|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 31, 2023 19:05:50 GMT -5
Thing is, it's not in the person's hands to simply "give up" anything, let alone aversion. But there's no issue with an arising/falling sense of aversion to something.
Likes and dislikes continue on post SR. So long as there's an apparent me character, there is still personality, complete with dislikes/aversions as well as likes/preferences.
It's not an arising sense of aversion per se that binds/limits, it's the overlay of an SVP and his judgments that does. The SVP overlay means the arising sense of aversion that will ebb on through easily and absent stickiness IF it's just allowed to, instead gets judged as bad/wrong/something that must not/should not arise, and also gets regarded as evidence that the world is not currently conforming with personal desires, and to an SVP...that's bad....very bad... To equate challenge of a particular idea during Truth-talk, specifically with "aversion" is going a little far imo.
One does not have to 'dislike/feel aversion towards' a particular assertion to simply call it out as false.
Yeah. It's a tricky pronouncement. I find a lot of what passes for nonduality is someone blue and shivering in the pool beckoning for others to jump in. "The water's fine."
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 31, 2023 19:25:45 GMT -5
I pretty-much stand alone in my ontology here, laughter keeps poking me, telling me I am not a machine. enigma coined it a 3-layer cake. (Essentially) Self-(1), True self-(2), false self-(3). We are born as True Self, essence, actual individuality. The false self forms as conditioning, acquired and covers over and obstructs True Self, and most people live the remainder of their life through their conditioning-which-they-believe-is-their-self. The self-as-conditioning IS a machine. True Self is not a machine.So I've always misunderstood Reefs it seems, I thought he was 1/2 way there, with True Self-as-individuality-acting. He just blew that up for me. Oh well...... I can't-not-see everything, everybody through that lens. It seems to me as though your focus is upon "human adulthood" (a term coined by Jed mckenna) also known as 'becoming relatively clear/as consciously aware of what's going as possible) vs. waking up/SR.
While being awake/SR very much includes being a human adult, being a human adult, does not necessarily include being away/SR.
I say becoming the most conscious and aware 'me character' you can be, as free from conditioning via delving within and seeing where it's got us by the knackers, etc, etc, is an extremely worthy endeavor in the absence of full SR/wakefulness.
I read the first Jed book in the early 2000's just before the second book came out. I chanced on it in a Barnes & Noble. I'll give a book about 30-40 seconds browse, it either keeps me or not. I browsed 5 minutes, 10, I was hooked. (I've read all 3 and then The Theory of..., then some of Play, A Play [liked the first play], none of The Talk books). I thoroughly enjoyed the first book (enjoyed the next 3 also). I found him closely akin to my POV, [he's] not wholly ND. I have no problem with your assessment. I'm (still) quite perplexed that ND is the be-all and end-all of the spiritual journey, as some consider it. I think Ken Wilber has a better handle on the whole picture. In a real sense it seems to be that ND makes what Wilber calls the pre-trans fallacy, that ND is in a sense a regression to a beginning state, and the way forward is an increase in consciousness. We've pretty-much beat that horse to death here, I know there is no ear for that view here. No problem. I'm here for the ride. Human adulthood is a good thing. Oh, too, I had essentially practiced spiritual autolysis for 30 years, then. I think better writing, I basically think through my fingers. Stuff comes out of my fingers that doesn't come out of my thoughts, alone. A slight handicap, but not really, I don't write about practices or experiences, anywhere, but I write from experience, for the most part, not just book-theory. So I'm pretty much immune from all the "slings and arrows". I like sharon's valley picture. I recognize most all the points of ND (the small s self can't do anything, correct, as an example, yes, it's imaginary), but I see the reasons for not-reaching the valley. There's a glass ceiling, a mirrored glass ceiling.
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on May 31, 2023 19:39:36 GMT -5
Yeah. It's a tricky pronouncement. I find a lot of what passes for nonduality is someone blue and shivering in the pool beckoning for others to jump in. "The water's fine." Sometimes tricky though too to know if what you deem to be 'blue & shivering in the pool' is truly what's going on.... I have excellent joydar. Take everything I say with a grain of salt. I do!
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 31, 2023 20:16:03 GMT -5
He could just as easily assert that you feel compelled to paint the portraits. The fact of her engagement is what it is, when/where/if it is...the idea that I am painting portraits is not...it's subjective. If you're keeping score, Reefs is way ahead in the personal jab/insult game this round.
Her?
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on May 31, 2023 20:27:37 GMT -5
The fact of her engagement is what it is, when/where/if it is...the idea that I am painting portraits is not...it's subjective. If you're keeping score, Reefs is way ahead in the personal jab/insult game this round.
Her? She thinks you are a female masquerading as a male. She's said so on occasion.
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on May 31, 2023 21:19:47 GMT -5
She thinks you are a female masquerading as a male. She's said so on occasion. It might be an hommage ... and lately it is fashionable to attribute feminine pronouns to gods and supreme powers Probably, frig just intends to annoy him. She has issues.
