|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 21, 2016 9:45:26 GMT -5
Powerful words. I haven't even been directly accused and I feel genuinely and sincerely hated.  You are not accused, you DID objectify and make a subject of person and assert they they are too invested, and between the two of you, you produced quite a dismal impression of a person as you pranced about together in the spiritual light. Now your 'playing the victim' being under the 'delusion' that everything's about you, but really, I was recalling the time Satch abused Gopal relentlessly and then paraded himself as holy man with a zen stick! And 2 or 3 others stroked his spiritual ego, as that must've hated G-man as well. I don't hate anyone. In this entire world with so many complete nutbags, I have not a shred of malice i any way. I just keep a bit clear of you because you treat me like some sort of underling, and I don't want be called insane, deluded, be psychoanalysed, made a subject of and so on; it's just not my scene. I'd tell you to get off the hight horse, but you're likely way too invested in it. Now I'm just taking the language people use, the techniques people deny are strategies, and seeing how they sound for me... feels cr4p when it's you who's insane and deluded and way too invested to see it and I bet Satch just loves his place on the student side of his imaginary statud quo, gawd, poor feller is becomig the subjecdt of discussion now, and hes probably too invested in this teachy thang to be enlightened by my far higher understanding. Feel's great dunnit? It just feels ugly, and sounds hateful. If you don't see it as malicious, maybe you should try being malicious and see what happens. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Aug 21, 2016 9:48:33 GMT -5
I agree. If we got rid of denigration, derision, belittlement, disparagement, oneupmanship, cuteness, smugness, etc, it would probably eliminate 90% of the posts on the forum. As Farmer suggested, people usually go visit a sage to learn how to find out what they want to know. They also visit a sage in order to find out if s/he is really a sage, to get a sense of his/her depth of understanding, to hear live speech rather than dead words, to report on their experiences and realizations and get feedback, to test the validity of their own ideas about reality, to obtain confirmation or not, to be in the presence of someone who's supposedly knowledgable about existential issues, etc. The same sort of thing is potentially true for a forum like this. Why are people here? I assume that anyone who comes here has had insights, experiences, or realizations that fall outside the realm of conventional life and conventional understanding, and s/he is interested in finding other people who have had similar insights, experiences, or realizations to converse with. Otherwise, they wouldn't be here. Unfortunately, rather than sharing and discussing issues and seeking common ground, the forum is often more like a confrontation of combatants defending particular positions and attacking anyone who disagrees with them. I've attended satsangs and dharma talks by at least a dozen well-known Zen Masters and non-duality figures and more than a dozen lesser-known sages. Why? Because it's entertaining to hear people who've discovered the truth speak about the truth. Some teachers strike me as more creative, more interesting, or more amusing than other teachers, but I rarely doubt the level of their attainment. Adyashanti, for example, seems clear as a bell to me, and interesting, but I don't find him nearly as stimulating or humorous as Tolle or Mooji. During 25 years of being around sages who are clear, I've never heard any of them take a seeker to task unless the seeker was trying to be cute or expressing extreme arrogance. All of them, without exception, have the same basic approach; they offer pointers and explanations, and tell people to look within themselves to find and verify the truth. I don;t remember any of them ever comparing themselves to anyone else or using "I/You" language. In the deepest sense, their words always strike me as impersonal, objective, helpful, and encouraging. IMO we could use a little more of that attitude on the forum. Fortunately, anyone can discover the living truth, and those who find it recognize other people who have found it. The message of all sages to people who have found the truth is, "Wonderful! You understand. Now, go spread this good news." This is not an attempt to be cute: do you see Tolle, Mooji or Adya logging in here? No, but that's because they're well-known and have continual interactions with lots of people who are coming to them to find answers. Many less-well-known sages have visited this site in the past, and some of them still have interactions here. People, including sages, find it fun being around people who share their interests, and if they are not already a part of an existing group, they often go wherever such a group can be found. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Aug 21, 2016 9:51:22 GMT -5
