suffering tends towards enlightenment

[3bob]

a relatable, multi-dimensional parable or pointing to is understandable on multiple levels...and the one that composes such does not insist on only one level or the deepest interpretation that they may have of same for others

Edited August 23, 2015 by 3bob

[Karl]

Intuition is intuition, flow is flow feelings are feelings and definitions are definitions. You know it or you don't. Spotless is gentle with you and you fight cause you want to have right but better would be to simply say "thank you for explanation". And dont repeat on and on what you have read about all this self stuff, everyone here see that these words you use are not yours... Instead of trolling you could soften your shell and learn something from people here. better find out why do you want to have right all the time, cause someone has taught you this. this investigation will bring you fruits. Now you will say that you don't fight

 

Calling it 'trolling' won't push me off course one bit. Coming up with obscure definitions won't wash either. Learning requires clear definitions and the ability to communicate concepts. If you are either unable to communicate the concept or are being deliberately obscure, then I hold that your argument is invalid and irrelevant. Chucking bucket full of ad hominem's just looks like padding and deflection.

[Karl]

a relatable, multi-dimensional parable or pointing to is understandable on multiple levels...and the one that composes such does not insist on only one level or the deepest interpretation that they may have of same for others

 

You have a weird way of saying things but you make my point admirably.

[Karl]

actually the "law of seven" and the "law of three" and the enneagram are profound

 

This is contained in the quadrivium so I'm aquatinted with the geometric, musical, cosmological and number concepts. Fascinating stuff.

[Kubba]

 

Calling it 'trolling' won't push me off course one bit. Coming up with obscure definitions won't wash either. Learning requires clear definitions and the ability to communicate concepts. If you are either unable to communicate the concept or are being deliberately obscure, then I hold that your argument is invalid and irrelevant. Chucking bucket full of ad hominem's just looks like padding and deflection.

Well, then am sorry

[Karl]

Well, then am sorry

 

What for ?

 

I'm only looking for clarity. A poor argument is just that and nothing more. If we produce coherent arguments then we can all learn something, but shrouding things in mystic jumbo jumbo and obscurity benefits neither proposer or listener. A clear argument-even if I do not agree with it-stands on its own and can be examined and tested. An unclear argument is just wasted words-a soup of nothing, forming nothing.

 

 

 

 

[3bob]

then again Karl a mind must be flexible if meanings are to be found (or not found) in seemingly strange teachings  - which may or may not be written-off as mumbo-jumbo based depending on the teacher, thus we come back to the simple analogy that a 2d format and view can not nail down a 3d format and view

[Karl]

then again Karl a mind must be flexible if meanings are to be found (or not found) in seemingly strange teachings  - which may or may not be written-off as mumbo-jumbo based depending on the teacher, thus we come back to the simple analogy that a 2d format and view can not nail down a 3d format and view

 

Flexible isn't malleablity. I've been a recipient and a proponent of such twaddle in the past. Conmen have used the arts of deception throughout history to gain prestige, power and wealth. Writing volumes of such slick unconscious messaging does not infer these writers are any less of that nature than any other confidence trickster. Sometimes philosophers gain an authoritative stamp that they shouldn't have, and their work has been ingested by generations as factual reality. I always remember that philosophers are just men, they have no special knowledge and so, every word of their arguments should be carefully and systematically examined for validity.

[Kubba]

What for ? I'm only looking for clarity. A poor argument is just that and nothing more. If we produce coherent arguments then we can all learn something, but shrouding things in mystic jumbo jumbo and obscurity benefits neither proposer or listener. A clear argument-even if I do not agree with it-stands on its own and can be examined and tested. An unclear argument is just wasted words-a soup of nothing, forming nothing.

Intuition is hard thing to put into any definition. It's like explaining what is salmons instinct - how they know where to travel in order to reproduce? Do they ask themselves how do we know why we go there? No, they just go.

Definitions are masculine tendencies to pack everything into words and structures. Women on the other hand are more connected and often time don't have such problem, they just act and are angry anytime when a man tries to put her into box by asking her a question - whats wrong? - wanting her to explain herself to him. She does not see any problem yet the man wants the structure cause he lacks of sensitivity.

