|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Mar 25, 2019 10:00:43 GMT -5
Groundhog Day is a good metaphor. What's the different between us and Phil in the film? Whereas Phil woke up every morning to know he was going to experience the same day again, we do not realize we are living our life over and over again. Why metaphor? Because we don't literally live each moment over again, but we live patterns, we live our own psychology over and over again. "Wherever you go, there you are". Why nondual trap? If you accept the premise, there is literally nothing you can do to change anything. Now, if OToH there is something to be done, but you consider it a fact there isn't, then you are trapped, thus, the ND trap.
I will create another metaphor. Suppose you are in a highly secure prison. You live in a small cell, get out only once a day to walk, alone, in a courtyard. But in your daydreams you can go anywhere, do anything, this is of course only in your imagination, that is, not-real. This small prison cell can be compared to what we take to be our self. But ND shows the self not-to-be real, not to be what we think it is.
Now combine paragraph one with two.
Of course nothing will happen differently unless the functionality of self, that is self, begins to become tiresome (that is, the metaphor, paragraph 2, becomes pretty real). Then the nightmare of Phil becomes our life. But the trouble is, we don't realize we already are living it. (See Lotto quote below). Now, what was Phil's solution to the problem? How did Phil escape? Maybe there is a kernel of an answer there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 25, 2019 10:48:27 GMT -5
Groundhog Day is a good metaphor. What's the different between us and Phil in the film? Whereas Phil woke up every morning to know he was going to experience the same day again, we do not realize we are living our life over and over again. Why metaphor? Because we don't literally live each moment over again, but we live patterns, we live our own psychology over and over again. "Wherever you go, there you are". Why nondual trap? If you accept the premise, there is literally nothing you can do to change anything. Now, if OToH there is something to be done, but you consider it a fact there isn't, then you are trapped, thus, the ND trap.Yeah, I see what you're saying there.. In order to truly grasp what is being indicated by 'there is no path...no doing that causes SR/Awakening,' the doer, volition and cause/effect must have been seen through. Absent that seeing through, these words will sound like "There's nothing you can do to end your suffering, so there's no point to anything...just sit there and suffer." Thus, I always say, if there's an arising interest to do something, or look at something, by all means don't resist that. At some point, it may become clear that the very arising of interest, itself, is beyond the person's control. Yeah, I think that movie is a good one for spiritual seekers...some kernels there for sure. If I'm grasping what you're saying, I agree. The very seeing that 'this is not working' and there must be something more, a better way, that this way has become tiresome and I'm sincere and intent upon change, I see to be just as much a matter of "Grace" as is the awakening/SR happening is. It's an opening...a seeing from which there is usually no turning back.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 25, 2019 15:57:37 GMT -5
Groundhog Day is a good metaphor. What's the different between us and Phil in the film? Whereas Phil woke up every morning to know he was going to experience the same day again, we do not realize we are living our life over and over again. Why metaphor? Because we don't literally live each moment over again, but we live patterns, we live our own psychology over and over again. "Wherever you go, there you are". Why nondual trap? If you accept the premise, there is literally nothing you can do to change anything. Now, if OToH there is something to be done, but you consider it a fact there isn't, then you are trapped, thus, the ND trap. I will create another metaphor. Suppose you are in a highly secure prison. You live in a small cell, get out only once a day to walk, alone, in a courtyard. But in your daydreams you can go anywhere, do anything, this is of course only in your imagination, that is, not-real. This small prison cell can be compared to what we take to be our self. But ND shows the self not-to-be real, not to be what we think it is. Now combine paragraph one with two. Of course nothing will happen differently unless the functionality of self, that is self, begins to become tiresome (that is, the metaphor, paragraph 2, becomes pretty real). Then the nightmare of Phil becomes our life. But the trouble is, we don't realize we already are living it. (See Lotto quote below). Now, what was Phil's solution to the problem? How did Phil escape? Maybe there is a kernel of an answer there. The "trap" is a strawman, that noone here will step into the shoes of it, and, in fact, most everyone has disclaimed to you at least once over the years. Which is .. kinda' ironic, now that I think of it.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Mar 25, 2019 16:00:13 GMT -5
Groundhog Day is a good metaphor. What's the different between us and Phil in the film? Whereas Phil woke up every morning to know he was going to experience the same day again, we do not realize we are living our life over and over again. Why metaphor? Because we don't literally live each moment over again, but we live patterns, we live our own psychology over and over again. "Wherever you go, there you are". Why nondual trap? If you accept the premise, there is literally nothing you can do to change anything. Now, if OToH there is something to be done, but you consider it a fact there isn't, then you are trapped, thus, the ND trap. I will create another metaphor. Suppose you are in a highly secure prison. You live in a small cell, get out only once a day to walk, alone, in a courtyard. But in your daydreams you can go anywhere, do anything, this is of course only in your imagination, that is, not-real. This small prison cell can be compared to what we take to be our self. But ND shows the self not-to-be real, not to be what we think it is. Now combine paragraph one with two. Of course nothing will happen differently unless the functionality of self, that is self, begins to become tiresome (that is, the metaphor, paragraph 2, becomes pretty real). Then the nightmare of Phil becomes our life. But the trouble is, we don't realize we already are living it. (See Lotto quote below). Now, what was Phil's solution to the problem? How did Phil escape? Maybe there is a kernel of an answer there. The "trap" is a strawman that noone here will take the other end of, and, in fact, most everyone has disclaimed to you at least once over the years. Which is .. kinda' ironic, now that I think of it. Yes, I understand what you're saying. (That's why, if I'm right, it IS a trap. But I can't do more than try to point it out).
