 GMT -5
It's a front... Since Duterte took office in late June, more than 6,000 people have been killed in his campaign to purge the Philippines of illegal drugs and those associated with them, according to reliable estimates by local media. The victims—suspected users and pushers—do not enjoy due process, and they are always killed at night, sometimes inside their own homes. The perpetrators are vigilantes, hired guns and likely cops too. Duterte made no secret that this would happen. “All of you who are into drugs, you sons of pregnant doges, I will really kill you,” he said last April, a month before he was elected. It wasn’t just campaign bluster. For 22 years Duterte had served as mayor of the southern city of Davao, where he took a pathological approach to restoring order to the city’s streets. Under his leadership, the extrajudicial killings of suspected criminals and drug users in Davao by vigilantes was practically state policy. In December, speaking to a group of businesspeople, Duterte admitted to personally killing a few himself while he was mayor. The reaction of the international community has been one of outrage and reproach: Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, said on Dec. 20 that Duterte should be investigated for murder. Duterte’s fiercest critic is Senator Leila de Lima, a former Secretary of Justice who has attempted to wage a war in the legislature against a strongman President who she says is actually “rather meek.” Duterte and his allies have struck back, and de Lima fears impeachment, arrest or worse. But, she says, “Will I stop fighting? Over my dead body.” —Nash Jenkins/Manila There's a great line in Star Wars which struck me even as a child... Leia says to the evil Tarkin....'the more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers' (He then blows up a planet!) But, systems of 'control' only work for so long (our planet is arguably under a system of control). Sovereignty/Freedom is too strong in the end. In fact, I have not applied for S2 (Narcotic License) from the Department of Health /Bureau of Food and Drugs because I know there will be patients or people feigning illness of mental in origin telling me they are depressed, can't sleep, anxious etc so I could prescribe to them opiods, anxiolytics,,, morphine, demerol, diazepams. That if I do these frequently, I would be framed for prescribing these drugs. Under the Duterte Administration you never know. So, when people visit me in the clinic asking to be prescribe say, Valium, I tell them, "Sorry I don't have a narcotics license."
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 24, 2020 8:33:05 GMT -5
There's a great line in Star Wars which struck me even as a child... Leia says to the evil Tarkin....'the more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers' (He then blows up a planet!) But, systems of 'control' only work for so long (our planet is arguably under a system of control). Sovereignty/Freedom is too strong in the end. In fact, I have not applied for S2 (Narcotic License) from the Department of Health /Bureau of Food and Drugs because I know there will be patients or people feigning illness of mental in origin telling me they are depressed, can't sleep, anxious etc so I could prescribe to them opiods, anxiolytics,,, morphine, demerol, diazepams. That if I do these frequently, I would be framed for prescribing these drugs. Under the Duterte Administration you never know. So, when people visit me in the clinic asking to be prescribe say, Valium, I tell them, "Sorry I don't have a narcotics license." That seems sensible to me.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Jan 24, 2020 15:12:17 GMT -5
How do you define "inner resistance"? It's a sense of contraction, a subtle refusal. ...and usually the result of unconscious mind-talk.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 24, 2020 15:20:39 GMT -5
In fact, I have not applied for S2 (Narcotic License) from the Department of Health /Bureau of Food and Drugs because I know there will be patients or people feigning illness of mental in origin telling me they are depressed, can't sleep, anxious etc so I could prescribe to them opiods, anxiolytics,,, morphine, demerol, diazepams. That if I do these frequently, I would be framed for prescribing these drugs. Under the Duterte Administration you never know. So, when people visit me in the clinic asking to be prescribe say, Valium, I tell them, "Sorry I don't have a narcotics license." That seems sensible to me. What if they really need Valium?
|
|