|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Nov 18, 2024 14:02:26 GMT -5
I post. Nobody has to read what I post, nobody has to answer me. I agree on nonvolition. I agree on the imaginary self. I just put everything in a different context. You people have never explained what individuation is. We both agree it has something to do with the body, the body acting without conditioning. (J Krishnamurti explained this very well. There is a kind of conditioning, knowing how to operate in-the-world, be a mechanic or a plumber, stopping at a red light, that is not disruptive, that is in fact necessary. But conditioning-as-the-psychological-self is a distorting unnecessary factor, it's what's responsible for food fights here, which, without rules we'd have every day. I don't know how you don't see that's a problem. I know what individuation is. Individuation is the subject of self-inquiry. On one hand, it is the great mystery, as in, what the Catholics sing-chant as "♪ The Mys-ter-y of Faith ♪", soon after the transubstantiation, during each Mass. Equally true, however, is that it is as plain as the nose on your face. Seeking that " explanation" is natural. But, expecting one ... well, I'd say, with all due respect Mr. 'Pilgrim, perhaps you should know better. By now. than I expect you know. |
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Nov 18, 2024 14:14:28 GMT -5
This idea that 'subjective realities' never meet or have any influence on each other is most unusual. I am writing this post to show your subjective reality something that it has overlooked. The way I understand it, you experience a physical reality (perceive it, and act in it) that is created by your subconscious. This applies to everything that participate in the physical-reality framework. Your beliefs and expectations shape your experience by dynamically associating your personality to one of an endless number of possible reality gestalts. This means that your subconscious doesn't show you another element of your current reality gestalt as that element experiences itself, but it shows you a subjective translation that matches your beliefs and expectations. In one of my altered-state lessons, I experienced watching at the same time others both how they perceived their experience, and how I perceived it differently according to what I believed and expected to happen in the physical-reality. For example, I saw an old man who intentionally broke his old and and deformed legs, and to my amazement, he grew back a pair of healthy rejuvenated legs. I could alternate my focus between the man's perception, as described, and my perception of him that satisfied my beliefs and expectations, in which an old man was in pain and suffering from broken legs. So, it isn't that his and my subjective physical-realities didn't meet, as if they were existing disjunct realities, but that my subjective reality was reflecting a distortion of the reality that that man was experiencing. And, actually for me it didn't matter what he was experiencing, but only what i was perceiving as being his experience. According to my beliefs and expectations, breaking your legs doesn't grow you better ones, but brings pain and suffering. In the interpretation and guidance phase of that lesson I realized, suddenly knew, that it is often the case that the more incredible the feat experienced by a more advanced co-participant in my physical-reality gestalt, the more I perceive it as intense pain and suffering. This warns me of the relative magnitude of my ignorance. I still don't understand how you reach this conclusion. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Nov 18, 2024 14:57:23 GMT -5
I think your main mistake in these discussions is you conflating SR and alignment. And you are not alone, there are others who do that, too. And there's no way that you can stop this unless you have a direct reference for SR. As the AI (thru Melvin) mentioned the other day, Yoga (alignment) and Advaita (SR) are complementary. One doesn't depend on the other, but in combination, one enhances the other so to speak. I've talked about this before, there are 4 basic scenarios or 'levels': 1) SR and alignment 2) SR but no alignment 3) No SR but alignment 4) No SR and no alignment Level #1 is basically the Avatar level, which is extremely rare. Anandamayi Ma comes to mind, or Jesus, if you will. Level #2 is more common, especially on the internet. Those are your "non-dualists". Level #3 is even more common, because that's something you can work at. Level #4 is the most common, it's the typical seeker position. It's basically the "hungry ghost" position. Your position is #4. Which means to you SR is a myth, it doesn't exist, because from the #4 position, SR is the unthinkable. So you are essentially aiming at reaching #3, because that's what's thinkable from your current position. You see, #1 would be SR without a personal touch, #2 would be SR with a personal touch. Which, from the SR perspective, is same same but different, as ZD keeps telling you. But from your #4 position, #1 looks like #3 and #2 looks like #4. And that's a difference like heaven and hell, as you keep telling us. So you see, it's quite natural that we keep talking past each other. It can't be any other way. And I think after 15 years, maybe it's time you give it a rest. I post. Nobody has to read what I post, nobody has to answer me. I agree on nonvolition. I agree on the imaginary self. I just put everything in a different context. You people have never explained what individuation is. We both agree it