|
Post by lopezcabellero on Aug 3, 2019 12:30:06 GMT -5
Who is RM again? To destroy a compensatory pattern is to make conscious and bring to light the energy that fuels it, most of which we could classify as either pain or emotional injury. The idea of destroying pain or destroying an emotional injury isn't really an accurate pointer to emotional processing. It sounds more like a glorified compensatory pattern. Not to say a compensatory identity or pattern can't be dismantled or eliminated, but the bottom line is those who demonstrate clarity are more emotionally conscious than those who don't. Pure consciousness is infinite, shapeless, and unbounded. Through the manifested, one consciousness conditions itself as a person through changing the universe, and during this conditioning identification happens. More pointedly, a pattern of compensation arises through the creation of personally unconscious people. Groups are split on whether this creation of the personally unconscious is God's creation or the creation of the unconscious themselves. The former testify to the human inclination toward self reliance and control, while the latter point out that such self reliance and control is itself a projection of a dynamic running internally, unconsciously, such that the idea humans chose unconsciousness isn't toadally true. I meet many folks who have lost faith in God, because they see a lack of justice in a striving to get ahead. Some even compensate for that loss of faith with a belief in a biblical God, and essentially lock their own prison cells by painting a mural of a sunset on the wall. Justice is human conditioning operating according to the same logic. In the same way consciousness identifies with being a predator, it likewise identifies with being a victim. Freedom is not in the identity, but beyond, and yet, within reach. You mention self realization, whether SR happens, and so on, but isn't it interesting how little we talk about emotional injuries on this forum? Injuries are the obstacle to freedom, but its the compensations on the outer layer over riding the pain that must first be noticed, and taken away. The society we inhabit is a compensation for guilt, shame, pain and trauma. Normalcy is compensation, and until we can see that clearly, the likelihood of transcending our own unconsciousness, on the personal level, is essentially nil. Most people are not just a little bit, but highly unconscious of how interlinked into collective dysfunction they are. And yet, the show goes on... Emotional consciousness is as good a synonym for clarity as any other, and while realization isn't necessary for clarity in this sense, realization can open an entire new dimension on it. In terms of realization, I'll write about "SR" because there's more or less a very loose forum consensus on what that refers to, but my opinion is that there are a number of different significant existential realizations possible, and that the number and the way these split-out can vary quite a bit among individuals. By "RM" I meant Ramana Maharshi, and I agree, referring to "destruction" in these terms can be unhelpful, but he did evidently refer to the possibility of the "destruction of mind". Similar to Jed, if I spoke with him, I'd feel him out by positing the fact that it's only ego that would seek to destroy ego, which ain't never gonna' really happen, and I'd be interested in his response. For either RM or Jed, given what they were talking about, it's important to put what they said in the proper and greater context, and I get the feeling from what I've read of both of them that they'd know what I meant by that it's only ego that would look to destroy ego. In terms of the question of how unconsciousness is created, to some extent, it's quite clear how the gears of culture grind on against themselves over the years to perpetuate some of that. But in terms of the specific individuals, we have to keep in mind what that individual really is, which is, as you say, infinite, shapeless and unbounded. The goal of emotional healing is noble. We can recognize the virtue of it, in human terms, and what this virtue reflects is that very unboundedness, because it is in that infinity where the unity suggested by the pointer of not-two is found. Existential realization offers an opportunity for a transcendent sort of "integration". One that doesn't ignore or belittle the individual's injuries, nor necessarily heal them, but that puts them into an embodied perspective that can't be arrived at by a change in conditions or conditioning.
While I'm certainly no healer, I can see what's going on with this. In terms of how past emotional injury moves into the light of pure consciousness, it's more like a dissolution, and opening, a gaining of space and a lightening, than it is a fracturing or a crushing or a smashing. I can imagine it being jarring, even violent, but I can't imagine it ever being coerced. Facilitating this, as well as pursing it, demands strength, but of the patient, gentle nurturing variety. Strength in support, rather than in rending.
