|
|
Post by andrew on May 28, 2024 10:18:22 GMT -5
Well...it does seem like you do a bit of disagreeing too! I haven't seen that frog analogy before (seems like there's a ton of analogies with frogs in!) and it's a good one. Ffor me, I've learned something from every regular participant here. Maybe 'learning' isn't the best word. Maybe even better to say I've 'absorbed' something from every regular participant. Not all at the same time obviously. Different phases of my life have drawn me to different participants, and it might sometimes be in the form of argument. So to be clear, I don't see your spirituality as wrong. No-one's spirituality here is wrong. I guess if I have a question....and I'm going to pick ZD, because I think he's someone that you discuss these things with most of all.....but do you get why ZD's spirituality 'works' for him i.e what it gives him? I get it. And I can draw from it at times, while knowing that his 'individuality' and spirituality is unique to him, and my 'individuality' and spirituality is unique to me. There's another story, I always attributed it to Chuang Tzu, but when I searched it wasn't there. There was a fisherman once who was convinced there were no fish smaller than 2 inches in the ocean. He tried to convince another man, who was a bit more clever than he was. The fisherman said he had fished with his net all his life and had never caught anything smaller than 2 inches, so there can't be a smaller fish in the ocean. The guy he was trying to persuade said, go get your net. And he then pointed out that the mesh of his net was, two inches. Any fish smaller than 2 inches would just fall through the mesh and would never be caught. An ordinary man has only a certain capacity for sifting reality, a certain level of being. I've only ever tried to point out that our mesh isn't tightly woven enough to 'catch' All That Is. I encapsulated all that into the frog in a well story. The NDist think I'm the frog in a well, I think they're the frog in a well. But, Gurdjieff said we can alter our capacity to experience reality, that is, we can change our level of being, we are designed thusly. IOW, there's always further. Yes, on all that concerning their view, I disagree. I did chase down the fishing net story, it came from Sir Authur Eddington, the astronomer. He's the guy who proved Einstein's (1915) General Relativity during the total solar eclipse of 1919. I have no problem whatsoever with ZD and his view and how he lives his life, and he is accurate, as far as it goes. All I do is try to share my own view. I know I can't defend my view. There is a whole process, all the initiative has to come from the beginner. There can be no coercion whatsoever, no persuading. In fact, at a certain point, there is dissuading. So Gurdjieff was just a seed-sower, and man himself is also a seed. In my signature is a law, you can't see above your own level of being. You can get a glimpse, the glimpse is to entice you to want to see. I basically agree. Im still affiliated with the new age community, and believe expansion continues well beyond this earth reality, which in dimensional terms, is a low rung on the ladder. That's not to say that the origin of earth beings is 'low rung'. In some senses, it takes a more advanced soul to want to experience a lower rung on the ladder. Self-realization/enlightenment isn't for the faint hearted, and all beings on the planet are in that process. In my view of course. To be clear, I didn't mean to imply that you have a problem with ZD. Quite the opposite, I'm suggesting that you may draw something from him. For example, because I 'get' how it works for him, I draw simplicity and presence from him. And I suspect that most that come to the form would be drawn to his messages for that same reason. From you, I could say I draw commitment, purpose and self-knowledge. I could probably say what I draw from every participant on the forum, to the extent that I 'get' them, and I think I 'get' most people here pretty well after 10 years. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 28, 2024 10:23:08 GMT -5
I don't think there's any thing as a nondualist. That would be an oxymoron. To say "I'm a nondualist." What is more discomforting than blather about nonduality is making claims about "freedom" when your head is clearly up your ass. Not that mine isn't which is why I make no such claim. Ah for the record, if I say the first bit, it's just a convenient figure of speech. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 28, 2024 10:31:13 GMT -5
There's another story, I always attributed it to Chuang Tzu, but when I searched it wasn't there. There was a fisherman once who was convinced there were no fish smaller than 2 inches in the ocean. He tried to convince another man, who was a bit more clever than he was. The fisherman said he had fished with his net all his life and had never caught anything smaller than 2 inches, so there can't be a smaller fish in the ocean. The guy he was trying to persuade said, go get your net. And he then pointed out that the mesh of his net was, two inches. Any fish smaller than 2 inches would just fall through the mesh and would never be caught. An ordinary man has only a certain capacity for sifting reality, a certain level of being. I've only ever tried to point out that our mesh isn't tightly woven enough to 'catch' All That Is. I encapsulated all that into the frog in a well story. The NDist think I'm the frog in a well, I think they're the frog in a well. But, Gurdjieff said we can alter our capacity to experience reality, that is, we can change our level of being, we are designed thusly. IOW, there's always further. Yes, on all that concerning their view, I disagree. I did chase down the fishing net story, it came from Sir Authur Eddington, the astronomer. He's the guy who proved Einstein's (1915) General Relativity