Get Rid Of Those Stories

[Ulises]

GET RID OF THOSE STORIES

"Your scientists and physicists are wrong. Your religions are misguided. Your new-age pundits are almost completely deluded. Your gurus, psychics and intuitives are openly full of self-inventing blather. And all of them want you to swallow and propagate their models — with good reason: they are directly interested in profiting from your participation in and activation of their myths. If you ignore them, they will perish. If you attend them, your capacity to experience and shape the flow of your own awareness and intelligence will be directly co-opted.

So if you want to become intimate with reality, get rid of those stories, FIRST. All of them. Particularly the ones you’ve grown most fond of — and definitely those you feel you must defend. After you’ve been outside the cage they comprise, you will be able to return and decide for yourself if any of them had any value, and what it was. Until then?

Set them down."

 

‎"The aspect of yourself you call ‘my mind’ is not your brain. It is a womb. And it is made to be penetrated not by human stories — but by the transentient flow of your own sources. And when this happens?

 

Your mind becomes pregnant, and you become… savant...."

http://www.organelle.org/organelle/skyBook/skyBook%28p%29.html

Edited April 1, 2011 by Ulises

[DalTheJigsaw123]

This was wonderful!

Thank you for sharing!

[Everything]

[thelerner]

I think getting rid of the stories is near the end of the process. Begin with some skepticism, learn from all angles, fall in love with a story, even to the point of being obsessive, finally let it go.

[Marblehead]

Well, I do still listen to the scientists, all forms, but I remain a skeptic. I rely on my own experiences a lot.

[devoid]

DON'T LISTEN TO ANYBODY!

 

 

 

(except me!)

 

 

 

[Marblehead]

DON'T LISTEN TO ANYBODY!

 

(except me!)

 

 

Hehehe. Yeah, I'll keep listening to you.

[Otis]

GET RID OF THOSE STORIES

"Your scientists and physicists are wrong. Your religions are misguided. Your new-age pundits are almost completely deluded. Your gurus, psychics and intuitives are openly full of self-inventing blather. And all of them want you to swallow and propagate their models — with good reason: they are directly interested in profiting from your participation in and activation of their myths. If you ignore them, they will perish. If you attend them, your capacity to experience and shape the flow of your own awareness and intelligence will be directly co-opted.

So if you want to become intimate with reality, get rid of those stories, FIRST. All of them. Particularly the ones you’ve grown most fond of — and definitely those you feel you must defend. After you’ve been outside the cage they comprise, you will be able to return and decide for yourself if any of them had any value, and what it was. Until then?

Set them down."

Beautiful quote, Ulises.

 

My question is: how do we set them down? When I choose to do so, I can push them away from me for a few seconds, maybe, but as soon as my attention wanders, the stories come back.

 

The only answer I have found is not to worry about the stories, but instead pay more attention to what's going on right now (including my tendency to form and believe stories). And when the stories do come up, have a sense of humor about them, let them never be more than "the best approximation I yet have".

 

On other threads, those of us who have a lot of respect for science, have been defending it. Not because science is, or necessarily reflects, the Truth, but because non-scientific story is so friggin' random and astonishingly unconnected to reality.

 

So yes, I respect (and vaguely agree with) the quote's suggestion to put story down. But I do not yet recognize within myself the ability to do so, and still live my life. So instead, I seek to make myself less and less dependent on story, and make sure that I am drawing my stories (at least the ones about the "actual" world) from reliable sources. Bit by bit, I hope to take your advice, and surrender all stories that stand between me and what's here, right now.

Edited April 1, 2011 by Otis

[Aaron]

Hello folks,

 

I think the irony here is that what's being expressed here is a story. So my question is, are we to put down all stories, except for this one or are we to put down this story too? If we put down this story, doesn't that mean that we are to dismiss it just like all the others? If we do that, then we must revert back to the way we were before we read this story and hence, we'll just be where we were.

 

Perhaps a better statement would be, don't take anything at face value. Examine what you are told and determine for yourself whether or not it is worth investigating.

