Otis

Good share, Mewtwo. That's my ideal when sword-fighting: no tension, no choosing, no watching the blades. Just smile, look at my opponent in the face, stay present, and let my body do what it needs to.

I've been meaning to ask this very question for awhile; thanks for bringing it up. I have (at least) three completely distinct answers to this: #1 is my reductionist, scientific response: we do not experience the outside world, only the interior model (simulacrum) of the world that our senses report, and which our brains put together into coherent form. In that sense, everything I experience is only part of me. Outside stimuli only re-shapes this model inside of me, but the actual world is not knowable, nor ever even directly experienced. In this sense, "all is one", because "all" refers to everything I experience, and "one" is where it all takes place, in my consciousness. #2 is my tantric response: The neurosis that I'm trying to wake up from is that I am a distinct being, and that my life happens to me. But of course, there is no part of me, which is distinct from my life, and vice-versa. They cover the exact same territory. Therefore, everything that I experience is part of me. Events, experiences, objects, other people, are just ways of viewing different aspects of "my life", therefore they are likewise all a part of "me". #3 is my philosophical response: if I see separation, it is because "I" am my ego, which is trying to control the world through distinction and hierarchy, both of which are man-made concepts. If I surrender seeing separation, then I also surrender the power of my ego, and thus achieve liberation. In this sense, "all is one" is recommendation, not necessarily truth. I also think that Dependent Origination points at a form of "all is one", in which causes and effects are inseparable. Likewise, quantum entanglement suggests that space and matter are, in some ways, illusions created by consciousness, and that the actual material of the universe is far more intimate and connected, than our perceptions would suggest.

I think that's great, and money has never been a big driver for me, either. But when things are tight, and every purchase (no matter how necessary) needs to be scrutinized, to make sure I don't bounce checks or go into debt, then the lack of money, unfortunately, does start to weigh heavily on me. When I consider that I am 42, and have no plans yet for retirement, then I realize that I do need to consider money more carefully. I have embraced not having (and was indoctrinated into that as a child), but now I think it's also time for me to embrace having.

Of course, Buddha asked not to be deified, or to have statues made of him, but that didn't last long... Likewise, Mohammed also asked not to be turned into a religious icon, but unfortunately that's been turned into an excuse to kill people over Danish cartoons.

This is a beautiful realization, InfinityTruth. This is how it occurred to me: The belief in human hierarchy is just a myth, nothing more. When I look closely at it, I realize there is no substantial reason to believe that any other person is worth more or less than I am. There is no objective yardstick. It is just my bias that keeps the myth alive. Whenever I see anyone else as lower than me, then I automatically buy into that myth of hierarchy. Without the myth, then there is no one lower. And as soon as I buy into the myth of hierarchy, then I also make myself lower than others. Because, in every single possible trait or measurement, I can always find someone else, who does it better. So as long as I put myself above, then I also put myself below. The only way to get out of hierarchy, is to let go of the need to be above, to stop getting my rewards by being superior. And that means, too, of course, to learn to stop being afraid of being seen as lower. I completely agree with your statement "kill the self-image". After all, there's no real violence there, because it's not a living thing, just an image. Self-image is just an addictive story, that warps everything that comes in, or goes out.