has something to do with the body, the body acting without conditioning. (J Krishnamurti explained this very well. There is a kind of conditioning, knowing how to operate in-the-world, be a mechanic or a plumber, stopping at a red light, that is not disruptive, that is in fact necessary. But conditioning-as-the-psychological-self is a distorting unnecessary factor, it's what's responsible for food fights here, which, without rules we'd have every day. I don't know how you don't see that's a problem. I know what individuation is. I think many of us have clearly explained what individuation is. It is an act of abstract distinction, and the lines for any distinction can be drawn anywhere (as noted by G. Spencer Brown and many others). If there is no thinking, where is the idea of individuation? Where is any separation? All separation and individuation is imagined. Is a finger separate from a hand, or a hand from an arm, or an arm from a body, or a body from the universe? We distinguish what we see, and symbolize those distinctions with words, in order to communicate about reality. We agree on the definitions for most distinctions because it's useful to do so. What reality IS, however, cannot be distinguished because it cannot be imagined. It can only be what it is--an infinite unified field of being. We agree that the sense of separation is a result of cultural conditioning and thinking habits, but the good news is that the sense of separation can vanish via a particular existential realization, and that changes everything. It's like falling into a moving river, realizing that what one IS is the river, and relaxing into the flow of it. Looking back one sees that all past sense of effort was an illusion just like the sense of being a SVP. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Nov 18, 2024 16:24:17 GMT -5
The way I understand it, you experience a physical reality (perceive it, and act in it) that is created by your subconscious. This applies to everything that participate in the physical-reality framework. Your beliefs and expectations shape your experience by dynamically associating your personality to one of an endless number of possible reality gestalts. This means that your subconscious doesn't show you another element of your current reality gestalt as that element experiences itself, but it shows you a subjective translation that matches your beliefs and expectations. In one of my altered-state lessons, I experienced watching at the same time others both how they perceived their experience, and how I perceived it differently according to what I believed and expected to happen in the physical-reality. For example, I saw an old man who intentionally broke his old and and deformed legs, and to my amazement, he grew back a pair of healthy rejuvenated legs. I could alternate my focus between the man's perception, as described, and my perception of him that satisfied my beliefs and expectations, in which an old man was in pain and suffering from broken legs. So, it isn't that his and my subjective physical-realities didn't meet, as if they were existing disjunct realities, but that my subjective reality was reflecting a distortion of the reality that that man was experiencing. And, actually for me it didn't matter what he was experiencing, but only what i was perceiving as being his experience. According to my beliefs and expectations, breaking your legs doesn't grow you better ones, but brings pain and suffering. In the interpretation and guidance phase of that lesson I realized, suddenly knew, that it is often the case that the more incredible the feat experienced by a more advanced co-participant in my physical-reality gestalt, the more I perceive it as intense pain and suffering. This warns me of the relative magnitude of my ignorance. Something I have observed over many years of looking after pets, is that in the first half of a house sit, the pets adapt to our way of living. They adapt to our energy, our routines, the particular ways that we love and look after them (and that might include some dog-training). But, in the second half of a house sit, the pet usually begins to adapt/revert back to the energy of the pet-owner. It's an interesting thing (and has been kind of frustrating at times if we've been training them lol), but I do appreciate it, because it means the pet doesn't have to make a huge 'leap' when the pet-owner returns home. And also, I don't have to make a huge leap in leaving them, which can often be quite painful for me. To give a specific example....we spend a lot of time with the pets, but some pet-owners leave the pets home alone for hours. And I notice that in the days before the owner comes home, the pet will begin to isolate him/herself more. In your model of how things work, how would you explain this phenomenon? . Very interesting, and very telling observation! Remember: physical time is a dimension of your focus. All gestalts of consciousness are clairvoyant. Your body, your organs, your cells are clairvoyant too. The pain you feel now gauges the outcome of what you're current psychic and psychological condition is now. Your ego is too narrowly focused, and its beliefs make it not realize that much of its choices are actually based on personality features that the ego ignores. Other gestalts of consciousness aren't that narrowly focused. For example, I believe that arthritis flare-ups are caused by the clairvoyance of the body in conjunction with the incorrect focusing of your ego, which is a psychic condition that your pain signals to you to interpret