Oh yea Ramana. I forgot we were talking about him. As far as what the individual really is: There really is no individual, but that's not helping the conversations on this forum because a primary injury we are seeing is the conditioned belief of not being separate arising from the conditioned complex from appearing to be separate. Obviously, if healing is going to happen, it happens through consciousness, the primary essence of self prior to changing conditions. But to use a meditation practice to become the primary self or confirm that you are the primary self is more bypassing of what isn't conscious in the realm of the conditioned self, when it's the form of a practice. Another common injury we see on this forum is the idea of just letting everything be, allowing the universe to steer the dream without conditioned interference. This, however solid a pointer to the supreme state, is also an invitation to a dark psychic force for those still in the presence of emotional conflict. If you don't want to take responsibility for your life, you invite a cloak from the collective unconscious. Many people in meditation circles actually confuse dark spiritual energy with the Self, and form co -dependent relationships with overlords hell bent on keeping the Earth in its current condition, if not making it worse, in exchange for power amd control. Yea, in terms of emotional processing, it's going to be everything it could have been and them some. Meaning, every emotion that's ever been blocked or bypassed must be experienced in order for the mind id complex to unravel. That's saying a lot, but based on laws of conditioning, once the intent to heal is present, conditions will arise, that you will create, to trigger unconscious emotions to bring them to light through alignment with desire. So healing, while it will be painful, will also be life altering in beneficial ways, to both the person and the collective dream.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2019 12:44:32 GMT -5
Satch believes thoughts occur randomly for no reason. Did you know you were going to think that before you thought it? The precise thought may not be predictable, no, but that does not mean thoughts occur willy-nilly or that SR has no bearing upon thought.
A sage 'thinks about' the world differently than one is still fast asleep. The thoughts about the world have SR as their basis. The thoughts themselves are not the Truth, but if they informed by SR, they point to it.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 3, 2019 13:53:59 GMT -5
Emotional consciousness is as good a synonym for clarity as any other, and while realization isn't necessary for clarity in this sense, realization can open an entire new dimension on it. In terms of realization, I'll write about "SR" because there's more or less a very loose forum consensus on what that refers to, but my opinion is that there are a number of different significant existential realizations possible, and that the number and the way these split-out can vary quite a bit among individuals. By "RM" I meant Ramana Maharshi, and I agree, referring to "destruction" in these terms can be unhelpful, but he did evidently refer to the possibility of the "destruction of mind". Similar to Jed, if I spoke with him, I'd feel him out by positing the fact that it's only ego that would seek to destroy ego, which ain't never gonna' really happen, and I'd be interested in his response. For either RM or Jed, given what they were talking about, it's important to put what they said in the proper and greater context, and I get the feeling from what I've read of both of them that they'd know what I meant by that it's only ego that would look to destroy ego. In terms of the question of how unconsciousness is created, to some extent, it's quite clear how the gears of culture grind on against themselves over the years to perpetuate some of that. But in terms of the specific individuals, we have to keep in mind what that individual really is, which is, as you say, infinite, shapeless and unbounded. The goal of emotional healing is noble. We can recognize the virtue of it, in human terms, and what this virtue reflects is that very unboundedness, because it is in that infinity where the unity suggested by the pointer of not-two is found. Existential realization offers an opportunity for a transcendent sort of "integration". One that doesn't ignore or belittle the individual's injuries, nor necessarily heal them, but that puts them into an embodied perspective that can't be arrived at by a change in conditions or conditioning. While I'm certainly no healer, I can see what's going on with this. In terms of how past emotional injury moves into the light of pure consciousness, it's more like a dissolution, and opening, a gaining of space and a lightening, than it is a fracturing or a crushing or a smashing. I can imagine it being jarring, even violent, but I can't imagine it ever being coerced. Facilitating this, as well as pursing it, demands strength, but of the patient, gentle nurturing variety. Strength in support, rather than in rending.
