|
|
Post by laughter on May 27, 2024 13:18:30 GMT -5
It's possible to feel a poignant moment as things change, especially as we witness the erosion of minds, people, places or things. Do we necessarily need a word other than "sadness"? I think not. But by the same token, I get what she's saying here, and its' related to what I wrote to SN about that ... "ache". Both poignancy and sadness are aspects of my experience, and I'm really okay with that. I've been a pet sitter that falls in love with every pet that comes under my care, and it has sometimes felt like my heart breaks to leave them. But when I've explored the spectrum of sadness closely, I can't deny that whether it's a moment of poignancy, or a outpouring of tears.... there is slight 'sulk' involved. I have to slightly withdraw from the present moment, I have to 'compare', I have to create a slight internal story/sense of 'loss'. Again, to reiterate, I'm really okay with that, I am not Katie. But I like the way she challenges. Same with anger...whether it's irritation, annoyance, frustration or rage....it's just intensities of the same basic story of 'should' and 'shouldn't'  .. self honesty rocks dude! |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 27, 2024 13:20:21 GMT -5
Both poignancy and sadness are aspects of my experience, and I'm really okay with that. I've been a pet sitter that falls in love with every pet that comes under my care, and it has sometimes felt like my heart breaks to leave them. But when I've explored the spectrum of sadness closely, I can't deny that whether it's a moment of poignancy, or a outpouring of tears.... there is slight 'sulk' involved. I have to slightly withdraw from the present moment, I have to 'compare', I have to create a slight internal story/sense of 'loss'. Again, to reiterate, I'm really okay with that, I am not Katie. But I like the way she challenges. Same with anger...whether it's irritation, annoyance, frustration or rage....it's just intensities of the same basic story of 'should' and 'shouldn't' .. self honesty rocks dude! |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 27, 2024 14:25:02 GMT -5
One of BK's most persistent investigations relates to 'what is our business' and 'what isn't'. I find it to be one of her most useful points. Reflecting this morning on the differences in attitudes towards homeless people, in America and the UK. It's an interesting cultural difference. In the UK, the attitude towards homeless people, in general, is a bit softer. In my old town, I would often stop and talk with the homeless folks, and give a bit of money. I had no care how they spent it, if they wanted to get some booze or drugs...it's none of my business. To a great extent, homeless folks were part of the community, generally considered harmless. It was considered that, for whatever reason, at this point in their life, they couldn't 'function' in the way that broader society expects and demands. They can't get a job, hold a job, pay bills etc. Maybe it boils down to trauma they experienced. Maybe they are neuro-divergent. Maybe it's just their personality type. It doesn't matter to me, I have no lesson to teach them, and I accept them as they are, in their current homeless state of being. It's different in America. America values the idea of people 'pulling themselves up by the bootstraps'. The idea that 'we are all equally capable'. The idea that 'if I can do it, you can do it'. So homeless folks are treated as a sub-class of people that could 'choose' better, if they learned the 'right lessons'. As much as I love America, I find this a culturally immature aspect. Can we ever know what is going on with another individual? Is it even our business to know? How do we know their mental-emotional state? How do we know their traumas? How do we know how their brains are wired? How do we know where they are 'at' in their life path, and what is necessary for them to explore? If we can't really know, why teach lessons? Then, if I'm ever homeless, I'm going to move to the UK. I agree. I was introduced to homelessness at an early age. My Grandmother had a brother who was a 'drunk' and lived on the streets of Charlotte. (It's curious, another brother was very successful, and he raised two sons to play in the NFL, Joe Bostic who played for the Arizona Cardinals and Jeff Bostic, who was a Hog, he was the offensive center, has 4 Superbowl rings. Jeff was a walk-on, he didn't have the size to be drafted. But he was invited to the Philadelpha training camp. They let him go, he was very discouraged. His dad said, why don't you stop by Washington, they had talked to him also. Jeff's forte was the long