|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 5, 2012 18:48:20 GMT -5
Two questions, then-- --doesn't 'quality' imply a dualist projection (i.e., either a 'good' or 'bad' experience)? --why is experience itself so important to you? What do you have to gain from experience? And whatever it is, isn't it gain, nonetheless, the focus on which is egocentric? Experience is important to me because thats all there is. There is only experiencing, and every action we take is with the intent of improving the quality of our experience. We are fundamentally selfish in that way. We cannot act outside of our best interests, even when our actions are selfless. I totally advocate selfless action, but thats because the quality of the experience is so good! I totally advocate putting the totality above the individual, but thats because it is ultimately IN the interest of the individual experiencer to do so. A joyful and loving experience is one in which we are entirely selfless in one way and entirely selfish in another. There may be no thoughts of the self, yet our action serves the self in the highest possible way. Its the law of giving and receiving, receiving and giving. Love in action. I dont have an issue with the idea of good and bad feelings or good and bad experiences though I see that at the highest level there is no good and bad. Hmm. You seem to really be caught up in the experience thing, Andrew. That's where we differ, I suppose. I, myself, do not see experience as all there is, except, perhaps, from the perspective of duality. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 5, 2012 19:00:09 GMT -5
Experience is important to me because thats all there is. There is only experiencing, and every action we take is with the intent of improving the quality of our experience. We are fundamentally selfish in that way. We cannot act outside of our best interests, even when our actions are selfless. I totally advocate selfless action, but thats because the quality of the experience is so good! I totally advocate putting the totality above the individual, but thats because it is ultimately IN the interest of the individual experiencer to do so. A joyful and loving experience is one in which we are entirely selfless in one way and entirely selfish in another. There may be no thoughts of the self, yet our action serves the self in the highest possible way. Its the law of giving and receiving, receiving and giving. Love in action. I dont have an issue with the idea of good and bad feelings or good and bad experiences though I see that at the highest level there is no good and bad. Hmm. You seem to really be caught up in the experience thing, Andrew. That's where we differ, I suppose. I, myself, do not see experience as all there is, except, perhaps, from the perspective of duality. What do you see as being outside of experiencing? From my perspective, I would say that we are God experiencing itself through the unfolding process of creation. When we consciously value the quality of the experience above being right, above self-image, above belief, above knowledge....then there is only joy. Because at this point we are God experiencing itself as God experiencing itself! |
|
|
|
Post by desertrat on Feb 5, 2012 22:50:16 GMT -5
On the source of creative visualization , the book (isbn 0-87542-183-0) says to dont be concerned with the source , but you can think of it as a being some where or your higher self . One method in this book is to visualize what you want is a white circule ,about where your third eye is , you charge it with white light and say "with the light of my higher self I charge this image , that it may be realized for me in the material world ." desert rat
|
|
|
|
Post by arisha on Feb 5, 2012 23:38:49 GMT -5
Even spirituality has nothing to do with enlightenment. The Truth is so simple and fundamental that this spiritual circus takes you far far away from it. Do not try to be quiet; do not make 'being quiet' into a task to be performed.
Don't be restless about 'being quiet', miserable about 'being happy'.
Just be aware that you are and remain aware Maharaj Nisargadatta Better go to the kitchen and enjoy a cup of coffee instead of trying to become a person with only good attitudes or developing magic abilities. Magic is in the picture in front of you.  You could make this statement if you had been already enlightened, because in this case you would have used this citation in a proper way. But you have been very far from it yet. To be (not to become!) a person with only good attitudes is a natural state of every normal person. Trying to develop magic abilities means to interfere with very subtle structures of the Universe, which is not recommended. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2012 2:55:51 GMT -5
Oh, I agree that BELIEVING that you are the creator is attachment, and I havent said I believe that. There is no such thing as a one ended stick by definition, and a two ended stick is the delusion/illusion of a third dimensional reality of conditional love. I have faith in the existence of a reality of unconditional love. If you want to talk in terms of two ways, I would say we are living as a conscious/awake creator or as an unconscious/asleep creator. If we are only talking in two ways, and not three, I would have to put passive creating (the illusion of standing on the riverbank) in with unconscious/asleep. Its still a useful step though. I would say that it might be true that creating is my job and it might be true that creating isnt my job. Its not that relevant. What is relevant is the experience. What I mean by standing on the river bank has nothing to do with creating. It has a lot to do with noticing, though. Yes, I agree. When we are standing on the bank it even SEEMS as if creation is something happening in the distance. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2012 2:56:43 GMT -5
I would say that we are either experiencing conscious creating or we are not. Whether its actually true or not that there is a subjective creator isnt that important. So basically, you're looking for a nice place to sleep? I dont quite understand this, but I wouldnt rule out the value of having a nice place to sleep each night hehe |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2012 2:58:27 GMT -5
On the source of creative visualization , the book (isbn 0-87542-183-0) says to dont be concerned with the source , but you can think of it as a being some where or your higher self . One method in this book is to visualize what you want is a white circule ,about where your third eye is , you charge it with white light and say "with the light of my higher self I charge this image , that it may be realized for me in the material world ." desert rat Cool. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by freddy on Feb 6, 2012 4:35:04 GMT -5
Believe me or not, but it is impossible to BE a person with only good attitudes. Bad and good attitudes are only polar opposites of the same coin, one cannot exist without the other and life flows always between these extremes.