and learn to correct it. True story: I witnessed a such case of physical pain and suffering experienced by a close family member, who got very deep emotionally into the then upcoming elections: fear, anger, obsession, misinterpretation, ... About a month or such ago he started feeling acute pain in his left knee. First thought: some articulation deterioration; he was even feeling something abnormally loose there; maybe some surgery will be needed; the x-ray showed only some regular age related arthritis. No further action was medically prescription. Then, unexpectedly, the pain moved to the right knee, as painful as it has been on the left one, which now was okay. Then he noticed his big toes nails growing abnormally, painfully, on both feet; a lab showed there is no fungus, and no cause of the condition was medically found; the foot doctor's opinion is that everything will return to normal with no medicine; this seems to be the case. At the same time, headaches and migraines became stronger and more frequent; medical investigations didn't yield any explanations, and the person is already on statins and aspirine to prevent a potential stroke. On top of all these, strong stomach and intestine turbulence and diarrhea appeared; practically he couldn't eat anything, spending frequent, long and painful trips to the restroom. There was a moment when the person was overwhelmed, foreseeing imminent death, talking about having no future. You can imagine that he spent much less time concerned with the news, and the catastrophic Trump's election didn't matter that much to him anymore; it was a side unpleasantness. Now the person started to feel better, after no medical explanation was found and having no treatment for any of the symptoms he experienced so acutely, one after another. I believe that this was a typical case of psychological state carelessly induced pain. All this experience wouldn't have happened if the person had made the conscious effort to deal with his negative emotions, if he had understood their consequences. I gave up long ago trying to make him somewhat revise his beliefs and expectations, his views on how to approach physical existence. This is a typical case of perfectionist, intelligent, self-confident person, who knows he's right, and who makes that clear to everybody, laughing dismissively at others' stupidity. This is a true story, and my interpretation of it. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Nov 18, 2024 18:26:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by melvin on Nov 18, 2024 19:42:29 GMT -5
When you consider people physically are one
Oneness is a nondual theme no separation so to speak.
If you consider people in their form each and every part of their bodies are of the same make.
For females, if you picture their anatomy from chest to groin, they almost looks the same.
Same with males, from chest to groin, the features are almost identical but..
People complain, male or female. Though anatomically all have identical looks from chest to groin, not all are comfortable with it.
The sizes for one. Either it's big or little. The dual thing again that's causing the problem.
Non-duality helps if only people look at their sexual anatomies as one. No different from the guy/girl next door.
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Nov 18, 2024 19:59:03 GMT -5
When you consider people physically are one Oneness is a nondual theme no separation so to speak. If you consider people in their form each and every part of their bodies are of the same make. For females, if you picture their anatomy from chest to groin, they almost looks the same. Same with males, from chest to groin, the features are almost identical but.. People complain, male or female. Though anatomically all have identical looks from chest to groin, not all are comfortable with it. The sizes for one. Either it's big or little. The dual thing again that's causing the problem. Non-duality helps if only people look at their sexual anatomies as one. No different from the guy/girl next door. When I read a post like this, it leaves me speechless. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 18, 2024 20:44:46 GMT -5
The appearance is that of a tangled hierarchy. Physical factors causing psychological reactions and those reactions, causing, in turn, physical manifestations. In general, it's a chegg. Aligning toward health is an interesting topic. Tangled' is an excellent word here....I almost used it myself 😁 I've had back pain, on and off, for 25 years. I sometimes say it's because I played too much rugby as a teenager, and I have a slight frame, and there's an aspect of truth to that. A more sophisticated truth is that I can see subtle levels of energy, and deeper beliefs, that very likely express as back pain. And I'm also aware that house sitting can be a contributing factor at times (though is also an expression of my inner state) So I can see the factors involved, and can even see what would be necessary in order to resolve them. I see excellent steps I could take both internally and externally, but that doesn't mean that taking those steps is appropriate. There's a divine timing to all things and there are appropriate lessons and growth for me in the issue. The reality is FAR more nuanced (and tangled) than Abraham presents it as, though I also appreciate the straight forward nature of their message. Sometimes folks die of illness, or manifest disease, and that's just the way it's meant to be for them. It doesn't necessarily mean they are blind to the issues, or failing to address them, it just means they have a different, perfect, life path and exploration. I feel the back issues will resolve. Inshallah. Sorry to hear of that challenge Andy. I'm completely unqualified to give anyone advice about anything from the midst of the train wreckage that is this life.  