Oh yea Ramana. I forgot we were talking about him. As far as what the individual really is: There really is no individual, but that's not helping the conversations on this forum because a primary injury we are seeing is the conditioned belief of not being separate arising from the conditioned complex from appearing to be separate. Obviously, if healing is going to happen, it happens through consciousness, the primary essence of self prior to changing conditions. But to use a meditation practice to become the primary self or confirm that you are the primary self is more bypassing of what isn't conscious in the realm of the conditioned self, when it's the form of a practice. Another common injury we see on this forum is the idea of just letting everything be, allowing the universe to steer the dream without conditioned interference. This, however solid a pointer to the supreme state, is also an invitation to a dark psychic force for those still in the presence of emotional conflict. If you don't want to take responsibility for your life, you invite a cloak from the collective unconscious. Many people in meditation circles actually confuse dark spiritual energy with the Self, and form co -dependent relationships with overlords hell bent on keeping the Earth in its current condition, if not making it worse, in exchange for power amd control. Yea, in terms of emotional processing, it's going to be everything it could have been and them some. Meaning, every emotion that's ever been blocked or bypassed must be experienced in order for the mind id complex to unravel. That's saying a lot, but based on laws of conditioning, once the intent to heal is present, conditions will arise, that you will create, to trigger unconscious emotions to bring them to light through alignment with desire. So healing, while it will be painful, will also be life altering in beneficial ways, to both the person and the collective dream. Care to elaborate? (From you this surprises me).
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 3, 2019 16:08:32 GMT -5
No, but that doesn't mean thoughts occur randomly for no reason. You're not consciously aware of everything you know. That's the difference between theory and actuality. I couldn't really call that a theory though because saying, that doesn't mean thoughts occur randomly for no reason is just as valid as saying it doesn't mean thoughts occur randomly for a reason. You haven't put forward any kind of mechanism or explanation to support one view or other. But as far as the actuality is concerned it's quite clear. A thought appears and disappears. End of story. That is what is actually happening. No, it's not. And from a place of consciousness you would be able to see that. Even from where you are, you can deduce that there is more going on; that there are unconscious movements of thought and feeling and that you are only consciously aware of a small fraction of what is taking place.
|
|
|
Post by satchitananda on Aug 3, 2019 21:07:29 GMT -5
That's the difference between theory and actuality. I couldn't really call that a theory though because saying, that doesn't mean thoughts occur randomly for no reason is just as valid as saying it doesn't mean thoughts occur randomly for a reason. You haven't put forward any kind of mechanism or explanation to support one view or other. But as far as the actuality is concerned it's quite clear. A thought appears and disappears. End of story. That is what is actually happening. No, it's not. And from a place of consciousness you would be able to see that. Even from where you are, you can deduce that there is more going on; that there are unconscious movements of thought and feeling and that you are only consciously aware of a small fraction of what is taking place. Okay you are clearly not dealing with what is actually happening right now, in this moment, which is not about deduction, thinking there is more going on, that you are only aware of part of what is going on etc. These thoughts are just extraneous thoughts of the mind. It's just noise. All that is required is to become still. I know you are fighting against this simple step, because your mind is full of ideas about what you think is true. But what is true is to simply be right here, right now in stillness, silence, bliss.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Aug 4, 2019 19:40:28 GMT -5
Emotional consciousness is as good a synonym for clarity as any other, and while realization isn't necessary for clarity in this sense, realization can open an entire new dimension on it. In terms of realization, I'll write about "SR" because there's more or less a very loose forum consensus on what that refers to, but my opinion is that there are a number of different significant existential realizations possible, and that the number and the way these split-out can vary quite a bit among individuals. By "RM" I meant Ramana Maharshi, and I agree, referring to "destruction" in these terms can be unhelpful, but he did evidently refer to the possibility of the "destruction of mind". Similar to Jed, if I spoke with him, I'd feel him out by positing the fact that it's only ego that would seek to destroy ego, which ain't never gonna' really happen, and I'd be interested in his response. For either RM or Jed, given what they were talking about, it's important to put what they said in the proper and greater context, and I get the feeling from what I've read of both of them that they'd know what I meant by that it's only ego that would look to destroy ego. In terms of the question of how unconsciousness is created, to some extent, it's quite clear how the gears of culture grind on against themselves over the years to perpetuate some of that. But in terms of the specific individuals, we have to keep in mind what that individual really is, which is, as you say, infinite, shapeless and unbounded. The goal of emotional healing is noble. We can recognize the virtue of it, in human terms, and what this virtue reflects is that very unboundedness, because it is in that infinity where the unity suggested by the pointer of not-two is found. Existential realization offers an opportunity for a transcendent sort of "integration". One that doesn't ignore or belittle the individual's injuries, nor necessarily heal them, but that puts them into an embodied perspective that can't be arrived at by a change in conditions or conditioning. While I'm certainly no healer, I can see what's going on with this. In terms of how past emotional injury moves into the light of pure consciousness, it's more like a dissolution, and opening, a gaining of space and a lightening, than it is a fracturing or a crushing or a smashing. I can imagine it being jarring, even violent, but I can't imagine it ever being coerced. Facilitating this, as well as pursing it, demands strength, but of the patient, gentle nurturing variety. Strength in support, rather than in rending.
