|
|
Post by figrebirth on Jun 21, 2023 12:34:24 GMT -5
Perfectness is right now and here, everything moves around according our inner nature. We are creating the world around us and people in it with our belief and the clarity. New clarity will remove certain people from lives . . But this "inner nature": ultimately there is no "inner", there is no "outer". You know that already. The question for you is, "what creates"? It's not the illusory false personal self, but then again, it's also undeniable that this "inner state" is not insignificant, once we start considering issues like anger. And then the next one is; Are you Absolutely certain that "creation" is what's actually happening? (That one goes hand in hand with taking a sincere, deep dive into the experience of 'time').
If we're talking Truth, is it actually so that experience is "being created"? A clear realization that "This is it," calls that idea into question...reveals the misconception that's in play there.
|
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on Jun 21, 2023 12:37:40 GMT -5
Bipolarity is a disorder treated by doctors, but for many folks, it's entirely possible to bliss out in meditation for a while, without going into rage the next day. What a nonsense It's not. He's describing a situation where an experience of bliss does not necessarily mean that a deep, dark venture into the depths of despair is coming directly after, as seems to be the point you are making. (If the wave of feeling goes very high on the emotional scale, it's inevitable that as it ebbs, it's gonna go real low...is that your position? ) |
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on Jun 21, 2023 12:39:41 GMT -5
Yes. But this "inner nature": ultimately there is no "inner", there is no "outer". You know that already. The question for you is, "what creates"? It's not the illusory false personal self, but then again, it's also undeniable that this "inner state" is not insignificant, once we start considering issues like anger. Yes, false is not creating the reality because that doesn't exist. Our being creates the reality. But it won't create properly when it believes something that's not true, for an example when it believes that permanent happiness can be attained. But isn't that what you are asserting when you suggest that SR means never experiencing irritation/frustration ever again? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jun 21, 2023 12:40:03 GMT -5
These emotions express a belief in lack on some level, and point to the potential for inner growth but I believe you are too idealistic about 'realization' and the mirage thing is just an analogy, and so is flawed. Enigma had stresses dealing with forest fires in the last year or two. Life reveals our shadow spots, but I think it's unreasonable to expect realization to dissolve or heal ALL these shadow spots. Forests fire enigma faces collapse what he has been saying ? On gab last year (or the year before), Enigma said his area was on fire, and he had to evacuate his house for a while. I recall empathizing with the sense of gratitude he expressed when he returned home. |
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on Jun 21, 2023 12:44:07 GMT -5
Ok. This is the boiled down version. 
"So long as discrete, individuals are experienced, experiential personal accountability.....personal agency is still to some degree." going to remain in play.
You are talking about when one believes himself to be a doer, yes? No. I am saying that even in the seeing through of the doer, the experience of a me character that does/accomplishes stuff, still to some degree remains.
Same with the experience of personal agency...it continues on as a facet of the dream/story, even after clearly seeing that there is no actual, fundamental responsibility/blame agency re: the appearing character.
For example; While I am clear that there is no separation....it's all one seamless unfolding and ultimately, no appearing character is fundamentally volitional, thus, he has no fundamental agency, if someone rams into my car, I'm still gonna take his insurance and file it as his 'fault' so as to pay for my car repair.
There are experiential facets that remain and continue to arise even though the fundamental Truth has been realized.
|
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on Jun 21, 2023 12:49:18 GMT -5
The observation of patterns within experience can never move beyond just that; A mere observation of an apparent, experiential pattern. You cannot rely on those apparent patterns to try to arrive at fundamental "law"....."Truth" about the how's and why's of what appears/arises in experience.
I do agree, experiential, relatively speaking, my life experience to date, has indeed been observed as moving in thoe 'waves'....where some stuff is liked/preferred, other stuff, not so much....emotions feelings experienced are on the upper part of the emotional scale, and then they move downwards, an ongoing dance of sorts, and all without 'problem,' so long as there is no judgment heaped upon that experiential dance/movement.
My experience does not support that necessity for a very 'high' feeling/emotion to then extend very 'low.' It's only the lower depths that dissolve in the absence of an SVP. Joy.....awe....bliss...whatever label you give to strongly positive, loving feelings are abundant, and absent an inevitable movement down into depths of deep discord.