snap. They also sent him home, but called back quickly, their center kept messing up the snap to the punter in practice. So Joe Gibbs asked him, how would you like to start for us next week on Monday Night football? . That's all he did for a while, snap to punter, but he eventually worked his way to center, always. So brains overcame his weight deficiency. They are my second cousins. They lived away, in Greensboro, NC). I just heard talk of him from time to time. The family had abandoned him, he was beyond help and beyond hope, so was cut off from the family. He would call my Grandma from time to time, drunk. I didn't really get this as a kid, but I understood it better as I got older. I think most people are doing the best that they can, sadly. Some are content to just survive. ....I've found that there is such a thing as a sphere of influence, it's usually very tiny for most people. Some people have a very large sphere of influence. I'd say you can live a happier life if you recognize what your sphere of influence, is.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 27, 2024 22:59:23 GMT -5
One of BK's most persistent investigations relates to 'what is our business' and 'what isn't'. I find it to be one of her most useful points. Reflecting this morning on the differences in attitudes towards homeless people, in America and the UK. It's an interesting cultural difference. In the UK, the attitude towards homeless people, in general, is a bit softer. In my old town, I would often stop and talk with the homeless folks, and give a bit of money. I had no care how they spent it, if they wanted to get some booze or drugs...it's none of my business. To a great extent, homeless folks were part of the community, generally considered harmless. It was considered that, for whatever reason, at this point in their life, they couldn't 'function' in the way that broader society expects and demands. They can't get a job, hold a job, pay bills etc. Maybe it boils down to trauma they experienced. Maybe they are neuro-divergent. Maybe it's just their personality type. It doesn't matter to me, I have no lesson to teach them, and I accept them as they are, in their current homeless state of being. It's different in America. America values the idea of people 'pulling themselves up by the bootstraps'. The idea that 'we are all equally capable'. The idea that 'if I can do it, you can do it'. So homeless folks are treated as a sub-class of people that could 'choose' better, if they learned the 'right lessons'. As much as I love America, I find this a culturally immature aspect. Can we ever know what is going on with another individual? Is it even our business to know? How do we know their mental-emotional state? How do we know their traumas? How do we know how their brains are wired? How do we know where they are 'at' in their life path, and what is necessary for them to explore? If we can't really know, why teach lessons? Then, if I'm ever homeless, I'm going to move to the UK. I agree. I was introduced to homelessness at an early age. My Grandmother had a brother who was a 'drunk' and lived on the streets of Charlotte. (It's curious, another brother was very successful, and he raised two sons to play in the NFL, Joe Bostic who played for the Arizona Cardinals and Jeff Bostic, who was a Hog, he was the offensive center, has 4 Superbowl rings. Jeff was a walk-on, he didn't have the size to be drafted. But he was invited to the Philadelpha training camp. They let him go, he was very discouraged. His dad said, why don't you stop by Washington, they had talked to him also. Jeff's forte was the long snap. They also sent him home, but called back quickly, their center kept messing up the snap to the punter in practice. So Joe Gibbs asked him, how would you like to start for us next week on Monday Night football? . That's all he did for a while, snap to punter, but he eventually worked his way to center, always. So brains overcame his weight deficiency. They are my second cousins. They lived away, in Greensboro, NC). I just heard talk of him from time to time. The family had abandoned him, he was beyond help and beyond hope, so was cut off from the family. He would call my Grandma from time to time, drunk. I didn't really get this as a kid, but I understood it better as I got older. I think most people are doing the best that they can, sadly. Some are content to just survive. ....I've found that there is such a thing as a sphere of influence, it's usually very tiny for most people. Some people have a very large sphere of influence. I'd say you can live a happier life if you recognize what your sphere of influence, is.