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on May 31, 2023 21:32:51 GMT -5
She thinks you are a female masquerading as a male. She's said so on occasion. It might be an hommage ... and lately it is fashionable to attribute feminine pronouns to gods and supreme powers Probably, frig just intends to annoy him. She has issues. That's actually funny.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2023 21:39:35 GMT -5
If we include ALL appearing objects/things under the umbrella of "suchness" then there is no context mix. There is nothing that falls outside of 'suchness.' What if there are no objects or things in Suchness? Will you get some kind of pleasure raising questions? You have been asking questions since last 10 years I guess.
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 22:45:21 GMT -5
It seems to me as though your focus is upon "human adulthood" (a term coined by Jed mckenna) also known as 'becoming relatively clear/as consciously aware of what's going as possible) vs. waking up/SR.
While being awake/SR very much includes being a human adult, being a human adult, does not necessarily include being away/SR.
I say becoming the most conscious and aware 'me character' you can be, as free from conditioning via delving within and seeing where it's got us by the knackers, etc, etc, is an extremely worthy endeavor in the absence of full SR/wakefulness.
I read the first Jed book in the early 2000's just before the second book came out. I chanced on it in a Barnes & Noble. I'll give a book about 30-40 seconds browse, it either keeps me or not. I browsed 5 minutes, 10, I was hooked. (I've read all 3 and then The Theory of..., then some of Play, A Play [liked the first play], none of The Talk books). I thoroughly enjoyed the first book (enjoyed the next 3 also). I found him closely akin to my POV, [he's] not wholly ND. Where do you think he 'sways' outside of Nonduality. It sounds as though you're very familiar with his stuff, so am curious to hear your opinion on this. I sure don't consider waking up/SR to be the 'end' of the experiential journey....life continues on and there's still stuff to learn....growth in terms of emotions/relationships, etc. It's just that ND/SR puts certain previously held beliefs/ideas that pertain to existential questions, in their place. For example, once actual "causation" has been through, existential ideas/beliefs...."law" of Attraction being one of them, no longer has any legs.....so it becomes impossible to keep practicing and giving air time to something like that. A VERY good thing. A very RARE thing too, it would seem. Truly "good" honorable, integral people, who cannot lie, who remain sincere and honest even under pressure, hard to find and the world would be a better place with more of 'em for sure. This makes sense now. At times I did notice that you seemed to have a very strong grasp on the points of ND. And I wouldn't even say that for you there is necessarily a full on erroneously imagined SVP in play, because you do acknowledge the distinction between (s)elf and (S)elf...I think you just still somehow have a very strong (stronger!) interest in focusing back into the personal experience, (s)elf aspect than the (S)elf....? It's true....the experience of the me character continues on after the locus of seeing shifts to predominantly beyond the personal to the impersonal....and there's still interest in the me character and all it's affairs following SR.
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 22:47:39 GMT -5
Sometimes tricky though too to know if what you deem to be 'blue & shivering in the pool' is truly what's going on.... I have excellent joydar. Take everything I say with a grain of salt. I do! Love it! Perfect term!
Yeah....grain of salt...got it!
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on May 31, 2023 22:53:12 GMT -5
The fact of her engagement is what it is, when/where/if it is...the idea that I am painting portraits is not...it's subjective. If you're keeping score, Reefs is way ahead in the personal jab/insult game this round.
Her? Yeah, a little birdie told me you're a she named Tegan. Not so?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2023 0:00:37 GMT -5
... I mean I'm well aware that her questioning could be very annoying, and she's said some shit in the past. But what I read here, it sounded like a magnanimous invitation to return with a clean slate. But that's not what she got. She got blasted immediately with condescension. Now that's totally understandable, and human – if there's a past conflict, bitterness, grievance, and an entrenched pattern of one-upmanship. My point is: if that's the case, just stop pretending you're High and Enlightened and better than Average Joe, and stop projecting all the issues unto the other party.Hehe....So, You noticed, too? Thanks for saying...
& yeah, for what it's worth, I'm making a strong point to remain as civil and possible and just to address the content of the posts/expressed views themselves. Yeah, I wanted to say something. But, I also think that what you're trying to do with cross-examining him won't work. Choose your battles. We have limited time on Earth. There are other things in life to put your attention on. The confrontational techniques can be good, but they require two willing participants, with trust, friendship, and respect underneath the surface conflict. You don't appear to have that here. The terms like "non-duality", "Self Realization", etc., are out there in the wide world. People will use them to describe different kinds of states and experiences. So be it. I had some colorful conflicts here a while back, but it didn't take long to learn I was not on the same page with certain people. In those cases, it's a waste of time to try to "talk it out". It's still possible to hang out and participate some while avoiding (mostly) certain conflicts.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 1, 2023 1:20:18 GMT -5
She thinks you are a female masquerading as a male. She's said so on occasion. I know. But I clarified that a long time ago already. Does she really believe that?
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 1, 2023 1:20:39 GMT -5
She thinks you are a female masquerading as a male. She's said so on occasion. It might be an hommage ... and lately it is fashionable to attribute feminine pronouns to gods and supreme powers Probably, frig just intends to annoy him. She has issues. Yes on all three counts.
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jun 1, 2023 1:39:42 GMT -5
Yeah, a little birdie told me you're a she named Tegan. Not so? Not so.
|
|