I agree. If we got rid of denigration, derision, belittlement, disparagement, oneupmanship, cuteness, smugness, etc, it would probably eliminate 90% of the posts on the forum. As Farmer suggested, people usually go visit a sage to learn how to find out what they want to know. They also visit a sage in order to find out if s/he is really a sage, to get a sense of his/her depth of understanding, to hear live speech rather than dead words, to report on their experiences and realizations and get feedback, to test the validity of their own ideas about reality, to obtain confirmation or not, to be in the presence of someone who's supposedly knowledgable about existential issues, etc. The same sort of thing is potentially true for a forum like this. Why are people here? I assume that anyone who comes here has had insights, experiences, or realizations that fall outside the realm of conventional life and conventional understanding, and s/he is interested in finding other people who have had similar insights, experiences, or realizations to converse with. Otherwise, they wouldn't be here. Unfortunately, rather than sharing and discussing issues and seeking common ground, the forum is often more like a confrontation of combatants defending particular positions and attacking anyone who disagrees with them. I've attended satsangs and dharma talks by at least a dozen well-known Zen Masters and non-duality figures and more than a dozen lesser-known sages. Why? Because it's entertaining to hear people who've discovered the truth speak about the truth. Some teachers strike me as more creative, more interesting, or more amusing than other teachers, but I rarely doubt the level of their attainment. Adyashanti, for example, seems clear as a bell to me, and interesting, but I don't find him nearly as stimulating or humorous as Tolle or Mooji. During 25 years of being around sages who are clear, I've never heard any of them take a seeker to task unless the seeker was trying to be cute or expressing extreme arrogance. All of them, without exception, have the same basic approach; they offer pointers and explanations, and tell people to look within themselves to find and verify the truth. I don;t remember any of them ever comparing themselves to anyone else or using "I/You" language. In the deepest sense, their words always strike me as impersonal, objective, helpful, and encouraging. IMO we could use a little more of that attitude on the forum. Fortunately, anyone can discover the living truth, and those who find it recognize other people who have found it. The message of all sages to people who have found the truth is, "Wonderful! You understand. Now, go spread this good news." Zendancer, sometimes I'm not sure if you work in the advertising/marketing department of neo-advaita and co or if you really, seriously mean what you say here, or if you're just some neo-adavaita-satsang-circus shareholder of some sort. Tell me, please, which one is it? I trust that you can find the truth for yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 21, 2016 9:58:34 GMT -5
It started with 'Efigma' making a subject out of Tenka, and then Satch asserted the teachy preachy position in the same regard. If people think that's reasonable, then they ain't my kinda people. You claim there's no positioning, so I assume you're caught up in the STF 'delusion' as well'. Very 'likely you have too much invested in it', Laffy. , I wrote the exact opposite of that. You're readlessly reading lolz: I very clearly stated that none of the eight of us were innocent of the positioning as you've described it most generally. Although I don't agree with your ascription of the vile motives. And if you think that tenka hasn't written stuff just like this, positioning-wise, and directly in the dialog that led to E's comment, I'll be happy to put up a link wall to point it out. Would you like me to do that?  Dude, self-righteousness only works .. if you're right.  First go find someone innocent. Then get your rage all stoked up. That's the thing. He's leveling some very harsh criticism based on what he reads and he can't even comprehend your simple, clear statement regarding positioning. Self righteousness almost always embodies that which one rails against. |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Aug 21, 2016 10:11:22 GMT -5
Your second sentence renders the first one insincere. What happened to the deeply-unconscious-person discussion?There never was one. It was always about judgment. Yes. It's a discussion about the root of judgment. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2016 10:21:17 GMT -5
That's what I call a successful image search.   |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 21, 2016 10:29:08 GMT -5
Incorrect, I wrote the exact opposite of that. You're readlessly reading lolz: I very clearly stated that none of the eight of us were innocent of the positioning as you've described it most generally. Although I don't agree with your ascription of the vile motives. And if you think that tenka hasn't written stuff just like this, positioning-wise, and directly in the dialog that led to E's comment, I'll be happy to put up a link wall to point it out. Would you like me to do that? Dude, self-righteousness only works .. if you're right. First go find someone innocent. Then get your rage all stoked up. Ok , I must've misread. Thanks for clarifying. I come to STF with a guard up. I'm absolutely convinced everyone is positioned as a teacher or a student at the outset, and people generally want the wise teacher position; not the ignorant student one. Then what people say comes across as preaching presented as The Answer, rather than a conversation. It's kinda like that Ruthless