Birch

That was very nice. Thanks Mr GranP. I would like to add, however, that all of these exhortions to diminish oneself in the service of enlightened masters will also get one nowhere. Rather see people doing other stuff than lining 'guru's' pockets with Rolls' --- personal opinion alert---

Ah well.

Well I suppose each person knows whether they've been to Alaska or not. This enlightenment business seems to be the only situation I've come across which you're supposed to both know whether you're in Alaska or have just visited a few times AND have the extent of your knowledge judged by others who haven't been to Alaska yet ever. But of course, in this enlightenment situation, no-one is going anywhere so why bother?

The 'best' method I've found is in looking at it (personal history) square in the face.

Whoop de doo:-) Nope, they said a person has to believe in a higher being. Not joining:-)

Watch GranP's video. It didn't seem very cool to me. Bit of a pompous bloke, I found (and don't forget your chance to purchase the whatever it was in the online gift store). The masons are also sexist. I think I mentioned that elsewhere:-)

As far as I can tell, the only acceptable situation for ego is one of coherence. So if coherence involves denying evidence or throwing it under the carpet (unconscious) then I suspect that's what happens. I'd say best bet is to assume yourself to be 'big enough' for any kind of coherence. But still, I don't reckon that counts as 'enlightenment' in the classic sense which is the realisation that there is no-one to get enlightened. Yes I have my suspicions that many people (re)coalesce into this 'witness' situation and assume they're done, not realizing what's happened. I see it as unfortunate and a waste of people. But then I am neither enlightened nor a permanent resident of the witness state so take what I'm saying with a bale of hay:-) ----personal opinion alert---

Or promoted.

13x13x13 or ONLY ONE Did I get it right Monseigneur?

That was a great post Serene Blue. Thank you for it! Here's where I'll say I reckon I'm at. I'll say that the 'getting annoyed' thing most often happens when I buy whatever the other person is saying, so where the 'choice' gets placed in the process becomes of some importance. So far I've gotten to points at which I still get annoyed (I still bought it) but then I 'choose' my subsequent reaction. It's not ideal because the emotion of 'annoyed' is already 'there' and so it has to be dealt with in some way. I reckon people can injure themselves with that. I do think it's pointless to pretend not to be annoyed if I am (although I will do so on purpose on occasion for '3rd chakra reasons':-)) However, if I can stop 'buying' (I suppose those Bhuddists would call it 'attachment'?) whatever is being communicated then no reaction. There was a lot of other interesting stuff in your post that I'm going to have to think about:-)

That's rather a broad sweeping statement Mr GranP. I do think there are 'elites' in commanding positions in every country in the world who tend to organize things the way they want, for maximum personal benefit. Nothing conspirational there. It's sort of like saying 'Advertising doesn't work on me'. Yes, that's why billions of $ get spent on it. Something that doesn't work.

"They are trying..." I'd say they've managed to succeed quite well so far. From time to time I dig around in related stuff and it's quite hard to determine what the aim is. Rumours abound of an end-goal of restoring the Earth to some kind of 'golden age' but so do rumours about off-planet survival strategies.

The pdf that DaoJones posted on dissassociation is interesting in this respect.

Interesting post on stoicism Serene Blue. What I'm looking at at the moment is what is the other person communicating to me? What do I think/feel they are saying? Clarification of intent (instead of assumption of intent) is worth IMO/IME working with as a way of honing awareness. It also tells me how my gut sense is aligned or not with reality. Sometimes it's not. Following that, comes the reaction. Getting annoyed might signify that I've bought into whatever the other person is communicating (in the above case, I've agreed that I ought to be talked down to) and so I would react to it as if it were true, maybe getting annoyed. Another option is just silence, no response. Which is fine, but then VMarco will be unclear on what I am communicating. Silence might also seem as if I agree that I ought to be talked down to. 'Who says nothing, consents'.

Interesting link. Thanks! It is also my point of view that what I'd refer to as '3rd chakra issues' are relative to a split between real/true self and the conditioned split/self, created to protect the self as it grows/ survive/function in society. Dissassociation is, as far as I understand it, a survival mechanism. I often wonder about the 'witness' created or cultivated in mindfulness practice in this light. ---speculative opinion alert---

Not at all:-) I learned that it's lots of different things. Even Shen gets split into a sort of a universal Shen and at least a personal one, also shen. No personal visitations via Shen so far. As far as I know.

Sounds like something God would do. Well, the one that people would have me believe in might.

Personally, I'm waiting till Spring for the relevant cleaning:-) Why haven't I mentioned much relative to my own process of self-observation, atonement etc? Because it's extremely personal. I'm pretty sure my faults are glaring in the sunshine for all to see. Additional 'misadaptations' found root and stock over the top of a learned self-reproach. What behaviours were taken up to appease, escape, resolve eventually became their own misadptations but because some are rewarded, it was not always apparent which were qualities and which were not. Further, each quality bears defect within it. I'd spill my guts but I don't think it would help anyone:-)

One, I have very few 'bubbles' left, you're not popping anything by talking down to me. Two, the reference in my sig is intended as a statement about the character of belief and the way meaning is derived from it. Three, I don't equate respectful discourse with the stance you're taking, nor your slights. Nothing to do with coddling:-) I've been through that whole 'message/messenger' thing. One thing Guerdjieff did write about which I found interesting was the distance between knowledge and understanding. Reading your posts, I'd say you have some way to go to close the gap.

Seriously? Seriously? No, unfortunately, it's very much not an illusion hue and cry signifying nothing. VMarco, while I appreciate several of your ideas I do not at all appreciate the denigrating approach used. Of course this means I have a locus of consciousness. What's your haste to condemn other people. Why talk at folks as if they are idiots?

http://www.bestthinking.com/articles/science/chemistry/biochemistry/the-spinach-popeye-iron-decimal-error-myth-is-finally-busted

Yes, it's an interesting expression. I just thought up "Before enlightenment, participate in an oppressive feudal system, after enlightenment participate in an oppressive feudal system"

I don't reckon it's a bad idea but would suggest being careful with mixing conceptual understandings from different systems. Makes spam of it. But then I'm guilty of it to a huge extent. I should watch that:-)

The above quote illustrates a Facebook Terms and Conditions issue around ownership and rights to use media posted on FB.

Spiritual experiences can become worldviews. Doesn't mean IMO/IME these are the only game in town. I fear a monk would explain the experience through the monk's view, a psych through his, a philosopher through hers. My point is that while it's tempting to search for a grounding context in the wake of shattering or strange experience, it's worth your discernment towards those you may examine and try on for size. ----opinion from experience alert---