|
Post by tenka on Feb 21, 2018 3:36:03 GMT -5
First thing on the net that I copied and pasted about bunnies behaviour . Grunts are often angry reactions to a human behavior or towards another rabbit and may be followed by scratching or biting. ... Some rabbits show their disapproval by grunting to protect what is theirs (cage, food, etc.) from a human hand or another rabbit and often, that is the extent of their anger.Now call me Mr Picky butt certain behaviours mirrors one'e sense of self in reflection of others . Suffering is this sense of self compared to not . When you are of this world you are suffering, simply by being of this world . Have you the comparison in toe? Behavior isn't a good indicator. Here's a list of aminals that have passed the mirror test. Bunnies didn't make the cut. Behaviour is a good indicator . Your using 'behaviour' as your point in making regarding the mirror test . How does the cat behave when it perceives a reflection of itself compared to something else that just sniffs the glass . What about the blind mole that can't perceive the reflection? I see the mirror test as interesting, butt it's not the holy grail of indicators pertaining to how something perceives themselves . If a bunny wants to grunt at you when you invade it's space or wants to protect it's food there is clearly something going on regarding what it thinks of itself and what it's protecting . The bunny doesn't do a mating bunny dance for the food butt will do so for a female bunny . Behaviour is a good indicator in reflection of what that something perceives themselves being . If a bunny had no self identity why would there be the aggressive behaviour towards something that invades their space .. Incidentally I thought the non suffering applied to all animals .. I plucked up a bunny and a dog as examples .. I wondered why a dog would lick it's wound if it had no associations had with it's own self identity and the wound it was licking .
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 21, 2018 6:21:57 GMT -5
Tolle is always a source of insight, and I like his interpretation of the prodigal son .. but wow .. .. telling Andrew Cohen that the purpose of the world is so that peeps can suffer enough to wake up ?? .. Suffering is an undeniable part of many folks path stories. But. It's really, always, quite optional. Really funny. Tolles was saying if you're hearing this you are ready for it - just then the computer glitched and shut it down! (don't worry though, Imma play it again teehee)
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Feb 21, 2018 11:13:02 GMT -5
Hey L, Incidentally, this is the sort of statement from which I draw that your position is that babies can't suffer. Ok, I think see how you get from point A to point B. It seems to me you're extrapolating "suffering is always optional" -- which is a misparaphrasing to begin with. Do I have that right? My intended meaning was far more narrow, far more contextually limited than that. My point is that for some folks suffering doesn't play much of a role at all in the spiritual path. The loss of existential meaning doesn't have to coincide with a suicidal crisis the way it did for Tolle. My position is similar to Tolle's in that a person can reach a point where they suddenly realize they don't have to suffer anymore. It is different in that I disagree with his implication that the story of deep suffering leading up to that point is necessarily universal. None of this has anything to do with babies. Thanks for clarifying. (Regarding the babies, I'll move you into the equivocal column then for the time being ). Could I not infer that if suffering is optional, then by extension babies can't suffer, due to limited options? ... I'll assume that's an artefact of the misparaphrase. Anyway, I really enjoyed the video, in it, Tolle was expressing something similar to one he did where he was talking about the evolution of ego, which I've posted before. But I hadn't seen your one, so I appreciate that. In the broadest sense, I sometimes consider what we generally think of as '[the turning of] the world' as being merely the path the process of waking up (in its entirety) takes, and I think Tolle may be expressing something similar. So not dissimilar to the notion of God coming to know Himself, I suppose, and Tolle talks about tangential egoic overdevelopment, essentially in the context of becoming lost in the dream in that other vid I mentioned. All a bit different from the narrow context you said you were talking in there, but perhaps not entirely unconnected.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2018 12:38:29 GMT -5
The body will signal the brain to relate to in reflection of pertaining to that it is thirsty. No mind/body identification necessary. The brain signal, the body urges all require a self identification in order to act upon them . Your not connecting the dots between body-mind-self .. How do you know what water is? How do you know how to turn the tap on? How do you differentiate the hot tap from the cold tap? How does the bunny know what water is compared to dry earth? There's a difference between a sense of self, and mind/body identification. A sense of self comes with being conscious, and the body functions superbly with only that. Mind/body identification is an imagined overlay of illusory belief that results in suffering (as you say).