But back pain, is one major exception, because of personal experience. It's what led me to dabble in yoga (western use of the word), and, in turn, brasp hasp day. I could tell a tale of an x-ray and subsequent beliefs leading to actions (decades before brass hasp day). When physical pain gets bad enough, one starts looking for ways to deal with it. In terms of the appearance of the tangled hierarchy, at that point, the physical has become the dominant apparent causation. Perhaps we take some sort of steps -- like myself with my "yoga" - and in making that decision, the conscious thought of our minds becomes the dominant apparent causation. And so it goes, in a dynamic cycle, "physical"/"non-physical"/"physical" ... etc. My belief prior to brass-hasp day was that I had to be careful about my back, but then again, come to think of it, that didn't stop me from becoming a ski bum for a few years. I was shocked in the years afterward that it didn't go out while I was trying to renovate that house. This is an example of how realizing the existential truth colors the "beliefs" that drive the apparent cycle. One possible explanation, in conventional terms, is that we can explain it by the absence of destructive unconscious physical tension generated when we're in a state of subconscious psychological resistance.  Just let the pain be a reminder in those moments. Still the mind. Release the resistance. A "yoga" habit might help too. Child, Tree and Downward Dog poses were the best for my condition. Also discovered Tiger Balm a few years back now. AH has started to make more and more sense to me over the years when I swap out "belief" for a different notion, involving "being". A notion that has far less to do with any abstract agreement with a concept, and more to do with an inner feeling, what the LOA'ers call the vibes. The "belief" is an after-the-fact description of the given facet of a state of being. Maybe "subconscious belief" fits into to that mess somewhere, as well. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 18, 2024 20:46:57 GMT -5
When you consider people physically are one Oneness is a nondual theme no separation so to speak. If you consider people in their form each and every part of their bodies are of the same make. For females, if you picture their anatomy from chest to groin, they almost looks the same. Same with males, from chest to groin, the features are almost identical but.. People complain, male or female. Though anatomically all have identical looks from chest to groin, not all are comfortable with it. The sizes for one. Either it's big or little. The dual thing again that's causing the problem. Non-duality helps if only people look at their sexual anatomies as one. No different from the guy/girl next door.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 18, 2024 20:54:20 GMT -5
Individuation is the subject of self-inquiry. On one hand, it is the great mystery, as in, what the Catholics sing-chant as "♪ The Mys-ter-y of Faith ♪", soon after the transubstantiation, during each Mass. Equally true, however, is that it is as plain as the nose on your face. Seeking that " explanation" is natural. But, expecting one ... well, I'd say, with all due respect Mr. 'Pilgrim, perhaps you should know better. By now. than I expect you know. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 19, 2024 1:31:50 GMT -5
Yes, that's the elephant in the room. But then again, from broader perspective, the goal of physical life is not to cross the finish line with the most possessions in your pocket or the healthiest body. I agree that those aren't goals of physical life. But, to the degree that achieving them alleviate pain and suffering they may gauge your (impersonal use) doing what's right for achieving whatever true goals of your current physical life. Coming back to pain and illness, experienced by gurus or by yourself ... When you experience them it means that you are doing something wrong psychically or psychologically; the physical manifestation is a consequence and a signal to be observed and intuitively investigated. This isn't about alleviating the pain, but about interpreting what is it about, and addressing that; otherwise the cause will manifest again in the same or different way, progressively stronger pain and suffering. When a guru experiences pain and illness, that is what you observe, and not what that guru experiences; this isn't about his ignoring or transcending his pain and suffering, but about the fact that what you only-observe that in your subjective reality. Those pain and illness apparently experienced by the guru are still meant for you to interpret, to get guidance for yourself. They may be about your understanding of what that guru teaches, which is not right for you as you understand it. Surely, that doesn't exclude the possibility that that guru experiences pain and illness in his subjective reality, but you have no way to know that, and it doesn't matter for you. Niz and Ramakrishna both repeatedly commented on the pain their cancer caused them. So that's what they experienced.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 19, 2024 1:33:04 GMT -5