Yes, I resonate with that, yes...people are doing the best they can, and for some, it's just about being content to survive (last sentence sounds interesting, though I don't fully understand it). |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on May 28, 2024 6:34:32 GMT -5
Then, if I'm ever homeless, I'm going to move to the UK. I agree. I was introduced to homelessness at an early age. My Grandmother had a brother who was a 'drunk' and lived on the streets of Charlotte. (It's curious, another brother was very successful, and he raised two sons to play in the NFL, Joe Bostic who played for the Arizona Cardinals and Jeff Bostic, who was a Hog, he was the offensive center, has 4 Superbowl rings. Jeff was a walk-on, he didn't have the size to be drafted. But he was invited to the Philadelpha training camp. They let him go, he was very discouraged. His dad said, why don't you stop by Washington, they had talked to him also. Jeff's forte was the long snap. They also sent him home, but called back quickly, their center kept messing up the snap to the punter in practice. So Joe Gibbs asked him, how would you like to start for us next week on Monday Night football? . That's all he did for a while, snap to punter, but he eventually worked his way to center, always. So brains overcame his weight deficiency. They are my second cousins. They lived away, in Greensboro, NC). I just heard talk of him from time to time. The family had abandoned him, he was beyond help and beyond hope, so was cut off from the family. He would call my Grandma from time to time, drunk. I didn't really get this as a kid, but I understood it better as I got older. I think most people are doing the best that they can, sadly. Some are content to just survive. ....I've found that there is such a thing as a sphere of influence, it's usually very tiny for most people. Some people have a very large sphere of influence. I'd say you can live a happier life if you recognize what your sphere of influence, is.
Yes, I resonate with that, yes...people are doing the best they can, and for some, it's just about being content to survive (last sentence sounds interesting, though I don't fully understand it). Your sphere of influence is a kind of Stoic idea. The Stoics say you have to be aware of what you can control and what you can't control. You basically can't control anything exterior to you. Your wife falls in love with somebody else, and leaves you. You get fired from your job. You're in a ten car pileup. A flood takes your house. A tornado takes your house. A kid dies of an overdose. Last week I went to a funeral, a cousin of mine died, she had cancer. She was 2 years younger than me, she grew up about 1/4 mile away. It went to her brain, she told everybody, I don't want any more chemo or radiation. Viktor Frankl was a psychiatrist in Germany. He was put in a concentration camp in WWII. He survived, in part because although the Nazis could control everything about his exterior life, they could not control his inner attitude, they never crushed ~him~. He wrote several books about his ordeal and surviving. (And he was in the position he was because Hitler's sphere of influence became the whole world, in a nasty and ugly way). The most famous is Man's Search for Meaning. Your sphere of influence is related to that. ZD would probably have the greatest sphere of influence of anybody here. A Bill Gates or a Warren Buffet has a broad sphere of influence because of their money. The US Supreme Court has a very broad sphere of influence. Broadcast TV in the US used to be exclusively financed by persuasion, commercials, if a program didn't sell products, it went off the air. But basically, anything you can't control, you just accept that, don't worry about it. You just cross it off your list of things to worry about. Eventually you get down to what to do, now. Eventually you see all you can really control is where your attention goes, and what you are aware of. But then it gets into LOA and how your outer life reflects your inner like and if you change, your outer world changes. All true, but it all results from what you can control, what's interior. But basically, it does zero good to get upset from what you can't control. Sphere of influence means the people you can influence. Happiness is a byproduct anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 28, 2024 17:56:52 GMT -5
Direct route to what? Liberation? Or waking the hell up? Are you saying there's a difference? (That's pretty cool that my question was being asked as you were adding an edit...I assume you didn't add it after you saw my question? More psychic connection on the forum!) Yes, I was adding it while you replied. Because I was afraid that it looks like I call Katie a dangerous fraud, but that's not my intention nor my take. I think she is genuine about her perspective. She is just a very popular example of a very common pattern which we could call "twilight zone spirituality", i.e. that zone or time between being done with the spiritual circus and the actual event of SR. I spend about a year or two in that state. Some people spend decades in that state. And there's nothing you can really do there. You cannot go back to the consensus trance, and you cannot pass thru the gateless gate either. So you are kinda stuck in a twilight zone.
And to understand my position you have to keep in mind 3 basic concepts: 1) You create your own experience. 2) SR is not an experience. 3) Suffering is optional.