The story which brings that emotion could be anything. If you force yourself to experience to much happiness, then downside of the rollercoaster can't be avoided, the depth can't be avoided Look closely. Basic Likes/dislikes (approval/disapproval) go hand in hand with basic up/down movement of feelings. Dramatic movements downward require the presence of deep judgements of an SVP. Otherwise, feelings all remain fundamentally okay....non-problematic...a moment of disappointment...aw shucks.... just arises and ebbs on through.
The basic emotion is part and part of the story in the sense that likes/dislikes are part and parcel of the story. You're never going to completely do away with personal judgment so long as a me character continues to arise in experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on Jun 21, 2023 12:50:16 GMT -5
It is indeed a very basic seeing that the happenings of life are going to dance up and down between liked/disliked to some degree, regardless of what's been realized.
So yes, I think I am in agreement with what you're saying there.
It's a hallmark of the imagined separate person to try to fight against that movement between polarities of human judgment/likes/dislikes re: what appears in experience. The SVP wants to try to control that wave so that only the upper echelons of the scale are experienced....the SVP does not accept the 'dancing/moving/constantly changing' nature of feelings emotions and that's largely what 'suffering' is all about.
yes. But I dislike the word like dislike So, what would you "prefer" to use instead?
|
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on Jun 21, 2023 12:52:02 GMT -5
Is this realization based seeing/knowing? If so, by what means have you realized it? Truth is not revealed by experiential content and what you are describing above there, IS very much 'experiential content.'
Just because you have reference for experience (perhaps many experiences) whereby you came to a certain clarity and then a certain person dropped from your life, does not mean that clarity is actually/Absolutely 'causal/creative' to the ensuing disappearance of that person from your life.
Cause/effect, time, while indeed remaining facets of the ongoing story, post SR, are now seen to ultimately be illusory/inferred. The clarity, the disappearance of the specific person, the perception/observation of that happening, the arrival at the conclusion that the "clarity" created/caused the disappearance, ALL OF IT, in the dream content....an appearance....cannot be relied upon to tell you the Absolute/existential Truth.
You are free to reject me here if you wish. Never YOU sweet Gopal, who has always held a special place in my heart, even though I know I deeply disappointed you when I didn't let make forum color changes....  .....but yes, re: your viewpoint, I may indeed 'reject' agreement with it. |
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on Jun 21, 2023 12:54:21 GMT -5
He did describe at times "expressing" what may have appeared to an onlooker to be anger....a recall a story of some incident regarding his ex, where to get her to leave him alone, he felt compelled to raise his voice...yell....but he described it as a sort of "faux anger," whereby he remained completely conscious and aware of what was happening.
That's very much something I can relate to, specifically re: my pet mess story...there was the "holy shit" response....and isn't this inconvenient and crazy, but there was also simultaneously, or very quickly on the heels of that response, an ability to laugh and see the lighter side....so very much an absence of 'immersion' in the expressed resistant response.
I think it's important to listen to ZD as he describes what is 'absent' in those experiences he's sharing.....he seems to be quite clear in his last response that there is no stickiness....no lasting impression. I think it was Satchi who used a really metaphor for this....the sand/foot-print that immediately gets smoothed out as the next wave rides up to wash it.
That faux anger Enigma describe is not an anger at all. Anger is all about how you feel towards the given situation it's not about how you change your outward appearaance. Yeah, I agree...I think. But regardless of the actual feeling in play, E obviously DID "want" that person to go away.....his personal judgment was of not wanting that person to keep being a thorn in his life/relationship. There was some kind of feeling of negative response towards that person....all of course, perfectly okay and not at all out of line with being awake/SR. |
|
|
|
Post by figrebirth on Jun 21, 2023 13:00:45 GMT -5
You are positing then an experience that is only filled with stuff that the person judges to be wanted/positive/liked. That's not what it means to be awake. The personality complete with likes/dislikes continues on post awakening. And experience...the appearing world, complete with distinction, polarities, continues to arise.
You've said yourself that the wave/movement, up/down nature of feeling/emotion is a natural facet of experience, haven't you? What you are positing is the end of that up/down movement....where only 'liked' content arises. That would mean the complete end of personal judgment and so long as a me character continues to appear, that's nothing more than an erroneous idea.