Truth place, but without the steroids. When I turn it all about and I adopt the same forms of language that hold this charade together, well, I look stupid right, it sounds kinda inane... looks ridiculous... it's laughable. For some reason it seems to go unnoticed as acceptable as normal until the wrong person starts to do it. If I banged on at Enigma about his insanity and delusions and his over-investments and what have you, persistently rendered Satch into student shoes, called 'Efigma' for a month or two, prattled on about and and giggled at them like a little b1tch pretty much incessantly... not to metion the unknown PM's ad reports to admin all used in the big coercion... and so on... and like, suddenly, BIG SURPRISE, there is an eruption, and someone tells me where to get off. To me though, it is not a surprise, because I know the game as a whole and it goes round and around in a predictable cycle. This is my last mention of the social dynamics at STF, because of two reasons, I;ve already said everything, and secondly, it's now just becoming a part of the cycle itself. Oh yea, I'm done using the strategies ad turning them back, too. They are here to stay and required to persuade people into their places. So that was just a reflecting Zen stick now? No, that was your own ugliness. I do hope you're done with it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2016 11:44:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 21, 2016 15:19:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 21, 2016 15:52:42 GMT -5
There can be two reasons why several people might agree on a social dynamic. One is that they're unconsciously absorbing a meme floating around the forum without question. The other is that it's true. I don't know about cynical, but I am very tired of hearing that everyone who agrees that the dynamic here is about one-upmanship is blindly running in with a torch and pitchfork. Lolly makes some interesting points. He delivers them through the lens of student-teacher. I have a different lens, but basically agree. I see it more as a conscious/unconscious dynamic. The ones who see themselves as conscious can deliver scathing critiques of the unconscious as an act of service (in waking up) but god-forbid the unconscious deliver anything even close to a critique of the conscious. Have you seen this critique over the years? It's had other names: d!ck-measuring, battle, a hammer looking for nails - all sorts of lenses basically talking about the same thing. Conscious and unconscious alike are doing the ST-Dance, so what's the difference between them? So here I am in battle-mode. It's uncomfortable for me and most of the time I'm apt to let something like this go after a few rounds. The fact that I'm not is probably why you're seeing 'becoming cynical'. The post above is disarming. There is no attack and there's a sense of questions rather than answers (although you suggest a few answers LOL). I appreciate that. As Farmer suggested, people usually go visit a sage to learn how to find out what they want to know. They also visit a sage in order to find out if s/he is really a sage, to get a sense of his/her depth of understanding, to hear live speech rather than dead words, to report on their experiences and realizations and get feedback, to test the validity of their own ideas about reality, to obtain confirmation or not, to be in the presence of someone who's supposedly knowledgable about existential issues, etc. The same sort of thing is potentially true for a forum like this. Why are people here? I assume that anyone who comes here has had insights, experiences, or realizations that fall outside the realm of conventional life and conventional understanding, and s/he is interested in finding other people who have had similar insights, experiences, or realizations to converse with. Otherwise, they wouldn't be here. Unfortunately, rather than sharing and discussing issues and seeking common ground, the forum is often more like a confrontation of combatants defending particular positions and attacking anyone who disagrees with them. I've attended satsangs and dharma talks by at least a dozen well-known Zen Masters and non-duality figures and more than a dozen lesser-known sages. Why? Because it's entertaining to hear people who've discovered the truth speak about the truth. Some teachers strike me as more creative, more interesting, or more amusing than other teachers, but I rarely doubt the level of their attainment. Adyashanti, for example, seems clear as a bell to me, and interesting, but I don't find him nearly as stimulating or humorous as Tolle or Mooji. During 25 years of being around sages who are clear, I've never heard any of them take a seeker to task unless the seeker was trying to be cute or expressing extreme arrogance. All of them, without exception, have the same basic approach; they offer pointers and explanations, and tell people to look within themselves to find and verify the truth. I don;t remember any of them ever comparing themselves to anyone else or using "I/You" language. In the deepest sense, their words always strike me as impersonal, objective, helpful, and encouraging. IMO we could use a little more of that attitude on the forum. Fortunately, anyone can discover the living truth, and those who find it recognize other people who have found it. The message of all sages to people who have found