This is why I often recommended in the past to not take this liberation stuff all too seriously. It's not in your hands. You cannot make it happen and you also cannot mess it up. Which is both bad news and good news. So just relax, it either happens or doesn't happen, it is not your responsibility. In the mean time, enjoy your life to the fullest here and now, take some time to smell the roses, instead of trying to meditate your way with clenched fists so that you can force your way thru that darned gateless gate. That will just add to your suffering. So the best advice I can think of for seekers is to be brutally honest about their situation. That they already are what they are looking for. They are home already. That what they are looking for is their natural state. Natural meaning that that it cannot be lost, it cannot be acquired, no one can give it or take it away and you also cannot or have to earn it. All that is required is a conscious re-cognition of what is already just-so, always has been just-so and always will be just-so. That it is all just an error in perception that causes their suffering. In essence just a case of mistaken identity. And that all it takes is to correct that error in perception. Which can only does happen instantly. There is no process whatsoever involved. This is not happening in time. The natural state exists outside of time, prior to time. But that re-cognition involves a seeing with a different set of eyes. And so whatever they attempt to see or realize with their current set of eyes is bound to fail and only add to their suffering. And so from an experiential perspective, it's much better to teach them about LOA, inner guidance and alignment than non-duality. Teaching them about deliberate creation will help them become healthy, wealthy and wise. It's basically the initial steps on the yoga path and it will decrease their suffering greatly, even though it doesn't solve the core issue, i.e. you while you cannot find unconditional peace that way, you can at least find conditional peace that way. Which is better than all the other alternatives. Teaching them only non-duality will make them frustrated and often conceited and put them at odds with the other consensus trance peeps, i.e. it will usually only increase their suffering. That's why, in offline life, I only talk to people about non-duality who are ready for it. This kind of knowledge has to be handled with care.
Yeah, but when it comes to abundance, sometimes, less is more. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 28, 2024 18:12:05 GMT -5
okay thank you for expanding/clarifying your view. There are always further questions that could be asked, but after sitting for a moment, in this case, I'm just going to let that little bubble of questioning subside, and move along. It was a good discussion from my perspective. You actually helped me clarify some points about spiritual teachers in general and the non-duality circus in particular. So thanks for the chat. And feel free to ask, no problem. Yes, cool to read along with, thanks guys.  |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 31, 2024 0:07:04 GMT -5
Yeah, at best it can free you from limiting beliefs, at worst it is just another form of mental kungfu that leads to spiritual bypassing. Here's from her website: What is the "you" that her four questions are directed at? What about realizing "your" true nature? Seeing thru the SVP? Does she address those issues?
If she doesn't address the SVP issue, then what she offers is just another form of self-help mixed in with a bit of non-duality lingo. Which would be the infamous context mix I mentioned earlier.
You can talk about self-help. No problem. You can talk about non-duality. No problem. But you cannot throw them together. They have to be discussed separately. Or else it's just identity poker, the false witness position. Which is the impression I got from her. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt though until I have actually read her book(s). We'll see.
Tolle sneaks this into Now with a single punchline in the context of writing about the (in my words) conventional state of mind as "madness". He wrote that (paraphrasing from memory) "as it is, 90% of human thought is negative, repetitive, and useless". So, now, what you say is true, and implicates RM's fake cop, patrolling the mall of the mind on his segway scooter policing any negative thoughts. Until Gracie visits, all witnessing is fake witnessing. But not all fake witnessing is created equal. Some of it can result in a sudden collapse of entire mind structures. The resulting mental quiescence is a space filled with opportunity. RM's self inquiry is a coin with two sides. On one side is the invitation to Grace, and there is always a thread of sincerity that runs through any tapestry of existential curiosity. Even Paul Blart's uniform. On the other side is neti-neti .. "who is it that has this thought?" becomes instantly clear in some instances: it is the imposter, the ego, the false sense of self. This can only be witnessed from the fake witnessing position, unless you want to account for the situation of a genuine existential insight short of SR. Seems to me that some of these might overlap with psychiatric/psychological insight. No reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater. As always, there is no hope for mind. I can see your clear bifrucation as potentially helpful, or potentially just another conditioned hitch someone might internalize along the way. Since you mention ET, BK actually seems to think that she's taking ET's teaching to the next level. (no joke!)  |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 31, 2024 0:14:34 GMT -5
Yes, I was adding it while you replied. Because I was afraid that it looks like I call Katie a dangerous fraud, but that's not my intention nor my take. I think she is genuine about her perspective. She is just a very popular example of a very common pattern which we could call "twilight zone spirituality", i.e. that zone or time between being done with the spiritual circus and the actual event of SR. I spend about a year or two in that state. Some people spend decades in that state. And there's nothing you can really do there. You cannot go back to the consensus trance, and you cannot pass thru the gateless gate either. So you are kinda stuck in a twilight zone.