 

Aaron

Edited April 2, 2011 by Twinner

[aridus]

Hello folks,

 

I think the irony here is that what's being expressed here is a story. So my question is, are we to put down all stories, except for this one or are we to put down this story too? If we put down this story, doesn't that mean that we are to dismiss it just like all the others? If we do that, then we must revert back to the way we were before we read this story and hence, we'll just be where we were.

 

Perhaps a better statement would be, don't take anything at face value. Examine what you are told and determine for yourself whether or not it is worth investigating.

 

Aaron

 

Also, I think, empty yourself a bit. I don't mean make yourself devoid of all sense, no, there's too far for everything I believe.

 

What I mean is, just as with being able to find 'wrong' in anything, one can also find 'truth' in anything, if they have too much agenda. People often secretly find ways to reaffirm what they already believe.

[sean]

My question is: how do we set them down? When I choose to do so, I can push them away from me for a few seconds, maybe, but as soon as my attention wanders, the stories come back.

tiny moments of clarity, repeated often, become continuous.

 

sean

[manitou]

I would go a step further and say to stop believing the stories we tell us about ourselves. Our inner dialogue. To stop swimming in the ego satisfaction of what we do for a living, how many initials we have after our names. I was a cop for 15 years, this is a MF'er of a perceived identity to drop. And it can still pop up at a moment's notice when I'm not looking.

 

Our perceived greatness. Our perceived smartness. Our ego. Our advice. Our pride. Our arrogance. These too all come out of stories we tell ourselves and believe.

 

Be here now, and live in the moment. This is all we have.

[Ulises]

[doc benway]

Hello folks,

 

I think the irony here is that what's being expressed here is a story. So my question is, are we to put down all stories, except for this one or are we to put down this story too? If we put down this story, doesn't that mean that we are to dismiss it just like all the others? If we do that, then we must revert back to the way we were before we read this story and hence, we'll just be where we were.

 

Perhaps a better statement would be, don't take anything at face value. Examine what you are told and determine for yourself whether or not it is worth investigating.

 

Aaron

I think that the story telling you to drop stories is different. It is also telling you to drop itself as well as the others.

It is asking us to experience rather than believe. When we accept a story without the direct experience, that is belief.

When we have direct, personal experience of something, that is knowledge.

I can accept that the OP's story is not a story but a suggestion that stories be dropped to make room for experience.

Edited April 6, 2011 by steve f

[doc benway]

I would go a step further and say to stop believing the stories we tell us about ourselves. Our inner dialogue. To stop swimming in the ego satisfaction of what we do for a living, how many initials we have after our names. I was a cop for 15 years, this is a MF'er of a perceived identity to drop. And it can still pop up at a moment's notice when I'm not looking.

 

Our perceived greatness. Our perceived smartness. Our ego. Our advice. Our pride. Our arrogance. These too all come out of stories we tell ourselves and believe.

 

Be here now, and live in the moment. This is all we have.

Excellent point and the stories we tell ourselves are very tough to drop.

First we have to become aware of them. So many exist at so many levels.

And when we think we've rooted them out, there are more.

And more are always being manufactured.

The mind is such a subtle and devious thing.

And beautiful, let's not forget that as well.

[Aaron]

Excellent point and the stories we tell ourselves are very tough to drop.

First we have to become aware of them. So many exist at so many levels.

And when we think we've rooted them out, there are more.

And more are always being manufactured.

The mind is such a subtle and devious thing.

And beautiful, let's not forget that as well.

 

Hello Steve,

 

My comments weren't directed at Ulises, but also to the website link. After reading a good deal of the information found on the website, it seemed to me, that much like many other pseudo-religious organizations, that their intent, wasn't to encourage people to give up "stories", but rather to understand that their story was the right story.

 

Now that's fine and good, but to me it seems paradoxical to say, "give up stories" and then offer another story, one that really is a story as a solution. I think it's groups like these that prey on those people who have been disenfranchised by modern religions and ideologies in an attempt to gather up their own followers.

 

Again, if that's your thing, fine, but I think they're a bit dishonest in their approach and their ultimate goals.

 

Aaron

 

edit- The more I look at the site, the more it makes me uneasy. My first thought is, don't trust someone who isn't willing to identify themselves or claim their own beliefs, something the person at Organelle seems to be doing.

