|
Post by enigma on Oct 3, 2017 1:21:41 GMT -5
Ego is very complex, lots of bells and whistles, levers and pulleys, but it is wholly a mechanical process. That's why it's imaginary, not-real, fictitious. Ego is just very complicated programming. Some are more complicated than others, but I bet you encounter someone almost every day, where you can see the wheels turning, you see preprogrammed responses. You haven't answered my questions. If it can't see then how does it know that it's seen a lever? If it doesn't understand then how does it even know a bell from a pulley? Pilgrim has taken a simple belief complex and turned it into an entityless entity that he can do battle with and distance himself from. It is, of course, his own belief complex operating through his own self delusion and unconsciousness. When it ceases to look like a programmed machine and begins to own it, we'll know that he's begun to make some headway in his little boat.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 3, 2017 1:23:05 GMT -5
The solution to the apparent dilemma you pose is in the complete understanding of the meaning of nonvolition. I've been promising Laughter for years that I would write an explanation and failed to fulfill my promise, so I take complete responsibility. What you do is a function of your conditioning only, and as such you have no volition, but what others say and do is part of that conditioning, and so it matters very much what peeps say and do. It matters very much how life is lived because everybody is conditioned by you, and you are conditioned by everybody else. You are told to live your life responsibly because if you conclude that it doesn't matter what you do, that bit of conditioning will cause you to act destructively in the world. The one who truly understands nonvolition also understands his responsibility. There is no paradox or contradiction. I'm happy to have finally cleared up the nonvolition issue once and for all. It makes me happy. 30,000 people die every year in your country from gun related incidents. A lot of them are suicides. So a lot of people are suffering? Is that your news flash?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2017 2:00:41 GMT -5
30,000 people die every year in your country from gun related incidents. A lot of them are suicides. So a lot of people are suffering? Is that your news flash? Have you ever killed anyone?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2017 2:09:22 GMT -5
You are entitled to your opinion. (Issue already spoken to). Of course I am, and you are entitled to take another hit. "He's not a person, he's a figment of your own imagination." ~ ...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2017 2:10:31 GMT -5
You haven't answered my questions. If it can't see then how does it know that it's seen a lever? If it doesn't understand then how does it even know a bell from a pulley? Pilgrim has taken a simple belief complex and turned it into an entityless entity that he can do battle with and distance himself from. It is, of course, his own belief complex operating through his own self delusion and unconsciousness. When it ceases to look like a programmed machine and begins to own it, we'll know that he's begun to make some headway in his little boat. Good luck with your plan.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 3, 2017 7:02:11 GMT -5
Ego is very complex, lots of bells and whistles, levers and pulleys, but it is wholly a mechanical process. That's why it's imaginary, not-real, fictitious. Ego is just very complicated programming. Some are more complicated than others, but I bet you encounter someone almost every day, where you can see the wheels turning, you see preprogrammed responses. You haven't answered my questions. If it can't see then how does it know that it's seen a lever? If it doesn't understand then how does it even know a bell from a pulley? It doesn't, it can't. All that is hidden, in the dark. Only by "light" can we see what we are. We are two, that which sees and that which is seen. Our ordinary state is to say "I" to what is seen, not to what sees. We say "I" to the fictitious self.
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Oct 3, 2017 7:17:02 GMT -5
That is absolutely accurate, Gurdjieff couldn't have said it better. Nonvolition = [our] mechanicalness. But there is a but, you don't go far enough. There is a part of us that is not conditioned. If we can find and access that, and learn to live through that, we can some day be free. But it is a long and difficult journey, nearly impossible. Now you can ask yourself, would you rather be happy, or free? (And what would you be willing to pay for freedom?) So if Gurjieff has told you this, why do you pretend nonduality is confused about nonvolition? Why do you pretend we don't know permanent happiness is impossible? Why do you pretend we don't know that part of us is not conditioned? Why do you pretend we don't know freedom is possible? If you had really read my website, you would know it is not about happiness, but rather Peace: freedom from suffering. It was written for you because you continue to take the happiness drug. Call it what it is. I think you want to be the only one who knows, but you have a lot to learn. What you want must become irrelevant if you are to be free. You obviously know that the price for freedom includes giving up the seeking and everything you think you know. Your seeking gives your life meaning. So ask yourself, would you rather be happy or free? Is there more knowledge to collect; more little boats to row? More layer cakes to bake? Or is freedom already waiting for you on the other side of all of that, where it has always been? I don't disagree with much of the nondual "teaching", (nonvolition, etc.) but I've said it doesn't go far enough. There is work on knowledge, yes, but knowledge only goes so far. There is also work on being. The whole point of the 4th way teaching is to change one's being. That's the way to freedom. It doesn't matter what Gurdjieff said, unless you verify it. I'm not trying to convince anyone about anything, I know I can't. I'm just sharing part of my journey. Anyone who is content, I wouldn't wish to disturb.