 

For example when I do my Qui Gong or Yoga exercises I sense the flow of energy within the body so according to this I addapt my movements. In simple words - I just move. I don't know which sequence of movements I will perform in next minute cause the flow will change geometrically like these forms that one can see in the kaleidoscope. So one can say that I do it according to my intuition, noone taught me this.

Another person, seing this can ask me why I do it? If this person would be a psychiatrist, he or she would immediately make notes and ask me questions. If I would answer honestly, they would assume that I "see something", and preceiving anything else than thoughts and emotions in our culture is a sighn of mental illnes.

 

Same about you - how did you choose to came to this forum?

 

There is also a kind of flow of thoughts, needs and feelings/ cravings, muscles contractions and body language, that are leading peoples life, this stuff is generally called mind, as you said somewhere - that does not have external existence on its own, but yet it dirrects peoples life. Within the mind boundries there is just train of thoughts, sensations and feelings coming one after another in sequences called patterns that are very mechanic. So one would say that I choosed this or that, but the choice was made by this sequences. So the "me" operates only within boundries of these patterns.

 

A lot of people here practice in order to transcedent this "mind" which is just energy in separations due tu internal conflicts which produce different forces that are as if drowing us in different, usually opposite directions. These kind of practices can lead someone to actually transcending this thing, called "mind", which simply means that these opposite forces will wanish. You don't think anymore the way you were doing it so far, so you wake up in the morning, eat something, go for a walk, and there is no thought or craving weather to do this or that. You oppened the refrigerator and picked food that you needed, according to the actuall situation of your body. You just did this stuff withouth thinking, yet you knew what is right thing to do, and which food would serve you. How did you know all this if there was no thoughts trying to find out which decission would be better, and you did not have any structurised plan?

Now the "me" is operating beyond boundries of the mind that I've described above. Now you move according to your intuition and sense of flow, but you don't ask yourself weather it is intuition or flow, you use these words when someone ask you and you are aware that these words are limited to mental constructs.

You also can preceive within yourself repercusions Of past patterns popping from time to time.

When you think of flow, the simple example is river. You say river - you have an image of a river, but when you step into it then you can feel pressure of moving mass of water. The flow of human existence and bodily energy can be compared to it - when you are in this "water" then you somehow feel this "pressure" but it is not a feeling limited to the way we experience emotions. So when someone is limited to the mind it is like standing in dried river - one simply can't feel it, cause there is no water there, so one identifies feelings, cravings, thoughts patterns with what one actually have choosen or wants. But the sense of intuition is also mixed with it, yet very suppressed by conditioning so one can't yet recognise what is what.

Hope I explained it.

Edited August 23, 2015 by Kubba

[Karl]

Intuition is hard thing to put into any definition. It's like explaining what is salmons instinct - how they know where to travel in order to reproduce? Do they ask themselves how do we know why we go there? No, they just go.

Definitions are masculine tendencies to pack everything into words and structures. Women on the other hand are more connected and often time don't have such problem, they just act and are angry anytime when a man tries to put her into box by asking her a question - whats wrong? - wanting her to explain herself to him. She does not see any problem yet the man wants the structure cause he lacks of sensitivity.

For example when I do my Qui Gong or Yoga exercises I sense the flow of energy within the body so according to this I addapt my movements. In simple words - I just move. I don't know which sequence of movements I will perform in next minute cause the flow will change geometrically like these forms that one can see in the kaleidoscope. So one can say that I do it according to my intuition, noone taught me this.

Another person, seing this can ask me why I do it? If this person would be a psychiatrist, he or she would immediately make notes and ask me questions. If I would answer honestly, they would assume that I "see something", and preceiving anything else than thoughts and emotions in our culture is a sighn of mental illnes.

Same about you - how did you choose to came to this forum?

There is also a kind of flow of thoughts, needs and feelings/ cravings, that are leading peoples life, this stuff is generally called mind, as you said somewhere - that does not have external existence on its own, but yet it dirrects peoples life. Within the mind boundries there is just train of thoughts, sensations and feelings coming one after another in sequences called patterns that are very mechanic. So one would say that I choosed this or that, but the choice was made by this sequences. So the "me" operates only within boundries of these patterns.