during the total solar eclipse of 1919. I have no problem whatsoever with ZD and his view and how he lives his life, and he is accurate, as far as it goes. All I do is try to share my own view. I know I can't defend my view. There is a whole process, all the initiative has to come from the beginner. There can be no coercion whatsoever, no persuading. In fact, at a certain point, there is dissuading. So Gurdjieff was just a seed-sower, and man himself is also a seed. In my signature is a law, you can't see above your own level of being. You can get a glimpse, the glimpse is to entice you to want to see. I basically agree. Im still affiliated with the new age community, and believe expansion continues well beyond this earth reality, which in dimensional terms, is a low rung on the ladder. That's not to say that the origin of earth beings is 'low rung'. In some senses, it takes a more advanced soul to want to experience a lower rung on the ladder. Self-realization/enlightenment isn't for the faint hearted, and all beings on the planet are in that process. In my view of course. To be clear, I didn't mean to imply that you have a problem with ZD. Quite the opposite, I'm suggesting that you may draw something from him. For example, because I 'get' how it works for him, I draw simplicity and presence from him. And I suspect that most that come to the form would be drawn to his messages for that same reason. From you, I could say I draw commitment, purpose and self-knowledge. I could probably say what I draw from every participant on the forum, to the extent that I 'get' them, and I think I 'get' most people here pretty well after 10 years. . To sdp it is telling that the ND bunch deny anything to do with reincarnation, or karma. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 28, 2024 10:34:13 GMT -5
I don't think there's any thing as a nondualist. That would be an oxymoron. To say "I'm a nondualist." What is more discomforting than blather about nonduality is making claims about "freedom" when your head is clearly up your ass. Not that mine isn't which is why I make no such claim. Ah for the record, if I say the first bit, it's just a convenient figure of speech. Yes, it's just a placeholder. ZD says it best, _________. |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on May 28, 2024 10:54:55 GMT -5
I basically agree. Im still affiliated with the new age community, and believe expansion continues well beyond this earth reality, which in dimensional terms, is a low rung on the ladder. That's not to say that the origin of earth beings is 'low rung'. In some senses, it takes a more advanced soul to want to experience a lower rung on the ladder. Self-realization/enlightenment isn't for the faint hearted, and all beings on the planet are in that process. In my view of course. To be clear, I didn't mean to imply that you have a problem with ZD. Quite the opposite, I'm suggesting that you may draw something from him. For example, because I 'get' how it works for him, I draw simplicity and presence from him. And I suspect that most that come to the form would be drawn to his messages for that same reason. From you, I could say I draw commitment, purpose and self-knowledge. I could probably say what I draw from every participant on the forum, to the extent that I 'get' them, and I think I 'get' most people here pretty well after 10 years. . To sdp it is telling that the ND bunch deny anything to do with reincarnation, or karma. I choose not to define myself as nondual or not. I just think life is a clear manifestation of WHAT we are. You ignore it at your peril, which, strangely, might be a good thing. This is why there's no roller coaster, the downs are the most useful. Most nondualist believe that karma and reincarnation are part of Reality. It's just this group that doesn't. The truth though is your focus belongs here and now only. On this site, I often hear talk of no grief, fear, anger etc, which I find frivolous, which, with a few exceptions, there's plenty evidence of it here. My take is very different along the lines of "purification." My life is unfolding as making more and more room for all these ( fear, anger, grief) so that they dissipate in the Vastness of what I am. This is what no suffering means. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 28, 2024 11:08:09 GMT -5
Yes. To sdp it is telling that the ND bunch deny anything to do with reincarnation, or karma. I choose not to define myself as nondual or not. I just think life is a clear manifestation of WHAT we are. You ignore it at your peril, which, strangely, might be a good thing. This is why there's no roller coaster, the downs are the most useful. Most nondualist believe that karma and reincarnation are part of Reality. It's just this group that doesn't. The truth though is your focus belongs here and now only. On this site, I often hear talk of no grief, fear, anger etc, which I find frivolous, which, with a few exceptions, there's plenty evidence of it here. My take is very different along the lines of "purification." My life is unfolding as making more and more room for all these ( fear, anger, grief) so that they dissipate in the Vastness of what I am. This is what no suffering means. No interest in purification of the causes of them? Or you believe the causes will be ultimately purified if they are consistently dissipated in the Vastness? |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on May 28, 2024 11:23:00 GMT -5