Oh yea Ramana. I forgot we were talking about him. As far as what the individual really is: There really is no individual, but that's not helping the conversations on this forum because a primary injury we are seeing is the conditioned belief of not being separate arising from the conditioned complex from appearing to be separate. Obviously, if healing is going to happen, it happens through consciousness, the primary essence of self prior to changing conditions. But to use a meditation practice to become the primary self or confirm that you are the primary self is more bypassing of what isn't conscious in the realm of the conditioned self, when it's the form of a practice. Another common injury we see on this forum is the idea of just letting everything be, allowing the universe to steer the dream without conditioned interference. This, however solid a pointer to the supreme state, is also an invitation to a dark psychic force for those still in the presence of emotional conflict. If you don't want to take responsibility for your life, you invite a cloak from the collective unconscious. Many people in meditation circles actually confuse dark spiritual energy with the Self, and form co -dependent relationships with overlords hell bent on keeping the Earth in its current condition, if not making it worse, in exchange for power amd control. Yea, in terms of emotional processing, it's going to be everything it could have been and them some. Meaning, every emotion that's ever been blocked or bypassed must be experienced in order for the mind id complex to unravel. That's saying a lot, but based on laws of conditioning, once the intent to heal is present, conditions will arise, that you will create, to trigger unconscious emotions to bring them to light through alignment with desire. So healing, while it will be painful, will also be life altering in beneficial ways, to both the person and the collective dream. Well, I don't consider myself qualified enough to evaluate other folks to this level of detail. My experience with meditation, and some of the other's I've read along with here are very different from the way you describe it. This isn't to disagree with your idea that it can't happen that way, it's just that I'm not familiar with it.
|
|
|
Post by lopezcabellero on Aug 5, 2019 11:41:27 GMT -5
Oh yea Ramana. I forgot we were talking about him. As far as what the individual really is: There really is no individual, but that's not helping the conversations on this forum because a primary injury we are seeing is the conditioned belief of not being separate arising from the conditioned complex from appearing to be separate. Obviously, if healing is going to happen, it happens through consciousness, the primary essence of self prior to changing conditions. But to use a meditation practice to become the primary self or confirm that you are the primary self is more bypassing of what isn't conscious in the realm of the conditioned self, when it's the form of a practice. Another common injury we see on this forum is the idea of just letting everything be, allowing the universe to steer the dream without conditioned interference. This, however solid a pointer to the supreme state, is also an invitation to a dark psychic force for those still in the presence of emotional conflict. If you don't want to take responsibility for your life, you invite a cloak from the collective unconscious. Many people in meditation circles actually confuse dark spiritual energy with the Self, and form co -dependent relationships with overlords hell bent on keeping the Earth in its current condition, if not making it worse, in exchange for power amd control. Yea, in terms of emotional processing, it's going to be everything it could have been and them some. Meaning, every emotion that's ever been blocked or bypassed must be experienced in order for the mind id complex to unravel. That's saying a lot, but based on laws of conditioning, once the intent to heal is present, conditions will arise, that you will create, to trigger unconscious emotions to bring them to light through alignment with desire. So healing, while it will be painful, will also be life altering in beneficial ways, to both the person and the collective dream. Well, I don't consider myself qualified enough to evaluate other folks to this level of detail. My experience with meditation, and some of the other's I've read along with here are very different from the way you describe it. This isn't to disagree with your idea that it can't happen that way, it's just that I'm not familiar with it. Well, I wasn't talking about meditation, but more pointedly what happens in the absence of meditation when the driving forces of attention shifting are made conscious. More often than not meditation is an act of suppression and a surrender of one's mind to an overcloaking compensatory force. I might say that emotional processing or debris removal can be a meditation in its own way, in the sense conscious observation is happening, but what's observed is the debris, not a mind state of peace and tranquility, which is what most meditation seems to be aimed at. Of course there is Peace which transcends the waves of emotion, but too often we folks talk about in terms of a mind state as opposed to something else.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 5, 2019 17:11:10 GMT -5