I have never written something like that Aren't you suggesting here that if there was full clarity/SR, then things would not have arises the way they did?
It seems to me your point there is that IF ZD was completely clear and SR, the situation would have unfolded perfectly....an efficient driver vs. one who was not...?
And doesn't that mean then that in abiding SR/clarity, one would never again experience an in-efficient driver/cement pourer?
|
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Jun 21, 2023 15:38:05 GMT -5
Consciousness is what the Collective, is. Personal consciousness is the much smaller perspective that your thread is attempting to discuss. Yes, and the idea that individuals are making choices is another false idea. If everything moves as one, then whatever happens is not by choice; it is simply an unfolding of "what is." We use the word "choice" conventionally as a communicative abstraction to describe everyday life, but is there actually a choice involved in anything that happens? According to scientific research what we call "choices" have already been made by the body/universe/"what is" prior to conscious awareness, so there is no volition in the way that is commonly assumed and believed. Furthermore, if logic were applicable to this issue, then the same logic would apply to any other action that we could label "response to the environment." In this context focusing only on anger but ignoring irritation or other human responses to life is irrational and illogical. If one understood that everything moves as one, then why would irritation or impatience occur? Wouldn't such a human be impervious to, and content with, whatever happened to be happening? The way I understand it, the feedback system that we call conscious awareness is more of a confidence determiner, as in.. if it's necessary to check whether there is confidence in the success of an action, then it will be activated. In flow, such engagement and thorough examination of potential isn't necessary. |
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Jun 21, 2023 15:58:31 GMT -5
Forests fire enigma faces collapse what he has been saying ? On gab last year (or the year before), Enigma said his area was on fire, and he had to evacuate his house for a while. I recall empathizing with the sense of gratitude he expressed when he returned home. I think this was it.. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Oregon_wildfires |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Jun 21, 2023 15:58:57 GMT -5
You are talking about when one believes himself to be a doer, yes? No. I am saying that even in the seeing through of the doer, the experience of a me character that does/accomplishes stuff, still to some degree remains.
Same with the experience of personal agency...it continues on as a facet of the dream/story, even after clearly seeing that there is no actual, fundamental responsibility/blame agency re: the appearing character.
For example; While I am clear that there is no separation....it's all one seamless unfolding and ultimately, no appearing character is fundamentally volitional, thus, he has no fundamental agency, if someone rams into my car, I'm still gonna take his insurance and file it as his 'fault' so as to pay for my car repair.
There are experiential facets that remain and continue to arise even though the fundamental Truth has been realized.
Yes, absolutely. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 21, 2023 19:21:04 GMT -5
There's momentum to our conditioning. If you find yourself getting angry with your wife or your daughter it doesn't mean that you haven't realized the existential truth about personhood, it just means that there is conditioning playing itself out. The realization is timeless, in an instant, and is of what can be pointed to as unconditioned. These human reactions are conditioning, and are time-bound. Yes, that conditioning is due to the belief that somebody over there has caused something. So that conditioning has to fade away followed by your realisation. Yes? The conditioning grounded in the belief eroded pretty quickly for me, and I've read that happens for many others that way. So no, not that.There's still visceral reactions though. Conditioned responses that short circuit any thinking. While these reactions never happen the same way after the realization about the emptiness at the center, and in my experience they also erode over time (but that might just be me getting old), they can still happen. But don't try to project too much onto that. Don't look "outside" for any answers about this. The same movement of mind that expects sainthood will always find fault, so that the expectation will never be fulfilled. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 21, 2023 19:22:23 GMT -5
Yes. But this "inner nature": ultimately there is no "inner", there is no "outer". You know that already. The question for you is, "what creates"? It's not the illusory false personal self, but then again, it's also undeniable that this "inner state" is not insignificant, once we start considering issues like anger. Yes, false is not creating the reality because that doesn't exist. Our being creates the reality. But it won't create properly when it believes something that's not true, for an example when it believes that permanent happiness can be attained. Well, belief and being seem to me to be two notions that don't blend all that well, and I'd say there is no "our" being. Just, being. |
|