I choose not to define myself as nondual or not. I just think life is a clear manifestation of WHAT we are. You ignore it at your peril, which, strangely, might be a good thing. This is why there's no roller coaster, the downs are the most useful. Most nondualist believe that karma and reincarnation are part of Reality. It's just this group that doesn't. The truth though is your focus belongs here and now only. On this site, I often hear talk of no grief, fear, anger etc, which I find frivolous, which, with a few exceptions, there's plenty evidence of it here. My take is very different along the lines of "purification." My life is unfolding as making more and more room for all these ( fear, anger, grief) so that they dissipate in the Vastness of what I am. This is what no suffering means. No interest in purification of the causes of them? Or you believe the causes will be ultimately purified if they are consistently dissipated in the Vastness? Not focused on what happened to this body/mind sixty years ago or a thousand years ago. My focus is the wound that mars the present. Not so much the wound itself, but glossing, suppressing, denial of it etc. The story isn't important. Not that it shouldn't be told. It can be retold a thousand times with no avail or relief. The important thing is what is done with it. I focus on the present, the moment, because it makes it impossible for me to ignore, to deny, to suppress. It helps me make room. Punification is not about the past or future. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 28, 2024 11:29:58 GMT -5
Yes. To sdp it is telling that the ND bunch deny anything to do with reincarnation, or karma. I choose not to define myself as nondual or not. I just think life is a clear manifestation of WHAT we are. You ignore it at your peril, which, strangely, might be a good thing. This is why there's no roller coaster, the downs are the most useful. Most nondualist believe that karma and reincarnation are part of Reality. It's just this group that doesn't. The truth though is your focus belongs here and now only. On this site, I often hear talk of no grief, fear, anger etc, which I find frivolous, which, with a few exceptions, there's plenty evidence of it here. My take is very different along the lines of "purification." My life is unfolding as making more and more room for all these ( fear, anger, grief) so that they dissipate in the Vastness of what I am. This is what no suffering means. In my tradition there are 3 gates, attention, consciousness, will. Will doesn't mean will in the ordinary sense. Will means you encompass the opposite. The answer is never yes or no. The answer is arrived at by encompassing yes and no (IOW, making more room for all these). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ At the risk of peril, Jung's description of the shadow enters here, it would seem. The shadow is what we deny in ourselves, (it's not necessarily bad). And then we project somewhere out there in the world, our shadow. What we deny in ourselves we see in others. The world is a hall of mirrors. So, basically, when you bash specifically, others, it's very telling. You are basically describing what-you-are. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 28, 2024 11:32:46 GMT -5
No interest in purification of the causes of them? Or you believe the causes will be ultimately purified if they are consistently dissipated in the Vastness? Not focused on what happened to this body/mind sixty years ago or a thousand years ago. My focus is the wound that mars the present. Not so much the wound itself, but glossing, suppressing, denial of it etc. The story isn't important. Not that it shouldn't be told. It can be retold a thousand times with no avail or relief. The important thing is what is done with it. I focus on the present, the moment, because it makes it impossible for me to ignore, to deny, to suppress. It helps me make room. Punification is not about the past or future. yeah, to be clear, by causes, I meant...for example, the beliefs that create the emotions. So pretty immediate causes. Or perhaps a bit less immediate, perhaps any traumas that you've experienced in your life. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 28, 2024 11:34:06 GMT -5
No interest in purification of the causes of them? Or you believe the causes will be ultimately purified if they are consistently dissipated in the Vastness? Not focused on what happened to this body/mind sixty years ago or a thousand years ago. My focus is the wound that mars the present. Not so much the wound itself, but glossing, suppressing, denial of it etc. The story isn't important. Not that it shouldn't be told. It can be retold a thousand times with no avail or relief. The important thing is what is done with it. I focus on the present, the moment, because it makes it impossible for me to ignore, to deny, to suppress. It helps me make room. Purification is not about the past or future. Absolutely perfectly true and correct. Quite profound even. (I corrected what might have been a Freudian slip  . |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 28, 2024 11:36:59 GMT -5
I choose not to define myself as nondual or not. I just think life is a clear manifestation of WHAT we are. You ignore it at your peril, which, strangely, might be a good thing. This is why there's no roller coaster, the downs are the most useful. Most nondualist believe that karma and reincarnation are part of Reality. It's just this group that doesn't. The truth though is your focus belongs here and now only. On this site, I often hear talk of no grief, fear, anger etc, which I find frivolous, which, with a few exceptions, there's plenty evidence of it here. My take is very different along the lines of "purification." My life is unfolding as making more and more room for all these ( fear, anger, grief) so that they dissipate in the Vastness of what I am. This is what no suffering means. In my tradition there are 3 gates, attention, consciousness, will. Will doesn't mean will in the ordinary sense. Will means you encompass the opposite. The answer is never yes or no. The answer is arrived at by encompassing yes and no (IOW, making more room for all these). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ At the risk of peril, Jung's description of the shadow enters here, it would seem. The shadow is what we deny in ourselves, (it's not necessarily bad). And then we project somewhere out there in the world, our shadow. What we deny in ourselves we see in others. The world is a hall of mirrors. So, basically, when you bash specifically, others, it's very telling. You are basically describing what-you-are. BK ''Everyone is a mirror image of yourself-your own thinking coming back to you.'' BK ''The clearer your mind gets, the more it projects a friendly universe, until one day it occurs to you that you haven’t had a problem for a very long time.'' |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 28, 2024 11:38:03 GMT -5