Enlightenment doesn't mean that only good attributes of the "person" shines through. The story of the person just unfolds, no matter of enlightenment. Before enlightenment chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment chop wood, carry water. Nothing really changes except that there is no idenfication with the unfolding story.
Enlightenment isn't the end of the dream character in the cosmic orchestra.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2012 5:24:55 GMT -5
Believe me or not, but it is impossible to BE a person with only good attitudes. Bad and good attitudes are only polar opposites of the same coin, one cannot exist without the other and life flows always between these extremes. Enlightenment doesn't mean that only good attributes of the "person" shines through. The story of the person just unfolds, no matter of enlightenment. Before enlightenment chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment chop wood, carry water. Nothing really changes except that there is no idenfication with the unfolding story. Enlightenment isn't the end of the dream character in the cosmic orchestra. I would say that I demonstrate more good attributes than I used to and I think the enlightened do demonstrate certain behaviours with consistency. However, I would agree that in a reality in which conditional love is the norm and the belief in opposites is prevalent, some degree of 'bad' is inevitable. I think the potential is there for other realities in which unconditional love is a fact of reality, in which case there would only be good attributes. Or to put in more obvious terms, the potential is there for a world of peace. I would also say that we are called to seek and work towards the good, and even the enlightened are called in that way. |
|
|
|
Post by Peter on Feb 6, 2012 5:35:46 GMT -5
I would also say that we are called to seek and work towards the good, and even the enlightened are called in that way. Interesting. Who or what is it that you think is doing the calling? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2012 6:03:33 GMT -5
I would also say that we are called to seek and work towards the good, and even the enlightened are called in that way. Interesting. Who or what is it that you think is doing the calling? I am comfortable with the idea that God is calling us, but I understand that that word doesnt work for everyone, so I can easily go with idea that Life is calling us or that our True Self is calling us. There are probably other words. This quote from Jed McKenna sprang to mind....''you can’t manage to avoid your own true nature forever. It’s a wonder anybody manages it at all.'' I think we are called to authenticity, and there is no end to this process...we can always become more of what we are. There is always more goodness, more love, more joy, more gratitude, more appreciation....I dont see an end point, so for me, the concept of 'enlightenment' is really more of a signpost that is used to point people in a direction (that actually we are all already heading in anyway!) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2012 9:11:00 GMT -5
yea i think of 'calling' as sourced in the discrepancy between what is and what is not. there's an inkling that "this is not all there is" and there's a movement towards trying to resolve that. it's sort of like the law of entropy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 6, 2012 9:52:09 GMT -5
Hmm. You seem to really be caught up in the experience thing, Andrew. That's where we differ, I suppose. I, myself, do not see experience as all there is, except, perhaps, from the perspective of duality. What do you see as being outside of experiencing? From my perspective, I would say that we are God experiencing itself through the unfolding process of creation. When we consciously value the quality of the experience above being right, above self-image, above belief, above knowledge....then there is only joy. Because at this point we are God experiencing itself as God experiencing itself! I had to sleep on this, but I think I can respond to this now. I have, for some time, understood that God experiences Itself, through itself, and that All is, basically, God. But, this is essential, not experiential. We may value Love, Joy, Peace, and Truth, and the mind may think that we experience them, but I don't view these things as something we experience, but rather attributes of our essence. It's what we ARE, not what we experience. It's THIS, not how we perceive THIS. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2012 10:28:39 GMT -5
What do you see as being outside of experiencing? From my perspective, I would say that we are God experiencing itself through the unfolding process of creation. When we consciously value the quality of the experience above being right, above self-image, above belief, above knowledge....then there is only joy. Because at this point we are God experiencing itself as God experiencing itself! I had to sleep on this, but I think I can respond to this now. I have, for some time, understood that God experiences Itself, through itself, and that All is, basically, God. But, this is essential, not experiential. We may value Love, Joy, Peace, and Truth, and the mind may think that we experience them, but I don't view these things as something we experience, but rather attributes of our essence. It's what we ARE, not what we experience. It's THIS, not how we perceive THIS. I do agree that these things are what we essentially are, but I would say that as ego patterns are released, we experience more OF what we are (i.e. love, joy, peace etc). We actually cannot NOT experience what we essentially are at least a tiny bit, but as those fearful ego patterns are released, we experience the good stuff more directly, more purely, and more consistently. So we are experiential beings because we are God experiencing itself. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Feb 6, 2012 10:58:35 GMT -5
I had to sleep on this, but I think I can respond to this now. I have, for some time, understood that God experiences Itself, through itself, and that All is, basically, God. But, this is essential, not experiential. We may value Love, Joy, Peace, and Truth, and the mind may think that we experience them, but I don't view these things as something we experience, but rather attributes of our essence. It's what we ARE, not what we experience. It's THIS, not how we perceive THIS. I do agree that these things are what we essentially are, but I would say that as ego patterns are released, we experience more OF what we are (i.e. love, joy, peace etc). We actually cannot NOT experience what we essentially are at least a tiny bit, but as those fearful ego patterns are released, we experience the good stuff more directly, more purely, and more consistently. So we are experiential beings because we are God experiencing itself. That we experience what We are just doesn't cut it for me. We simply Are. THIS is One. There is no experiencer, to me, and nothing other than Itself, so what is to experience? If you want to experience those aspects of awareness (i.e., Love, Joy, Peace, etc.), seems that all one has to do (though it's probably an oversimplification), is BE What One IS. That's my take, anyway. |
|