|
|
|
Post by krsnaraja on Oct 3, 2017 8:01:41 GMT -5
Non-dualism as I come to understand it is impersonalism meaning not being on the personal level. One's self is merged into Brahman's effulgence. Identity is dissolved. One with the Absolute Truth. The self and God become one.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 3, 2017 10:11:30 GMT -5
So a lot of people are suffering? Is that your news flash? Have you ever killed anyone? No. Next question.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 3, 2017 10:14:02 GMT -5
Pilgrim has taken a simple belief complex and turned it into an entityless entity that he can do battle with and distance himself from. It is, of course, his own belief complex operating through his own self delusion and unconsciousness. When it ceases to look like a programmed machine and begins to own it, we'll know that he's begun to make some headway in his little boat. Good luck with your plan. What plan?
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 3, 2017 10:40:10 GMT -5
So if Gurjieff has told you this, why do you pretend nonduality is confused about nonvolition? Why do you pretend we don't know permanent happiness is impossible? Why do you pretend we don't know that part of us is not conditioned? Why do you pretend we don't know freedom is possible? If you had really read my website, you would know it is not about happiness, but rather Peace: freedom from suffering. It was written for you because you continue to take the happiness drug. Call it what it is. I think you want to be the only one who knows, but you have a lot to learn. What you want must become irrelevant if you are to be free. You obviously know that the price for freedom includes giving up the seeking and everything you think you know. Your seeking gives your life meaning. So ask yourself, would you rather be happy or free? Is there more knowledge to collect; more little boats to row? More layer cakes to bake? Or is freedom already waiting for you on the other side of all of that, where it has always been? I don't disagree with much of the nondual "teaching", (nonvolition, etc.) but I've said it doesn't go far enough. There is work on knowledge, yes, but knowledge only goes so far. There is also work on being. The whole point of the 4th way teaching is to change one's being. That's the way to freedom. It doesn't matter what Gurdjieff said, unless you verify it. I'm not trying to convince anyone about anything, I know I can't. I'm just sharing part of my journey. Anyone who is content, I wouldn't wish to disturb. Mostly, what you talk about has always seemed like a different, more complex way of talking about nonduality, while constantly declaring that nonduality is inadequate. That's why I tend not to engage your different language but rather to question why you seek to distance yourself from what most of us talk about. Your mantra is 'I'm not a nondualist', as though anyone here has even claimed such an affiliation.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Oct 3, 2017 10:41:49 GMT -5
Non-dualism as I come to understand it is impersonalism meaning not being on the personal level. One's self is merged into Brahman's effulgence. Identity is dissolved. One with the Absolute Truth. The self and God become one. Nonduality simply says that the self and God have always been one. There is no becoming.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2017 11:53:06 GMT -5
You haven't answered my questions. If it can't see then how does it know that it's seen a lever? If it doesn't understand then how does it even know a bell from a pulley? It doesn't, it can't. All that is hidden, in the dark. Only by "light" can I see what I am. I am two, that which sees and that which is seen. My ordinary state is to say "I" to what is seen, not to what sees. I say "I" to the fictitious self. I have changed your post to the first person because you can only explain to me what you're doing. What you seem to be saying here is that although you understand when pulleys are pulled and levers are levered, you are keeping yourself from admitting that you've felt them. So it's only when your chin is three feet above your head that you feel anything.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2017 11:54:04 GMT -5
Have you ever killed anyone? No. Next question. Why do you want another question?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2017 11:57:52 GMT -5
Non-dualism as I come to understand it is impersonalism meaning not being on the personal level. One's self is merged into Brahman's effulgence. Identity is dissolved. One with the Absolute Truth. The self and God become one. Nonduality simply says that the self and God have always been one. There is no becoming. Only those that abide in their self-nature can know that though.
|
|