Edited April 8, 2011 by Twinner

[Ulises]

Hello Steve,

 

My comments weren't directed at Ulises, but also to the website link. After reading a good deal of the information found on the website, it seemed to me, that much like many other pseudo-religious organizations, that their intent, wasn't to encourage people to give up "stories", but rather to understand that their story was the right story.

 

Now that's fine and good, but to me it seems paradoxical to say, "give up stories" and then offer another story, one that really is a story as a solution. I think it's groups like these that prey on those people who have been disenfranchised by modern religions and ideologies in an attempt to gather up their own followers.

 

Again, if that's your thing, fine, but I think they're a bit dishonest in their approach and their ultimate goals.

 

Aaron

 

edit- The more I look at the site, the more it makes me uneasy. My first thought is, don't trust someone who isn't willing to identify themselves or claim their own beliefs, something the person at Organelle seems to be doing.

 

 

Interesting your reaction to the site...having read the site for a few years now, I have to say that the author doesn't promote any teaching/wisdom path in particular, all the contrary, he encourages a radical exploration, free of any "story"..

Suffice to say that I discovered this site - very sinchronistically - in the middle of a collapsing of stories that I held very dearly ( a deep cognitive release, so to speak). I remember the extraordinary feeling of bubbling excitement reading some paragraphs ( and I say "bubbling" metaphorically and literally: my gut was bubbling with a joyful, ecstatic "A-ha" energy while reading the site..

At the end of the day, it's not about the messenger, it's about the message of radical freedom that it's our birthright...

 

 

More and more people are getting it, spontaneously:

"Maps are needed by the individual to feel some sense of safety and control in a reality they inherently feel separate from. And I am coming to see that without the individual, maps are not required. Life then becomes spontaneous living. Certainly I am not talking about geographical maps where you are trying to get from point A to point B or directions about how to put together a model plane. I am talking about maps that explain life. And perhaps it is the non-linear aspect to life that is causing so many of our maps to fall apart. For no map can ever represent that which is un-mappable. (...)

 

It's a funny notion to think that all these systems of religions and spiritual paths are predicated on the search to see through eyes of childhood. Taking communion, being circumcised, meditating, religious text, prayer, fasting, going to places of worship and on and on are seeking what little infants see. It is a great absurdity. What is rather simple has been made thoroughly complex. And wars have been fought and lives lost over that which an infant sees. (...)

 

We are born with no sense of self being boundlessness. Sense of self apparently arises as a means of survival. In primitive cultures, the sense of self is not the focus. Rather it is a tool, so their identification remains with their boundlessness. Because there is a degree of separation, myths and stories do arise in these cultures to explain the universe. That is the function of feeling separate. Explanation is needed when feeling separate as a means of feeling secure in a world where natural forces and other variables can pose a threat to existence.

 

The sense of self is a program that apparently arises in boundlessness. The complexity of the program is increased by learning. What appears to have happened in our modern world is that we have come to believe we are the program and misplaced our sense of boundlessness. The program no longer is just a tool, it has become who we think we are..."

Nancy Dolin

 

 

http://nonduality.org/2011/03/29/nonduality-street-interview-with-nancy-dolin/

Edited April 8, 2011 by Ulises

[Ulises]

UG did not, of course, use high-sounding words or expressions like 'superman' or even resort to traditional terms; instead, he used simple terms like 'creative energy', 'human flower', 'natural state' to describe his state of being. A few times, though, he did refer, however reluctantly, to traditional expressions such as Brahmasakshatkara, Nirvikalpa Samadhi, Turiya and so on, and also to the modern term 'mutant', meaning the one who has undergone biological mutation. However, the one thing he stressed -- even over-stressed at times -- was that the natural state, or nirvana, or enlightenment, or whatever term we want to use, is a pure and simple physical and physiological state of being, where, it is not the self or the mind, but a different kind of intelligence that is in operation. It is a state where the human animal has flowered into a human being, into a human flower. Perhaps such an individual is the end product of human evolution, if there is such a thing. In other words, if there is a purpose to evolution at all, then, it is to produce such human flowers. 'But this process of evolution,' UG says, 'is retarded or delayed because of the culture, because of our anxiety to shape man according to a pattern, a model, or an idea or belief.'