I agree that those aren't goals of physical life. But, to the degree that achieving them alleviate pain and suffering they may gauge your (impersonal use) doing what's right for achieving whatever true goals of your current physical life. Coming back to pain and illness, experienced by gurus or by yourself ... When you experience them it means that you are doing something wrong psychically or psychologically; the physical manifestation is a consequence and a signal to be observed and intuitively investigated. This isn't about alleviating the pain, but about interpreting what is it about, and addressing that; otherwise the cause will manifest again in the same or different way, progressively stronger pain and suffering. When a guru experiences pain and illness, that is what you observe, and not what that guru experiences; this isn't about his ignoring or transcending his pain and suffering, but about the fact that what you only-observe that in your subjective reality. Those pain and illness apparently experienced by the guru are still meant for you to interpret, to get guidance for yourself. They may be about your understanding of what that guru teaches, which is not right for you as you understand it. Surely, that doesn't exclude the possibility that that guru experiences pain and illness in his subjective reality, but you have no way to know that, and it doesn't matter for you.This idea that 'subjective realities' never meet or have any influence on each other is most unusual. I am writing this post to show your subjective reality something that it has overlooked. I know Inavalan is not a solipsist, but that argument was somewhat solipsistic. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 19, 2024 1:36:29 GMT -5
This idea that 'subjective realities' never meet or have any influence on each other is most unusual. I am writing this post to show your subjective reality something that it has overlooked. The way I understand it, you experience a physical reality (perceive it, and act in it) that is created by your subconscious. This applies to everything that participate in the physical-reality framework. Your beliefs and expectations shape your experience by dynamically associating your personality to one of an endless number of possible reality gestalts. This means that your subconscious doesn't show you another element of your current reality gestalt as that element experiences itself, but it shows you a subjective translation that matches your beliefs and expectations. In one of my altered-state lessons, I experienced watching at the same time others both how they perceived their experience, and how I perceived it differently according to what I believed and expected to happen in the physical-reality. For example, I saw an old man who intentionally broke his old and and deformed legs, and to my amazement, he grew back a pair of healthy rejuvenated legs. I could alternate my focus between the man's perception, as described, and my perception of him that satisfied my beliefs and expectations, in which an old man was in pain and suffering from broken legs. So, it isn't that his and my subjective physical-realities didn't meet, as if they were existing disjunct realities, but that my subjective reality was reflecting a distortion of the reality that that man was experiencing. And, actually for me it didn't matter what he was experiencing, but only what i was perceiving as being his experience. According to my beliefs and expectations, breaking your legs doesn't grow you better ones, but brings pain and suffering. In the interpretation and guidance phase of that lesson I realized, suddenly knew, that it is often the case that the more incredible the feat experienced by a more advanced co-participant in my physical-reality gestalt, the more I perceive it as intense pain and suffering. This warns me of the relative magnitude of my ignorance. What would experience be like without all those "interpretations"? |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 19, 2024 1:37:44 GMT -5
The Trump Card. When in doubt, go back to the largest context. Best debate strategy. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 19, 2024 1:56:59 GMT -5
Alignment happens one way if there has been a realization as to the question of "what aligns, with what?", and another way, otherwise. Funny thing is though, that most of the alignment material seems to me to have been generated from the dark on that. One reason for this is simple: the biggest question is going to be the one that draws the most interest, especially for anyone who gets close to it. So the sickly guru phenomenon can be understood, at least partly, by the pull to expressing the existential truth outweighing the pull toward alignment. Said another way, you don't go to Niz or Ramana or E' for advice on weight loss. There is actually a backstory arc on that with E' that is particularly rather comical. And, one can read a value judgment into that first sentence that isn't really there, but getting into that is unwrapping a box of potential confusion. You get what you think about, whether you want it or not. It's as simple and clear as that. And that applies equally to the saint and the sinner, the sage and the ignorant. It only gets convoluted when our image of those sages doesn't match the reality of those sages, i.e. when we assume that the minds of those sages are much purer than they actually are in reality. Then we have to make up all kinds of fantastical stories to bridge that gap. Here's a nice quote: |
|
But back pain, is one major exception, because of personal experience. It's what led me to dabble in yoga (western use of the word), and, in turn, 