Care to elaborate? (From you this surprises me). If you create a night time dream with your mind, you are creating that dream from beyond it. Your dream character is of the same fabric as its friends and enemies in the dream, such that the entire dream is mind while no thing in the dream exists independent of the mind or dream. As such, there is no individual, but there is the appearance of one. This appearance can be and is in fact conditioned by the universal condition of now, which is where most people go astray with their beliefs in non duality. I don't see how you can have it both ways. If what we consider as an individual is merely the dream of Consciousness, then isn't conditioning also a part of the dream? If there is conditioning then at minimum there must be a body...for the conditioning to *take place in*. But is not the body also part of the dream? But if there is a body, and conditioning, then doesn't it follow that there is in some sense an individual? ...But then the conditioning is a masquerade.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 6, 2019 7:54:09 GMT -5
If you create a night time dream with your mind, you are creating that dream from beyond it. Your dream character is of the same fabric as its friends and enemies in the dream, such that the entire dream is mind while no thing in the dream exists independent of the mind or dream. As such, there is no individual, but there is the appearance of one. This appearance can be and is in fact conditioned by the universal condition of now, which is where most people go astray with their beliefs in non duality. I don't see how you can have it both ways. If what we consider as an individual is merely the dream of Consciousness, then isn't conditioning also a part of the dream? If there is conditioning then at minimum there must be a body...for the conditioning to *take place in*. But is not the body also part of the dream? But if there is a body, and conditioning, then doesn't it follow that there is in some sense an individual? ...But then the conditioning is a masquerade. Is your point that 'conditioning' isn't a good word to use?
|
|
|
Post by lopezcabellero on Aug 6, 2019 11:43:40 GMT -5
If you create a night time dream with your mind, you are creating that dream from beyond it. Your dream character is of the same fabric as its friends and enemies in the dream, such that the entire dream is mind while no thing in the dream exists independent of the mind or dream. As such, there is no individual, but there is the appearance of one. This appearance can be and is in fact conditioned by the universal condition of now, which is where most people go astray with their beliefs in non duality. I don't see how you can have it both ways. If what we consider as an individual is merely the dream of Consciousness, then isn't conditioning also a part of the dream? If there is conditioning then at minimum there must be a body...for the conditioning to *take place in*. But is not the body also part of the dream? But if there is a body, and conditioning, then doesn't it follow that there is in some sense an individual? ...But then the conditioning is a masquerade. In the same way a night time dream is made up entirely of the fabric of mind, the universal condition of now literally is consciousness. What seems to be separate conditioned objects, people, are conditioned by the universal condition which is ultimately of the same fabric as the body. And all of this transpires within and happens to be, consciousness. As far as a sense of an individual, do you mean the experience of being a person? Of course that's allowed for in the aforementioned framework.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 6, 2019 14:50:28 GMT -5
I don't see how you can have it both ways. If what we consider as an individual is merely the dream of Consciousness, then isn't conditioning also a part of the dream? If there is conditioning then at minimum there must be a body...for the conditioning to *take place in*. But is not the body also part of the dream? But if there is a body, and conditioning, then doesn't it follow that there is in some sense an individual? ...But then the conditioning is a masquerade. Is your point that 'conditioning' isn't a good word to use? No (not my point). If you take the dream analogy, if in my dream there is a jerk, then there is no "history" of the jerk who went through a bunch of S**t as a young child which is the reason for being a jerk. It's all taking place in *my* consciousness, my consciousness is responsible for all the actors in my dream. I'm saying lopezc can't have it both ways, all *action* taking place in the One Consciousness and ATST conditioning taking place in time in an actual world. It seems that if this is a ~dream world~, then the appearance of *there having been conditioning* is merely another aspect of the One-Consciousness. If conditioning takes place, then that necessitates a world, a physical body which has a brain and a neural structure wherein the conditioning occurs, which necessitates time and space. See?