 

 

Every human being is different. As UG would put it, 'Each individual is unique, unparalleled; there is not another one like you in the whole universe. That is your natural state.' But we ignore that fact and try to put everybody in a common mould and create what we call the greatest common factor.

Our education, religion and culture are geared towards producing copies of acceptable models, and, in the process, destroying that unique, living quality in a child, in every human being, which is yearning to blossom and express itself. Otherwise, there would be more human flowers...

 

‘We imitate (sages) and that is not going to help,' says UG. ‘You doing good, being kind, giving up something, behaving in a certain way, are all attempts to imitate the lives of the sages. That is not going to help and that is not the way to consider the sages, whether the Buddha or Jesus or other sages. If they are there it is to enable you to understand that there is a possibility of being there, of that state of being. But what you are doing is to imitate their lives and to create this imitation all over the world. You create Buddhists and you create Christians and there is a conflict between the two. The belief is the one that separates you from others, from everything that is there. But it is all one. Life is one unitary movement.'

 

All existence is one; there is no two. Life is a unitary movement. That is the message of every sage, and if there is a mission to his or her life at all, it is to enable other individuals to surpass the animal in them and become human flowers. A sage is the new society, the new world, the change for which humanity has been yearning for over thousands of years, through its philosophies and religions, however flawed and erroneous these may be. It is possible, for every human being is a potential sage. 'You are unique,' says UG. 'You are far ahead of the Buddha, Jesus and all these religious teachers put together. But this uniqueness cannot express itself unless the limitations are destroyed'; unless 'you touch life at a point never touched before'.

 

"I am not saying that this is something that has not been said before. Several people have come into this state and they have expressed it in different ways. But what I am trying to point out is you must reject not only that but also what I am saying. It has to be your path. The essence is not different-how can it be different? It can't be, because the movement of life and its functions are exactly the same in everybody. But its expression is bound to be different, because it's your path and you come to a point where you reject your own path as well. This is a pathless one."

 

http://www.realitysandwich.com/introduction_u_g_krishnamurti

Edited April 13, 2011 by Ulises

[Otis]

...you must reject not only that but also what I am saying. It has to be your path. The essence is not different-how can it be different? It can't be, because the movement of life and its functions are exactly the same in everybody. But its expression is bound to be different, because it's your path and you come to a point where you reject your own path as well. This is a pathless one."

Another great share, Ulises, thanks!

 

Who else's path does it make sense for me to follow, than my own? So why spend all my time trying to learn how to follow a traditional (someone else's) path, when my own is inside of me, all the time, begging for me to pay attention? Once I have a taste of my own path, then tradition becomes useful, as a series of mirrors, to help find clarity along the way. But if I choose tradition over my own path, then I am just choosing to be programmed by new conditioning.

[Ulises]

[Dagon]

I think getting rid of the stories is near the end of the process. Begin with some skepticism, learn from all angles, fall in love with a story, even to the point of being obsessive, finally let it go.

 

I agree, many of your experiences will aid you to this point. Which these will be your tools to discern your fate.

 

It is the journey holds the treasures.

[Otis]

6.5 BILLION PATHS TO GOD

"I subscribe to Krishnamurti's principle... he said that 'we need four billion religions.' Now that number is up to 6.5 billion - a religious tradition for everyone on the planet, 6.5 billion paths to God." San Francisco Chronicle Rob Brezny 2008 interview

In fact, I think we do have 6.5 billion religions. I doubt any two people have exactly the same beliefs.

 

In the absence of outside groups to compare with, humans become enamored with the differences between members of the same group. Splits must happen, because different interpretations are inevitable. So every tradition looks like a branching tree, with continual re-interpretations.

 

So we might as well stop pretending to be purists, when there is no such real thing as pure tradition, to begin with. We might as well own up to having our own interpretations and beliefs, because it's true, anyway. We might as well call it following our own path, because that is what we already do, even when we pretend otherwise. We might as well own up to the responsibility of finding our own way, because that responsibility is ours, no matter what.