the truth is, "Wonderful! You understand. Now, go spread this good news." The underlined shows, from those exhibiting such, what their sense of self consists of. Note these are all emotional. You could say: "The underlined is as the underlined does". Now, most here might even probably say they recognize such exhibition comes from a false sense of self, but this is no excuse, that ought to be a hint that something is wrong. The underlined is as the underlined does. Also saying in another way, the underlined is what these say "I" to, why else write such things? The things slip by me sometimes too, but I ~own~ them, admit them, I sometimes even race back to delete hoping someone hasn't quoted me yet. But more important, the underlined acts as obstructions, barriers, they are a distorting lens. And they constitute reasons to go see a sage, as you say here, but these prevent hearing a sage, here (STF orum) or anywhere. We can only hear what we are. So first we have to see we are in our own way. We think if the truth is just spoken to us, we would recognize it, but we don't. If "God" Him/Her/Self spoke to us, we couldn't hear, because the ~message~ would fall on this interlocking grid of ~what-we-are~, as this false sense of self. And then maybe we think we are ~getting somewhere~, but then at some point we may realize we have merely peeled off the outer layer of the onion, and then we consider we have ~gotten somewhere~, until we realize that that was merely another layer. But first we have to see the underlined in ourselves, and own it, and then maybe these influences cease to ~push us around~. What would that mean? It would mean we cease saying and writing such stuff, and quit treating people we encounter in life nastily, anybody. (And sometimes we can treat the people closest to us, nastily). That's a very high bar. But when people are nasty to us, we feel we have the right to be nasty back. But that just shows ~who we are~ (what we say "I" to). |
|
|
|
Post by zin on Aug 21, 2016 15:59:00 GMT -5
There can be two reasons why several people might agree on a social dynamic. One is that they're unconsciously absorbing a meme floating around the forum without question. The other is that it's true. I don't know about cynical, but I am very tired of hearing that everyone who agrees that the dynamic here is about one-upmanship is blindly running in with a torch and pitchfork. Lolly makes some interesting points. He delivers them through the lens of student-teacher. I have a different lens, but basically agree. I see it more as a conscious/unconscious dynamic. The ones who see themselves as conscious can deliver scathing critiques of the unconscious as an act of service (in waking up) but god-forbid the unconscious deliver anything even close to a critique of the conscious. Have you seen this critique over the years? It's had other names: d!ck-measuring, battle, a hammer looking for nails - all sorts of lenses basically talking about the same thing. Conscious and unconscious alike are doing the ST-Dance, so what's the difference between them? So here I am in battle-mode. It's uncomfortable for me and most of the time I'm apt to let something like this go after a few rounds. The fact that I'm not is probably why you're seeing 'becoming cynical'. The post above is disarming. There is no attack and there's a sense of questions rather than answers (although you suggest a few answers LOL). I appreciate that. I agree. If we got rid of denigration, derision, belittlement, disparagement, oneupmanship, cuteness, smugness, etc, it would probably eliminate 90% of the posts on the forum. As Farmer suggested, people usually go visit a sage to learn how to find out what they want to know. They also visit a sage in order to find out if s/he is really a sage, to get a sense of his/her depth of understanding, to hear live speech rather than dead words, to report on their experiences and realizations and get feedback, to test the validity of their own ideas about reality, to obtain confirmation or not, to be in the presence of someone who's supposedly knowledgable about existential issues, etc. The same sort of thing is potentially true for a forum like this. Why are people here? I assume that anyone who comes here has had insights, experiences, or realizations that fall outside the realm of conventional life and conventional understanding, and s/he is interested in finding other people who have had similar insights, experiences, or realizations to converse with. Otherwise, they wouldn't be here. Unfortunately, rather than sharing and discussing issues and seeking common ground, the forum is often more like a confrontation of combatants defending particular positions and attacking anyone who disagrees with them. I've attended satsangs and dharma talks by at least a dozen well-known Zen Masters and non-duality figures and more than a dozen lesser-known sages. Why? Because it's entertaining to hear people who've discovered the truth speak about the truth. Some teachers strike me as more creative, more interesting, or more amusing than other teachers, but I rarely doubt the level of their attainment. Adyashanti, for example, seems clear as a bell to me, and interesting, but I don't find him nearly as stimulating or humorous as Tolle or Mooji. During 25 years of being around sages who are clear, I've never heard any of them take a seeker to task unless the