And to understand my position you have to keep in mind 3 basic concepts: 1) You create your own experience. 2) SR is not an experience. 3) Suffering is optional.
This is why I often recommended in the past to not take this liberation stuff all too seriously. It's not in your hands. You cannot make it happen and you also cannot mess it up. Which is both bad news and good news. So just relax, it either happens or doesn't happen, it is not your responsibility. In the mean time, enjoy your life to the fullest here and now, take some time to smell the roses, instead of trying to meditate your way with clenched fists so that you can force your way thru that darned gateless gate. That will just add to your suffering. So the best advice I can think of for seekers is to be brutally honest about their situation. That they already are what they are looking for. They are home already. That what they are looking for is their natural state. Natural meaning that that it cannot be lost, it cannot be acquired, no one can give it or take it away and you also cannot or have to earn it. All that is required is a conscious re-cognition of what is already just-so, always has been just-so and always will be just-so. That it is all just an error in perception that causes their suffering. In essence just a case of mistaken identity. And that all it takes is to correct that error in perception. Which can only does happen instantly. There is no process whatsoever involved. This is not happening in time. The natural state exists outside of time, prior to time. But that re-cognition involves a seeing with a different set of eyes. And so whatever they attempt to see or realize with their current set of eyes is bound to fail and only add to their suffering. And so from an experiential perspective, it's much better to teach them about LOA, inner guidance and alignment than non-duality. Teaching them about deliberate creation will help them become healthy, wealthy and wise. It's basically the initial steps on the yoga path and it will decrease their suffering greatly, even though it doesn't solve the core issue, i.e. you while you cannot find unconditional peace that way, you can at least find conditional peace that way. Which is better than all the other alternatives. Teaching them only non-duality will make them frustrated and often conceited and put them at odds with the other consensus trance peeps, i.e. it will usually only increase their suffering. That's why, in offline life, I only talk to people about non-duality who are ready for it. This kind of knowledge has to be handled with care.
Yeah, but when it comes to abundance, sometimes, less is more. Yes, you have to think in terms of abundance in broader terms, not just in terms of things, especially owning things. That will make you feel poor in the midst of abundance and miss the real abundance that is always there. Take Andrew as example, he continually lives in beautiful places without owning them. Now, in terms of ownership, he might consider himself poor, but in terms of experience, he might consider himself rich. Most of the abundance you can experience every day you cannot put a price tag on. And so most people miss it. Very weird! |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 31, 2024 0:16:46 GMT -5
It was a good discussion from my perspective. You actually helped me clarify some points about spiritual teachers in general and the non-duality circus in particular. So thanks for the chat. And feel free to ask, no problem. Yes, cool to read along with, thanks guys. BK certainly has a place in the self-help arena, it's not by accident that she's so popular. However, putting her on the same level with RM or even ET is a mistake, IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 31, 2024 11:47:57 GMT -5
Yeah, but when it comes to abundance, sometimes, less is more. Yes, you have to think in terms of abundance in broader terms, not just in terms of things, especially owning things. That will make you feel poor in the midst of abundance and miss the real abundance that is always there. Take Andrew as example, he continually lives in beautiful places without owning them. Now, in terms of ownership, he might consider himself poor, but in terms of experience, he might consider himself rich. Most of the abundance you can experience every day you cannot put a price tag on. And so most people miss it. Very weird! so! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2024 14:51:15 GMT -5
Byron Katie's method is just her unique style. If you question thoughts as she guides people to do, it can lead to the same place that Ramana Maharshi was pointing to. Different people can respond to different styles, at different times in their life. No reason to try to put her down, or put her in some box.