[Aaron]

Interesting your reaction to the site...having read the site for a few years now, I have to say that the author doesn't promote any teaching/wisdom path in particular, all the contrary, he encourages a radical exploration, free of any "story"..

Suffice to say that I discovered this site - very sinchronistically - in the middle of a collapsing of stories that I held very dearly ( a deep cognitive release, so to speak). I remember the extraordinary feeling of bubbling excitement reading some paragraphs ( and I say "bubbling" metaphorically and literally: my gut was bubbling with a joyful, ecstatic "A-ha" energy while reading the site..

At the end of the day, it's not about the messenger, it's about the message of radical freedom that it's our birthright...

 

 

More and more people are getting it, spontaneously:

"Maps are needed by the individual to feel some sense of safety and control in a reality they inherently feel separate from. And I am coming to see that without the individual, maps are not required. Life then becomes spontaneous living. Certainly I am not talking about geographical maps where you are trying to get from point A to point B or directions about how to put together a model plane. I am talking about maps that explain life. And perhaps it is the non-linear aspect to life that is causing so many of our maps to fall apart. For no map can ever represent that which is un-mappable. (...)

 

It's a funny notion to think that all these systems of religions and spiritual paths are predicated on the search to see through eyes of childhood. Taking communion, being circumcised, meditating, religious text, prayer, fasting, going to places of worship and on and on are seeking what little infants see. It is a great absurdity. What is rather simple has been made thoroughly complex. And wars have been fought and lives lost over that which an infant sees. (...)

 

We are born with no sense of self being boundlessness. Sense of self apparently arises as a means of survival. In primitive cultures, the sense of self is not the focus. Rather it is a tool, so their identification remains with their boundlessness. Because there is a degree of separation, myths and stories do arise in these cultures to explain the universe. That is the function of feeling separate. Explanation is needed when feeling separate as a means of feeling secure in a world where natural forces and other variables can pose a threat to existence.

 

The sense of self is a program that apparently arises in boundlessness. The complexity of the program is increased by learning. What appears to have happened in our modern world is that we have come to believe we are the program and misplaced our sense of boundlessness. The program no longer is just a tool, it has become who we think we are..."

Nancy Dolin

 

 

http://nonduality.org/2011/03/29/nonduality-street-interview-with-nancy-dolin/

 

Hello Ulises,

 

I was just stating an observation. Most cults, when they indoctrinate others first try to foster a sense of community, making the potential inductee feel closer to the group, then try to break down the person's previous belief systems, so that they are more open to new beliefs, and finally indoctrinate the person into a new belief system that is "true" and correct. As a layman I could see where this whole idea could easily be used to facilitate a cult environment, not unlike certain other religions I wont mention because of there propensity for lawsuits.

 

Telling people to give up everything they know is like telling someone that everything they know is wrong and honestly how can one assume that. Rational skepticism is understandable, but denying everything as false isn't. Also the quote that you posted here is very much in line with Zen and Buddhist thinking.

 

With that said, if it works for you, great, but I still think that it's important to examine stories, especially if those stories have a great deal of history surrounding them. In my own experience if I hadn't unintentionally been exposed to Hinduism (a religion I had many preconceptions about) without really knowing that I was being exposed, I would never had achieved the degree of awareness that I enjoy today. Perhaps it's not enlightened awareness, but nonetheless it's better than where I was at before.

 

Aaron

[Birch]

Interesting stuff. I'd argue many reasons I'm looking for a map on occasion:

 

- I said already, sometimes I need permission, my bad

- because the terrain as explained to me from the get go has changed (as it is wont to do anyway)

- and/or the explanations themselves are no longer applicable - whether that be from the very second they were fed to me or minutes or years later.

 

IMO the more this stuff goes, the more obvious and natural it gets.

[Dagon]

This is why I don't really like mantra's. Repeating something over and over to yourself, whether true or not, will become true to you. Truth isn't something that needs to be force fed, imo. I see how they could be beneficial to some in some instances, but it isn't always so.

Edited April 22, 2011 by Dagon