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 21, 2018 14:29:16 GMT -5
The punchline to that joke has sprung up in my mind every time I've seen a ripped apart piece of tree in the woods since then. Where o where could that sense of certainty go in those kinds of given contexts? Me, myself and I personally thank the one true and of course truly dualistic Man God in literal heaven on high that the end of suffering doesn't extinguish survival instinct.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2018 19:59:57 GMT -5
Tolle is always a source of insight, and I like his interpretation of the prodigal son .. but wow .. .. telling Andrew Cohen that the purpose of the world is so that peeps can suffer enough to wake up ?? .. Suffering is an undeniable part of many folks path stories. But. It's really, always, quite optional. Suffering is optional...unless it isn't. I agree that falling into self delusion brings suffering such that an appreciation for freedom comes about, a la the prodigal son, and the world ultimately brings about this outcome as a consequence of seeking to escape the suffering, but I would not say the purpose of the world is to suffer enough to wake up. The issue I have is not that that scenario doesn't play out, but rather with the idea of purpose. Nobody has set up the world with that purpose.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2018 20:03:46 GMT -5
Let's just talk about bunnies for a moment. Bunnies are not biologically self aware. I.E. when you put a mirror in front of them, they do not recognize their own reflection. So suffering doesn't apply to them? They don't have a highly developed self-awareness, but there is still a basis for self-awareness...a basic ego. A toy robot bunny can't evolve into a bunny that can know itself in a mirror, but a real bunny potentially could. What you're calling a basic ego develops around a sense of self rather than as a consequence of self awareness. No self awareness, no stories about a 'me', no suffering.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2018 20:07:32 GMT -5
The body will signal the brain to relate to in reflection of pertaining to that it is thirsty. No mind/body identification necessary. The sense of thirst is felt though, and feeling is not mechanical. I didn't mean to say anything about mechanical or not. I'm saying bodily needs can be taken care of without the 'me' story that we usually call ego.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2018 20:15:17 GMT -5
It's not significant to cognitive thought and feeling, but it's critical to suffering. Well that depends if you believe that a bunny can be physically tortured and still not suffer. To me it's not common sense to say that. The abstract 'me' concept leads to suffering. It has nothing to do with bunnies.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2018 20:18:07 GMT -5
2 minute retention for dogs sounds about right, based on my own 'study'. I do home maintenance, and meet a lot of dogs. They typically bark at first, then lick me like an old friend. When I go out to the van to get a tool or a part, the experiment begins. If I'm back in a minute or so, I'm greeted like the old friend I am, but if it's more like a few minutes, I get barked at and have to get reacquainted all over again. I meet a lot of dogs too, and if I spend a couple of weeks with them, and then return to them after a few months, and some demonstrate that they definitely remember us. But as the article said, what humans have is good 'episodic' memory. Sure.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2018 20:27:38 GMT -5
What he didn't mention is that, without the resisting thoughts the fear dissolves, because the fear is made of resistance. Fear IS resistance. Not that I'm a huge fan of Rupert Spira, but I think he might agree with you. He often talks about "concessions" to the mind/body or interim steps. Perhaps this is one of them. So you're suggesting it is possible to remove "resisting" thoughts, by .......? The technique he's espousing is basically focusing attention purely on the feeling where for me thoughts tend to go to the background or dissipate. Please explain what you're suggesting.
I suggest clarity. It can be seen that fear is a movement only (like all feeling) and therefore if it's hanging around, it's being created over and over by mind. It can also be seen that there is nothing behind the resistance to fear. When the resistance is gone (and going into the fear is one way of making that happen), the fear is also gone. I suggest welcoming fear.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2018 20:43:02 GMT -5
2 minute retention for dogs sounds about right, based on my own 'study'. I do home maintenance, and meet a lot of dogs. They typically bark at first, then lick me like an old friend. When I go out to the van to get a tool or a part, the experiment begins. If I'm back in a minute or so, I'm greeted like the old friend I am, but if it's more like a few minutes, I get barked at and have to get reacquainted all over again. Well, to go a step further in the experiment, get their olfactory memory into play. I have found that kneeling down with the back of my hand slightly held out is more "invitational".I'm still intrigued by the fact that when VERY territorial dogs of villages used to get too aggressive, all I had to do was act like I was bending down to pick up a rock, and that would usually be enough to get them to keep their distance. Now THAT'S conditioning! Yes, I almost said that to Andrew in response to dogs remembering peeps after months. When I go back to a house days or weeks later, I let them smell my hand and they usually calm right down. You're obviously top dog in the villages.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2018 20:50:56 GMT -5
Behavior isn't a good indicator. Here's a list of aminals that have passed the mirror test. Bunnies didn't make the cut. Behaviour is a good indicator . Your using 'behaviour' as your point in making regarding the mirror test . How does the cat behave when it perceives a reflection of itself compared to something else that just sniffs the glass . What about the blind mole that can't perceive the reflection? I see the mirror test as interesting, butt it's not the holy grail of indicators pertaining to how something perceives themselves . If a bunny wants to grunt at you when you invade it's space or wants to protect it's food there is clearly something going on regarding what it thinks of itself and what it's protecting . The bunny doesn't do a mating bunny dance for the food butt will do so for a female bunny . Behaviour is a good indicator in reflection of what that something perceives themselves being . If a bunny had no self identity why would there be the aggressive behaviour towards something that invades their space .. Incidentally I thought the non suffering applied to all animals .. I plucked up a bunny and a dog as examples .. I wondered why a dog would lick it's wound if it had no associations had with it's own self identity and the wound it was licking . Just those who are not biologically self aware. (Humans are aminals too.)
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Feb 21, 2018 21:10:16 GMT -5
Tolle is always a source of insight, and I like his interpretation of the prodigal son .. but wow .. .. telling Andrew Cohen that the purpose of the world is so that peeps can suffer enough to wake up ?? .. Suffering is an undeniable part of many folks path stories. But. It's really, always, quite optional. Really funny. Tolles was saying if you're hearing this you are ready for it - just then the computer glitched and shut it down! (don't worry though, Imma play it again teehee) Well, don't feel bad. Not everybody can be ready for it.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Feb 22, 2018 3:11:15 GMT -5
The brain signal, the body urges all require a self identification in order to act upon them . Your not connecting the dots between body-mind-self .. How do you know what water is? How do you know how to turn the tap on? How do you differentiate the hot tap from the cold tap? How does the bunny know what water is compared to dry earth? There's a difference between a sense of self, and mind/body identification. A sense of self comes with being conscious, and the body functions superbly with only that. Mind/body identification is an imagined overlay of illusory belief that results in suffering (as you say). A conscious bunny that knows the difference between carrots and sand, lettuce and water will do so because they have an identified structure in place . All this structure is built around / upon how it identifies with itself otherwise it would not be able to distinguish / differentiate one thing from another . The mirror experiment that you speak of is about reflections of self awareness .. The same applies to a bunny perceiving in reflection of itself in life experience .
|
|