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 6, 2019 14:55:22 GMT -5
I don't see how you can have it both ways. If what we consider as an individual is merely the dream of Consciousness, then isn't conditioning also a part of the dream? If there is conditioning then at minimum there must be a body...for the conditioning to *take place in*. But is not the body also part of the dream? But if there is a body, and conditioning, then doesn't it follow that there is in some sense an individual? ...But then the conditioning is a masquerade. In the same way a night time dream is made up entirely of the fabric of mind, the universal condition of now literally is consciousness. What seems to be separate conditioned objects, people, are conditioned by the universal condition which is ultimately of the same fabric as the body. And all of this transpires within and happens to be, consciousness. As far as a sense of an individual, do you mean the experience of being a person? Of course that's allowed for in the aforementioned framework. OK, then maybe E is correct, then no, conditioning is not a good word or even an apt process. No conditioning takes place in "the universal condition of now literally is consciousness". If you don't see the problem (also discussed in post above) then I don't know how to make it clearer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2019 14:56:57 GMT -5
Is your point that 'conditioning' isn't a good word to use? No (not my point). If you take the dream analogy, if in my dream there is a jerk, then there is no "history" of the jerk who went through a bunch of S**t as a young child which is the reason for being a jerk. It's all taking place in *my* consciousness, my consciousness is responsible for all the actors in my dream. I'm saying lopezc can't have it both ways, all *action* taking place in the One Consciousness and ATST conditioning taking place in time in an actual world. It seems that if this is a ~dream world~, then the appearance of *there having been conditioning* is merely another aspect of the One-Consciousness. If conditioning takes place, then that necessitates a world, a physical body which has a brain and a neural structure wherein the conditioning occurs, which necessitates time and space. See? There is 'history' if it arises as part of the dream. I often have night-time dreams where history/past arise as part of the story.
Whether that arises in a night time dream or in your waking world, it does not necessitate an objective world that exists apart from Being, a world that is something other than an appearance in consciousness.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 6, 2019 15:11:21 GMT -5
No (not my point). If you take the dream analogy, if in my dream there is a jerk, then there is no "history" of the jerk who went through a bunch of S**t as a young child which is the reason for being a jerk. It's all taking place in *my* consciousness, my consciousness is responsible for all the actors in my dream. I'm saying lopezc can't have it both ways, all *action* taking place in the One Consciousness and ATST conditioning taking place in time in an actual world. It seems that if this is a ~dream world~, then the appearance of *there having been conditioning* is merely another aspect of the One-Consciousness. If conditioning takes place, then that necessitates a world, a physical body which has a brain and a neural structure wherein the conditioning occurs, which necessitates time and space. See? There is 'history' if it arises as part of the dream. I often have night-time dreams where history/past arise as part of the story.
Whether that arises in a night time dream or in your waking world, it does not necessitate an objective world that exists apart from Being, a world that is something other than an appearance in consciousness. It's less complicated if you accept that there is an actual world and actual history...but I understand there's no use trying to discuss that...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2019 15:35:58 GMT -5
There is 'history' if it arises as part of the dream. I often have night-time dreams where history/past arise as part of the story.
Whether that arises in a night time dream or in your waking world, it does not necessitate an objective world that exists apart from Being, a world that is something other than an appearance in consciousness. It's less complicated if you accept that there is an actual world and actual history...but I understand there's no use trying to discuss that... Being is actual/fundamental/abiding. All that arises within/to Being is ephemeral, changing, it's arising dependent upon Being.
|
|