Not focused on what happened to this body/mind sixty years ago or a thousand years ago. My focus is the wound that mars the present. Not so much the wound itself, but glossing, suppressing, denial of it etc. The story isn't important. Not that it shouldn't be told. It can be retold a thousand times with no avail or relief. The important thing is what is done with it. I focus on the present, the moment, because it makes it impossible for me to ignore, to deny, to suppress. It helps me make room. Punification is not about the past or future. yeah, to be clear, by causes, I meant...for example, the beliefs that create the emotions. So pretty immediate causes. Or perhaps a bit less immediate, perhaps any traumas that you've experienced in your life. Fritz Perls was the king of quick analysis. The past doesn't have to be dealt with, the past makes itself known in the present. zazeniac is correct, we only have to deal with crap that comes up, now. This is not so easy to see, when we encounter it, we think it's somebody else's carp. But if it comes to your door, it's your crap. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 28, 2024 11:41:16 GMT -5
yeah, to be clear, by causes, I meant...for example, the beliefs that create the emotions. So pretty immediate causes. Or perhaps a bit less immediate, perhaps any traumas that you've experienced in your life. Fritz Perls was the king of quick analysis. The past doesn't have to be dealt with, the past makes itself known in the present. zazeniac is correct, we only have to deal with crap that comes up, now. This is not so easy to see, when we encounter it, we think it's somebody else's carp. But if it comes to your door, it's your crap. My experience is that when crap comes up persistently, delving into the past can be useful. (of course, even delving into the past happens in the present) Fritz Perls was a significant aspect of my old NLP training. nlp-mentor.com/fritz-perls/ |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 28, 2024 11:49:10 GMT -5
In my tradition there are 3 gates, attention, consciousness, will. Will doesn't mean will in the ordinary sense. Will means you encompass the opposite. The answer is never yes or no. The answer is arrived at by encompassing yes and no (IOW, making more room for all these). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ At the risk of peril, Jung's description of the shadow enters here, it would seem. The shadow is what we deny in ourselves, (it's not necessarily bad). And then we project somewhere out there in the world, our shadow. What we deny in ourselves we see in others. The world is a hall of mirrors. So, basically, when you bash specifically, others, it's very telling. You are basically describing what-you-are. BK ''Everyone is a mirror image of yourself-your own thinking coming back to you.'' BK ''The clearer your mind gets, the more it projects a friendly universe, until one day it occurs to you that you haven’t had a problem for a very long time.'' I can only see everything from my own perspective, sorry. This would be the distinction between what Gurdjieff called voluntary suffering and intentional suffering. BK is correct, but doesn't go far enough, she has reached the point of the end of voluntary suffering. But there is still stuff buried even deeper that has to be dealt with (eventually, meaning now or another life). To make this stuff arise, in yourself, intentional suffering is necessary. Because BK is correct doesn't mean that's the end of the journey. At a certain point, nothing in life that happens can make you suffer, no circumstance. That's when you begin intentional suffering. But you have to understand the why of it. (And an odd aside. The Gurdjieff teaching has several names, the 4th Way, and simply, The Work. Is it a coincidence BK called her method, Work? I don't know. Have you ever seen her discuss how she came up with that name?) A very unique interesting story, when Hui Neng became the 6th Patriarch. His teacher gave him the bowl and the robe, and told him he had better leave, as the other students wouldn't understand. So he left. But a particularly (former)-bad-guy-student was indeed angry, and he and another went after Hui Neng. They found him, and threatened him, intended to slice and dice. Hui Neng simply laid the bowl and robe down, and said, take them if you need them. That completely disarmed the (former) bad guy student, and he immediately accepted Hui Neng as his teacher. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 28, 2024 11:50:15 GMT -5
Fritz Perls was the king of quick analysis. The past doesn't have to be dealt with, the past makes itself known in the present. zazeniac is correct, we only have to deal with crap that comes up, now. This is not so easy to see, when we encounter it, we think it's somebody else's carp. But if it comes to your door, it's your crap. My experience is that when crap comes up persistently, delving into the past can be useful. (of course, even delving into the past happens in the present) Fritz Perls was a significant aspect of my old NLP training. nlp-mentor.com/fritz-perls/Cool, he was a pretty unique dude, fearless. |
|
.