|
Post by andrew on Mar 8, 2018 17:26:16 GMT -5
Okay so practically speaking you see the baby screaming. Do you believe or know that the baby is in some level of distress? Do you then have the thought 'I believe the infant is not suffering'? What happens internally when you see a baby in distress? Where does the thought that the baby might not be experiencing fit in?For me what happens is...'I see the baby screaming, I know the baby is in distress, I know the baby is suffering (because distress is suffering). Then I start weighing up options on how to act. I start weighing up options on how to act. The thought that the baby might not be experiencing doesn't fit in. What did I say that gave you that impression? What terms did I fail to define well? ...Experiencing?...Baby? So you know the baby is in some level of distress, and then weigh up the options? If so, then your acknowledgement that a baby experiences distress is basically enough for me. If it important to you to save the word 'suffering' for adult human existential distress then okay.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 8, 2018 17:35:06 GMT -5
No, I mean the hurt goes dormant again until we create a new trigger, which gives the feeling the opportunity to say all that it wants to say. This is what happens in counselling sometimes...though I don't believe it works very effectively, because the feeling is contrived in that context. Unfortunately, we have to work through emotional wounds as they happen in actual life experience. So the feeling is still there somewhere? It hasn't had it's say yet? It is basically dormant, so we create similar situations in order to let the feeling (and accompanying thoughts) have its say. I don't see the mind as in the head, though that's where it is most concentrated, I see mind as in every cell of the body, and I believe in cell memory. Probably a huge percentage of humans are like emotional timebombs hehe, and we don't have the contexts to express emotion healthily. Airports are one of the most emotionally charged environments out there...people leaving each other, maybe forever. But how many people do you see fully weeping in airports or in airplanes? Or consider most work environments. Our world is not set up for healthy expression of emotion, so it leeks out in odd ways, we create situations that force us to feel and heal.
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Mar 8, 2018 17:35:40 GMT -5
I addressed this above I believe. Addressed what? The pub crawling issue? The engaging issue.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Mar 8, 2018 17:48:11 GMT -5
No, I mean the hurt goes dormant again until we create a new trigger, which gives the feeling the opportunity to say all that it wants to say. This is what happens in counselling sometimes...though I don't believe it works very effectively, because the feeling is contrived in that context. Unfortunately, we have to work through emotional wounds as they happen in actual life experience. So the feeling is still there somewhere? It hasn't had it's say yet? Precisely. That's the meaning of the unconscious (subconscious). Anything not ~processed~, dealt with, goes into the "garbage bin", and becomes the tail wagging the dog. (That's also what happens to babies when they are psychologically mistreated, the mistreatment gets shoved into the background, and has a powerful influence. That's ~ the meaning~ of the suffering of babies. [When it is severe enough, when they grow up a little they begin to mistreat animals. When it is severe enough, killing animals eventually can turn into killing people, they're called serial killers. There is almost without fail this pattern] They feel compelled to {unconsciously act out} what had been done to them). For the ordinary person, nasty psychological stuff [done to them] can be turned into (Laughter's) double bind. For the Borderline Personality [Disorder] (on borderline between neurotic and psychotic) a common phrase describing this problem is: "I hate you, don't leave me", the Borderline person wants opposing things. All this happens at least to some tiny extent, to all of us. The unconscious/subconscious is the tail wagging the dog. A major problem it seems to me, is that SR does not "fix" any of our psychological problems. Something is amiss here. (But I commend Reefs for bringing in alignment [A-H and Seth], which seems to address this problem). I think it's a failing to say, it doesn't matter because there isn't a self to begin with. There is a manifestation, which keeps manifesting, after SR (if it quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, looks like a duck, don't tell me the duck is illusory, there is no separate duck). There is a process of ~taking the energy out of~ the duck structure.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Mar 8, 2018 17:52:35 GMT -5
I don't suffer from physiological requirements. I eat when I'm hungry, drink when I'm thirsty, sleep when I'm tired. What I've been trying to say is suffering is not an inevitable consequence of certain bodily sensations. There's really nothing objective about suffering. well you suffer from physiological requirements if those requirements aren't being met. That's the point of suffering, it tells us to take action in some way (this might be internal or external action). Yes, there is an (unconscious) compulsion to ~do stuff~. When there is compulsion, you can bet the unconscious is rising to the surface (usually physically, emotionally, or obsessive thinking). [And this refers back to the earlier question by E and my reply to-it].
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Mar 8, 2018 17:55:52 GMT -5
So the feeling is still there somewhere? It hasn't had it's say yet? It is basically dormant, so we create similar situations in order to let the feeling (and accompanying thoughts) have its say. I don't see the mind as in the head, though that's where it is most concentrated, I see mind as in every cell of the body, and I believe in cell memory. Probably a huge percentage of humans are like emotional timebombs hehe, and we don't have the contexts to express emotion healthily. Airports are one of the most emotionally charged environments out there...people leaving each other, maybe forever. But how many people do you see fully weeping in airports or in airplanes? Or consider most work environments. Our world is not set up for healthy expression of emotion, so it leeks out in odd ways, we create situations that force us to feel and heal. Yes, and yes. (And basically dormant means unconscious/subconscious).