I hear you, Everything. I've been trying to choose that path for myself (stop controlling, and do what comes naturally) for the past few years, and it's not always an easy transition. My path has traveled through some indulgence / low-level hedonism (and is still emerging from that now), because that is part of where my system wanted to go. It is easy to believe the slippery-slope argument that it will lead all the way to being a "bum". Of course, when I first started listening and following my system, the urges that arose were not necessarily the "natural" choices that my organism might have made, prior to all its conditioning, and the zig-zag reinforcement that I've negotiated with life thus far. Indeed, if that had been my true inner nature expressing itself, I think I would have crashed a long time ago. However, I've found that the longer I practice following, rather than leading, the more that my system learns to be self-balancing. Freed of my micro-managing, my desires actually lead me in directions I didn't expect, like facing my fears and my pain, and choosing adventure and growth over comfort. IME, the organism itself has all the tools it needs to wake up into maturity; it was just confused and contorted, because it has been under my (i.e. my ego's) control, thus far. I don't think that following desire is necessarily egotistical. I think that is an error of puritanical myth and of two awkward interpretations into English. After all: "when thirsty, drink; when hungry, eat." The desire to love others is the fuel behind compassion; the desire to be clear and integral is part of waking up. Desire is the only motivator that leads us; fear, duty, and shoulds just chase us. IME, the problem with desire is when it is aimed at covering up pain. Only pain that is faced and embraced will lead to healing. If I keep turning away from, or covering up suffering, then I never heal, and I become addicted to the pleasures that keep my pain at bay. IME, the more I'm willing to face and accept suffering, the less I need pleasure, in order to keep myself balanced. And "ego" is not specifically about self-indulgence, but about mistaking my model of the world for the world itself. This includes all the "shoulds" and "oughts" that I have learned (including those about surrendering desire). Living according to an idea of how I'm supposed to be, is pure ego. It's a separation from what is. If I live by what is, that is not only "what events arise", but also "what arises within me". If I accept the outside world, but continue not to accept the inside world, then I remain in separation. I need to stop judging everything, including myself. So I doubt my beliefs, but accept who I am. And note that "who I am" is not something that can or should be expressed in words, because that's just bringing it back into the realm of ego. Instead, just accept what arises within me, including awkward emotions, fantasies, thoughts, memories. Don't necessarily be controlled by it (because I am still in transition stage), but don't judge it as wrong, or turn away from it. Our earliest programming in life is to "be a good boy/girl". So, when we cultivate, it's very tempting to keep rewarding that concept of what it means to be "good", including being a good meditator or a good Buddhist. But that was obedience that was being taught, not freedom. To be free, I need to surrender what I think is "good" and "bad", and be willing to be empty before experience, to be taught by my life, and by my body.

I don't know what's happening with you, of course. But when stuff like that happens to me, I turn the new sensation into a fun meditation. I play with how it feels, how it wants me to move it. Pulsing, clenching, wriggling, stretching, dancing fingers? I listen for echoes elsewhere in my body, since one open area can sometimes call others into activation. When odd phenomena show up like that, I don't bother trying to figure out what they mean (it's a great opportunity for creating superstition). Rather, I meet them with my full fascination, and enjoy them as long as I can.

One of the dangers of following forms is that the form is supposed to describe the optimum stance, not always the necessary one. But it often gets translated as: if you're not doing this specific stance, then you're doing it wrong. Whereas, the stance that (I think) one should start at, is the one that makes sense for your body, right now. Once you find some comfort, then there's no reason you can't ease your way toward the optimum stance. But respect your body, over the rules that arose from the movement of someone else, who has likely been dead for centuries. Forcing a stance on a body that's not yet ready to cooperate, is putting the outer over the inner, form over function, appearance over ease. Outward-in is all ego. That is all exactly opposite from a path of growth, IME. The form is there to serve the organism, not the other way around.

Good topic, Everything. One key thing, I think, is that if I'm not living an authentic life (i.e. if I'm living according to how I think I'm supposed to be), then there's a very good chance that what I'm trying to do will not match up with how I'm internally motivated. For example, if I have the soul of an artist, but go to law school to please my parents, there's a good chance that I'm going to run into a wall, at some point. Willpower is great, but actually loving what I'm doing, makes the effort seem minimal, and the suffering seem worthwhile. IME, the more I'm willing to listen to my own system (my heart, my body, my appetites), and allow it to set the pace, the more my motivation and my life are in sync. Rather than follow a "respectable" path, I try to listen to what does actually drive me, and see how I can build my life around that. What actually drives me, BTW, was often a surprise to me, when I started listening.

Fung Yu-Lan, in his first appendix of the Chuang-Tzu, writes the following: I think a slight disservice was done by Hoff's "The Tao of Pooh", which over-sensationalized Chuang-Tzu's treatment of Confucius. In my reading of Chuang-Tzu, most of the time Confucius seems to be presented as the wise man of the story, who is willing to humble himself, whereas Hoff uses him as a pedantic foil to Lao Tzu.

Excellent share, 3bob, thanks!