seeker was trying to be cute or expressing extreme arrogance. All of them, without exception, have the same basic approach; they offer pointers and explanations, and tell people to look within themselves to find and verify the truth. I don;t remember any of them ever comparing themselves to anyone else or using "I/You" language. In the deepest sense, their words always strike me as impersonal, objective, helpful, and encouraging. IMO we could use a little more of that attitude on the forum. Fortunately, anyone can discover the living truth, and those who find it recognize other people who have found it. The message of all sages to people who have found the truth is, "Wonderful! You understand. Now, go spread this good news." I first came here in order to hear about nonduality.. after the first year I thought I heard whatever could be heard on this particular forum. The rest (of the time) is passing by looking at how people's minds work, as much as they put it here, of course. I am not curious about sages' experiences especially.. I wonder more about what normal/ordinary people think what life or 'this' is and how they put it into test. Iow, I am not trying to be self-realized; hearing about it is ok though. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 21, 2016 19:24:57 GMT -5
You seem pleased with you victory. It's interesting that you need to create this polarity. Teacher/student, victory/defeat, win/lose, respect/abuse. Let your guard down. Most here just want to exchange views. It's safe. Any kind of abuse here cannot be compared with real abuse in the workplace or in a domestic relationship let's say which are serious issues that need to be dealt with. No one has to really confront anyone, they can walk away. The nature of such a beast as a spiritual forum is that it will test ones beliefs and investment in those beliefs and that can precipitate strong personal views and displays of vulnerability on occasion. To frame these exchanges within the context of a power struggle where one is being forced to defer to another is a dynamic that is continually alternating here so overall there seems to be a balance. I suppose what I'm saying is, don't be too serious about what's said here. That's my perspective as well. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2016 19:27:57 GMT -5
What do I know for sure? Tolle .. www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl_q0533sHgFirst time I listened to him .. worth a listen I suppose in relation to what has been discussed on the forums of late .. speaks of context relating to what one can know for sure .. What knows what can be known is even more interesting...but don’t try to know it. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Aug 21, 2016 19:55:36 GMT -5
I don't think you're splitting hairs but I think you've grown cynical. (Hopefully, just about this forum) (Or just about me) (Or maybe Lolly is beginning to infect the whole forum)(siriusly) There can be two reasons why several people might agree on a social dynamic. One is that they're unconsciously absorbing a meme floating around the forum without question. The other is that it's true. I don't know about cynical, but I am very tired of hearing that everyone who agrees that the dynamic here is about one-upmanship is blindly running in with a torch and pitchfork.Lolly makes some interesting points. He delivers them through the lens of student-teacher. I have a different lens, but basically agree. I see it more as a conscious/unconscious dynamic. The ones who see themselves as conscious can deliver scathing critiques of the unconscious as an act of service (in waking up) but god-forbid the unconscious deliver anything even close to a critique of the conscious. Have you seen this critique over the years? It's had other names: d!ck-measuring, battle, a hammer looking for nails - all sorts of lenses basically talking about the same thing. Conscious and unconscious alike are doing the ST-Dance, so what's the difference between them? So here I am in battle-mode. It's uncomfortable for me and most of the time I'm apt to let something like this go after a few rounds. The fact that I'm not is probably why you're seeing 'becoming cynical'. The post above is disarming. There is no attack and there's a sense of questions rather than answers (although you suggest a few answers LOL). I appreciate that. I agree that's one dynamic, maybe even the dominant one. Pretty much a no-brainer as applied to internet forums. Why would I characterize such a comment in the way you describe? You imply that characterization regarding one-upmanship has been made a sickening number of times. Are you sure? |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Aug 21, 2016 20:19:52 GMT -5
I am very tired of hearing that everyone who agrees that the dynamic here is about one-upmanship is blindly running in with a torch and pitchfork. I agree that's one dynamic, maybe even the dominant one. Pretty much a no-brainer as applied to internet forums. Why would I characterize such a comment in the way you describe? You imply that characterization regarding one-upmanship has been made a sickening number of times. Are you sure? She is right, but falls into the trap of being made to be upset by your unrelenting pursuit to come out on top of any and all debate you engage in. |
|
First go find someone innocent. Then get your rage all stoked up.