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 8, 2018 20:22:16 GMT -5
I use the terms the way most teachers and students use them. The problem seems to be the idea that, since everything is Consciousness, it must therefore be conscious. It's like saying, since everything in your nightly dream is your mind, it must therefore be intelligent. I don't think so. What you mean by 'Consciousness/Awareness/Intelligence'...most teachers would use 'emptiness' or 'nothingness', because you are not saying that Consciousness is conscious, or Awareness is aware. But otherwise, no, it is like saying, since everything in your nightly dream comes from your mind, then everything in the dream is minding (or has the quality of mind). It's just not a very translatable example, because we shouldn't really compare mind with Consciousness/Awareness etc. Well, at least you're not being disagreeable or nuthin.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 8, 2018 20:26:37 GMT -5
Marie and I have talked about that exact issue in the squirrel satsangs, and we agree it can't be known if each other exist. You obviously see that as a contradiction or something problematic, but it's fine. Okay, you don't know if ' each other' exist. So then the knowing you exist is a personal knowing i.e the knowing is only applicable to your existence, and not to Marie's existence (if she exists). Does this mean that you know that Phil exists? (This should probably go in the other thread, As I have said before, the problem with solipsism is that it eventually feeds into every spiritual orientated conversation) So when someone indicates to you that they are experiencing something...for example...let's say someone says to you...'I am sad' or 'I am happy' or 'I like the smell of this'....then in that moment, do you consider it possible that they are lying about experiencing, or that they are mistaken about experiencing? If not, why not? No, I consider it possible that they're not experiencers at all. Yes, it works into every conversation, so stop it.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 8, 2018 20:39:30 GMT -5
I'm not talking about a lack of interest in engaging or a lack of desire to engage. In the experiments in question, the infants were not given the opportunity to engage. Is this the meaning of "he said/she said"? That's all on you, Andrew. You don't listen to what I say and I constantly have to correct you. Well Enigma, I would say that the lack of opportunity to engage would result in chronic depression. In the interests of the thread, I won't engage with the second paragraph, and will do my best to stick to the point. Depression requires a 'me'.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 8, 2018 21:16:19 GMT -5
So the feeling is still there somewhere? It hasn't had it's say yet? It is basically dormant, so we create similar situations in order to let the feeling (and accompanying thoughts) have its say. I don't see the mind as in the head, though that's where it is most concentrated, I see mind as in every cell of the body, and I believe in cell memory. Probably a huge percentage of humans are like emotional timebombs hehe, and we don't have the contexts to express emotion healthily. Airports are one of the most emotionally charged environments out there...people leaving each other, maybe forever. But how many people do you see fully weeping in airports or in airplanes? Or consider most work environments. Our world is not set up for healthy expression of emotion, so it leeks out in odd ways, we create situations that force us to feel and heal. I agree with the comments about suppressed expression, but I don't see feeling existing without some form of thought structure that both creates and sustains it. Feeling is a movement only. This is why the feeling does not go dormant, it goes away.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 8, 2018 21:21:17 GMT -5
Addressed what? The pub crawling issue? The engaging issue. You said "because of the absence of desire to engage with life?" And I corrected it to "the absence of engagement with life." In the case of the experiments, the infant lacks the experience of life from which to form a desire.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 8, 2018 21:24:52 GMT -5
So the feeling is still there somewhere? It hasn't had it's say yet? Precisely. That's the meaning of the unconscious (subconscious). Anything not ~processed~, dealt with, goes into the "garbage bin", and becomes the tail wagging the dog. (That's also what happens to babies when they are psychologically mistreated, the mistreatment gets shoved into the background, and has a powerful influence. That's ~ the meaning~ of the suffering of babies. [When it is severe enough, when they grow up a little they begin to mistreat animals. When it is severe enough, killing animals eventually can turn into killing people, they're called serial killers. There is almost without fail this pattern] They feel compelled to {unconsciously act out} what had been done to them). For the ordinary person, nasty psychological stuff [done to them] can be turned into (Laughter's) double bind. For the Borderline Personality [Disorder] (on borderline between neurotic and psychotic) a common phrase describing this problem is: "I hate you, don't leave me", the Borderline person wants opposing things. All this happens at least to some tiny extent, to all of us. The unconscious/subconscious is the tail wagging the dog. A major problem it seems to me, is that SR does not "fix" any of our psychological problems. Something is amiss here. (But I commend Reefs for bringing in alignment [A-H and Seth], which seems to address this problem). I think it's a failing to say, it doesn't matter because there isn't a self to begin with. There is a manifestation, which keeps manifesting, after SR (if it quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, looks like a duck, don't tell me the duck is illusory, there is no separate duck). There is a process of ~taking the energy out of~ the duck structure. It IS processed, by discovering it never happened to begin with.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Mar 8, 2018 21:50:10 GMT -5
I don't see feeling existing without some form of thought structure that both creates and sustains it. Feeling without thought first is not possible? Isn't even in the realm of possibilities?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 8, 2018 23:59:20 GMT -5
A major problem it seems to me, is that SR does not "fix" any of our psychological problems. Something is amiss here. (But I commend Reefs for bringing in alignment [A-H and Seth], which seems to address this problem). I think it's a failing to say, it doesn't matter because there isn't a self to begin with. There is a manifestation, which keeps manifesting, after SR (if it quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, looks like a duck, don't tell me the duck is illusory, there is no separate duck). There is a process of ~taking the energy out of~ the duck structure. SR actually "fixes" the biggest psychological problem of all--by exposing the illusion that there's a separate volitional entity at the center of whatever is happening. Using your words, it totally "takes the energy out of the duck structure" by making it obvious that there was never a duck to begin with. There is only "what is," and "what is" is a living unified whole. SR brings seeking to an end because it becomes obvious that the seeker was never who one imagined it was. The difference between before and after, psychologically, is impossible to over emphasize. Sanity appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Mar 9, 2018 0:10:34 GMT -5
I don't see feeling existing without some form of thought structure that both creates and sustains it. Feeling without thought first is not possible? Isn't even in the realm of possibilities? Emotional feeling and mental activity are inextricably tied together. You feel good or bad about something. The body can feel good or bad without mental activity, of course.
|
|