Hi Barb, I know what you're talking about. I also found this to be true. Both my money situation and career surged forward, when I stopped worrying about them, and just joyfully tended to my path. However, for whatever reason, things have shifted. Maybe I became complacent, or started taking it for granted. Maybe the economy has changed too much. Or maybe I just needed to learn a new lesson. I don't know. What the book I'm reading has done for me so far, is to stir up my resistance to even thinking about money. That resistance is a clear signal that there is stuff for me to let go of. In particular, I'm seeing my tendency to "tune out" from money issues, to turn away. If nothing else, I am sure it is important and worthwhile, surrendering those habits. Also, thank you to everyone for your great suggestions and shares. I have bookmarked http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/, and am very impressed with what I've read on it, thus far.

That's my unpacked version of "I don't know".

Hi Steve, I think that when people talk about "reality", they're rarely talking about the actual world (even though they think they are); they're only talking about their models of the world. If I say "get real", I mean: get with my version of reality. Reality (as I hear people use the word) is utterly personal, and shared by no two people. It exists only in mind, as you say. Which raises the question: is there even an actual world, something beyond the subjective reality? The only answer that makes sense to me is: it sure seems like it, but I can't say for sure. Since there is absolutely no way that I can be sure that I am not, say, a brain in a vat, being fed experiences, or that I am perhaps part of a simulation or deep in a dream; therefore I must always beg ignorant as to what cause has generated my experience of reality. I know that when I'm high or depressed or angry or horny or self-conscious or preoccupied, the world changes. Things look different; space feels different; pain, events, and people are received differently. Which suggests that my state of mind has a lot to do with how my reality appears. What I think is within my capacity, is to witness how much I add my preconceptions and emotional weight to experience, and then progressively try to reduce the interference of my biases. IME, that alone makes my life a lot easier, more joyful, and more interesting. But I don't see how any experience, no matter how clear, no matter how profound, no matter how "of course", could ever be deduced to be "truth". There's never an objective yardstick of Truth to compare any experience to.

I agree with this. Animals don't have "beliefs" in the same way we do, as dualistic language-based concepts. But they sure do have emotions. So emotions must be primary (although I'm sure there's all kinds of cross-talk between the two). For humans, I think which ideas stick (which beliefs take root) is very much based upon emotional tendencies. Someone can tell you that you're worthwhile, but if you don't feel the same way, then it won't get in.

Great reminder! Dance, play, acting out in public: these have been, for me, awesome areas to practice being authentic, and to grow. Every time I go turn a bulldozer or set of stairs into a dance floor, I surrender not only the self-consciousness, but also the ideas of what the equipment is made for, or even what dance is supposed to be. I just listen to the music, take my time, pay lots of attention to what I'm doing, and play.

Not at all dumb. Good paying attention! Often, those things which are "painfully obvious when high" need IME to be seen when altered, in order to have them become obvious, the rest of the time, too. These limitations (how little I have yet lived, seen, experienced, should claim to be an authority on) were a bit painful to first experience, but so liberating, too! Humility allows me to grow, which is so much sweeter than pretending I know what I do not.

An easy example: a mirage. The experience is certainly no illusion, because the mirage is "real" (i.e. the person next to you will have a similar experience, etc.). But the conclusion that is drawn: "there is water there"; that is the illusion.

I think that saying "there are no extremes" is essentially the same thing as saying "Nothing is certain; everything is probabilistic."

Whether I think the universe is wrong or I think I'm wrong, I'm still saying "this is not how it's supposed to be". But that's just comparing what is to a mental model, and actually making the model, more important than what's real. "I'm what's wrong" is just a judgment, that has within it, no path out of wrongness. "I have not yet learned how to successfully navigate this terrain" is an honest assessment that actually suggests a solution: practice in the terrain.

I don't choose; just get moving and see where my system calls me.

Definitely. Metaphors are the pointing fingers.

Very true. I think a great deal of religious superstition occurs, because the worshipers take the metaphors too literally, and forget their "transitory" nature.

I get it. I've mentioned that I've been watching a bunch of historical documentaries lately: the Holocaust, Hiroshima, the fire bombing of Germany, etc. It is heavy stuff and painful to bear, afterwards. But I also recognize that I had previously been avoiding these subjects, and hence choosing ignorance about not only what happened, but how people believe and choose awful things. How else will I learn about the worst of me, prior to actually being in the situation that draws it out? I applaud your willingness to suffer a bit, in order to gain that perspective.

Great post and personal sharing, Aaron! This reminds me: a friend of mine told me recently about a language in which they don't say "I am angry", but rather say: "anger is near me". What a different perspective that phrasing makes!