One of the advantages of BK's style is that she does not posit in advance much about what you will find. Reality can be discovered just the same. Some non-duality followers keep repeating the concepts and try to talk themselves into a pale replica Reality, putting a mental value on some future "Enlightenment". That's less of a risk with a teacher like Katie who isn't trying (always in vain) to describe Reality.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 31, 2024 15:18:39 GMT -5
Tolle sneaks this into Now with a single punchline in the context of writing about the (in my words) conventional state of mind as "madness". He wrote that (paraphrasing from memory) "as it is, 90% of human thought is negative, repetitive, and useless". So, now, what you say is true, and implicates RM's fake cop, patrolling the mall of the mind on his segway scooter policing any negative thoughts. Until Gracie visits, all witnessing is fake witnessing. But not all fake witnessing is created equal. Some of it can result in a sudden collapse of entire mind structures. The resulting mental quiescence is a space filled with opportunity. RM's self inquiry is a coin with two sides. On one side is the invitation to Grace, and there is always a thread of sincerity that runs through any tapestry of existential curiosity. Even Paul Blart's uniform. On the other side is neti-neti .. "who is it that has this thought?" becomes instantly clear in some instances: it is the imposter, the ego, the false sense of self. This can only be witnessed from the fake witnessing position, unless you want to account for the situation of a genuine existential insight short of SR. Seems to me that some of these might overlap with psychiatric/psychological insight. No reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater. As always, there is no hope for mind. I can see your clear bifrucation as potentially helpful, or potentially just another conditioned hitch someone might internalize along the way. Since you mention ET, BK actually seems to think that she's taking ET's teaching to the next level. (no joke!) Weirdly, I actually did go from Tolle to Katie. I wouldn't say she takes things to the next level, but I had been stuck in a rut with Tolle, and had turned 'thought' and 'ego' (Tolle's definition) into a sort of 'enemy'. Katie presented things in a way that did shift my perspective and approach on that. It was more like....welcome the thoughts, treat each one individually, and gently investigate them. I still tied myself in knots with it But it was a useful shift at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 31, 2024 15:26:56 GMT -5
Byron Katie's method is just her unique style. If you question thoughts as she guides people to do, it can lead to the same place that Ramana Maharshi was pointing to. Different people can respond to different styles, at different times in their life. No reason to try to put her down, or put her in some box. One of the advantages of BK's style is that she does not posit in advance much about what you will find. Reality can be discovered just the same. Some non-duality followers keep repeating the concepts and try to talk themselves into a pale replica Reality, putting a mental value on some future "Enlightenment". That's less of a risk with a teacher like Katie who isn't trying (always in vain) to describe Reality. Yeah, that pretty much describes what was going on with me (in the post above). Katie's approach brought me out of the abstract concepts, and into the present a lot more. In terms of addressing my deeper fears, I was always going to try and avoid them if I could, and after a while, I found myself using her method/questioning as a deceitful way to avoid the fears (I wasn't doing that deliberately). But, that's just me, everyone's different. I still value how she showed up for me at the time (and continues to). |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on May 31, 2024 15:45:13 GMT -5
Yeah, but when it comes to abundance, sometimes, less is more. Yes, you have to think in terms of abundance in broader terms, not just in terms of things, especially owning things. That will make you feel poor in the midst of abundance and miss the real abundance that is always there. Take Andrew as example, he continually lives in beautiful places without owning them. Now, in terms of ownership, he might consider himself poor, but in terms of experience, he might consider himself rich. Most of the abundance you can experience every day you cannot put a price tag on. And so most people miss it. Very weird! I've had to think a fair bit over the years what 'abundance' means to me, and it does relate to simplicity. As the years have passed, I've found handling bureaucratic stuff more challenging. My organization skills aren't good, and I don't keep track of stuff well, I don't understand how things 'work' in the modern world very well. People can explain stuff to me, and if it's more than 3 sentences of explanation, I've usually forgotten what the first sentence was (though my long term memory is excellent). In one way, I'm not much better mentally equipped than a 5 year old lol. It's why I relate to homeless folks....I sort of 'get' how it is for some of them. But I also resonate with a good standard of physical ease and comfort. So it does seem as if I've gravitated, or been guided, to a path that suits me. We are pet sitting again on the Outer Banks over the summer. Really cool house on the beach. And yet, while I'm always appreciative of what we've been given, I'm also sometimes glad that it's not mine to take care of permanently...it would just be too much for me. Simple and easy is how I like it. |
|
.. self honesty rocks dude!