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 25, 2019 18:16:47 GMT -5
The "trap" is a strawman that noone here will take the other end of, and, in fact, most everyone has disclaimed to you at least once over the years. Which is .. kinda' ironic, now that I think of it. Yes, I understand what you're saying. (That's why, if I'm right, it IS a trap. But I can't do more than try to point it out). Well, apparently, we're not perceiving the same irony. Would you rather I leave it there? -- I'm ok, either way.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Mar 25, 2019 18:41:55 GMT -5
Yes, I understand what you're saying. (That's why, if I'm right, it IS a trap. But I can't do more than try to point it out). Well, apparently, we're not perceiving the same irony. Would you rather I leave it there? -- I'm ok, either way. Sure, no problem, I'm sure we will get nowhere. But you and everyone here moves and acts in the world as if they are an acting agent, even if they have a realization or an ideology that says differently.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 25, 2019 19:13:26 GMT -5
Well, apparently, we're not perceiving the same irony. Would you rather I leave it there? -- I'm ok, either way. Sure, no problem, I'm sure we will get nowhere. ok then, yeah, no point in wasting any attention on that. But you and everyone here moves and acts in the world as if they are an acting agent, even if they have a realization or an ideology that says differently. No, I don't "act as if" anything, I just ... act. The agency is a conceptual overlay on either the results of the actions or to facilitate an after-the-fact analysis of intent. It's also a useful construct when planning, and necessary when doing the taxes, which never happens at any time other than now.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Mar 25, 2019 19:23:51 GMT -5
...most everyone has disclaimed to you at least once over the years. Which is .. kinda' ironic, now that I think of it. That's a funny observation L! Made me chuckle. :-)
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Mar 26, 2019 10:51:32 GMT -5
Sure, no problem, I'm sure we will get nowhere. ok then, yeah, no point in wasting any attention on that. But you and everyone here moves and acts in the world as if they are an acting agent, even if they have a realization or an ideology that says differently. No, I don't "act as if" anything, I just ... act. The agency is a conceptual overlay on either the results of the actions or to facilitate an after-the-fact analysis of intent. It's also a useful construct when planning, and necessary when doing the taxes, which never happens at any time other than now. You are being disingenuous, or truthful. Did nonvolition go out the window?
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 26, 2019 11:55:07 GMT -5
Sure, no problem, I'm sure we will get nowhere. ok then, yeah, no point in wasting any attention on that. But you and everyone here moves and acts in the world as if they are an acting agent, even if they have a realization or an ideology that says differently. No, I don't "act as if" anything, I just ... act. The agency is a conceptual overlay on either the results of the actions or to facilitate an after-the-fact analysis of intent. Yes. There doesn't need to be any self-referential thoughts associated with actions. If they occur, it's just an overlay.
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 26, 2019 11:56:31 GMT -5
ok then, yeah, no point in wasting any attention on that. No, I don't "act as if" anything, I just ... act. The agency is a conceptual overlay on either the results of the actions or to facilitate an after-the-fact analysis of intent. It's also a useful construct when planning, and necessary when doing the taxes, which never happens at any time other than now. You are being disingenuous, or truthful. Did nonvolition go out the window? Why would you think that? If there are no thoughts involved in actions, then the thought of volition does not arise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2019 12:08:24 GMT -5
ok then, yeah, no point in wasting any attention on that. No, I don't "act as if" anything, I just ... act. The agency is a conceptual overlay on either the results of the actions or to facilitate an after-the-fact analysis of intent. Yes. There doesn't need to be any self-referential thoughts associated with actions. If they occur, it's just an overlay. How about when it comes to socializing with others?.. you don't see the necessity for an entity/intermediary, imagined or otherwise?
(If not....fully agree.)
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Mar 26, 2019 12:18:42 GMT -5
Yes. There doesn't need to be any self-referential thoughts associated with actions. If they occur, it's just an overlay. How about when it comes to socializing with others?.. you don't see the necessity for an entity/intermediary, imagined or otherwise? (If not....fully agree.) No, I see socialization in the same way. There's just whatever's happening, and there's no need to imagine that one is an entity doing anything. It's just ordinary life without a conceptual/linguistic overlay.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2019 12:31:13 GMT -5
How about when it comes to socializing with others?.. you don't see the necessity for an entity/intermediary, imagined or otherwise? (If not....fully agree.) No, I see socialization in the same way. There's just whatever's happening, and there's no need to imagine that one is an entity doing anything. It's just ordinary life without a conceptual/linguistic overlay. Yes. I see it the same. Even socializing can and does happen absent an imagined overlay, Conversations flow best when the intermediary is absent.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Mar 26, 2019 12:38:57 GMT -5
...most everyone has disclaimed to you at least once over the years. Which is .. kinda' ironic, now that I think of it. That's a funny observation L! Made me chuckle. :-) heh heh .. well .. to bee perfectly honest, I didn't fully perceive my play in the irony until later. The only way to avoid that would have been to "♪ know where to put the cork ♫". But, I don't feel trapped.
|
|