A lot of people here practice in order to transcedent this "mind" which is just energy in separations due tu internal conflicts which produce different forces that are as if drowing us in different, usually opposite directions. These kind of practices can lead someone to actually transcending this thing, called "mind", which simply means that these opposite forces will wanish. You don't think anymore the way you were doing it so far, so you wake up in the morning, eat something, go for a walk, and there is no thought or craving weather to do this or that. You oppened the refrigerator and picked food that you needed, according to the actuall situation of your body. You just did this stuff withouth thinking, yet you knew what is right thing to do, and which food would serve you. How did you know all this if there was no thoughts trying to find out which decission would be better, and you did not have any structurised plan?

Now the "me" is operating beyond boundries of the mind that I've described above. Now you move according to your intuition and sense of flow, but you don't ask yourself weather it is intuition or flow, you use these words when someone ask you and you are aware that these words are limited to mental constructs.

You also can preceive within yourself repercusions Of past patterns popping from time to time.

When you think of flow, the simple example is river. You say river - you have an image of a river, but when you step into it then you can feel pressure of moving mass of water. The flow of human existence and bodily energy can be compared to it - when you are in this "water" then you somehow feel this "pressure" but it is not a feeling limited to the way we experience emotions. So when someone is limited to the mind it is like standing in dried river - one simply can't feel it, cause there is no water there, so one identifies feelings, cravings, thoughts patterns with what one actually have choosen or wants. But the sense of intuition is also mixed with it, yet very suppressed by conditioning so one can't yet recognise what is what.

Hope I explained it.

 

It seems you wish to think like as a Salmon. You are trying to create an automatic consciousness in which animal instinct and emotions are the proving ground for you. That is unfortunate. I have no idea why that should be appealing but that's not my business. It just seems a waste.

 

[3bob]

you have a strange way of proving my point Karl...

[Karl]

you have a strange way of proving my point Karl...

 

Well I'm a strange sort of person so I don't doubt it :-)

[Kubba]

It seems you wish to think like as a Salmon. You are trying to create an automatic consciousness in which animal instinct and emotions are the proving ground for you. That is unfortunate. I have no idea why that should be appealing but that's not my business. It just seems a waste.

Not at all - it is exactly the opposite. Subconscious is automatic consciousness, where you are jut as a doll moved by tendencies and conditioning of your past and the way you were rised by parents. And indeed the animalistic mind is involved there as just survival instinct and fear of death/ nonexistence. Its like being owned.

 

In the model that I have described above instinctive consciousnes is also transcended and included. Also, as someone explained to me parts of our being that we carried throug our evolution since RNA was developed, that belong to other animal forms are transcended too, even human being within you is transended and unified. You might even witness all these regression into depths of our being. you're not longer moved by this forces unconsciously, and finally you do what you really want, withouth being conflicted, nor being afraid of death and live. No longer trapped in this realm of existence and the body yet you enjoy all thats here as existence of which you are not separated.

This is the meaning of this business

Edited August 23, 2015 by Kubba

[Karl]

Not at all - it is exactly the opposite. Subconscious is automatic consciousness, where you are jut as a doll moved by tendencies and conditioning of your past and the way you were rised by parents. And indeed the animalistic mind is involved there as just survival instinct and fear of death/ nonexistence. Its like being owned.

In the model that I have described above instinctive consciousnes is also transcended and included. Also, as someone explained to me parts of our being that we carried throug our evolution since RNA was developed, that belong to other animal forms are transcended too, even human being within you is transended and unified. You might even witness all these regression into depths of our being. you're not longer moved by this forces unconsciously, and finally you do what you really want, withouth being conflicted, nor being afraid of death and live. No longer trapped in this realm of existence and the body yet you enjoy all thats here as existence of which you are not separated.

This is the meaning of this business

 

We don't have a pure, unthinking survival instinct. It means we can be self destructive. An animal doesn't intentional commit suicide.

You have reasoning wether you like it or not you have individual identity and self responsibility for all actions and the emotion that goes with it. You are aware of your actions. Animals perceive directly, they do not apply reason, they don't regret past actions or fear the future.

 

Is it your intention to dispense with the ability to reason and therefore avoid the responsibility of action and the accompanying emotions ?

 

 

[Kubba]

We don't have a pure, unthinking survival instinct. It means we can be self destructive. An animal doesn't intentional commit suicide. You have reasoning wether you like it or not you have individual identity and self responsibility for all actions and the emotion that goes with it. You are aware of your actions. Animals perceive directly, they do not apply reason, they don't regret past actions or fear the future. Is it your intention to dispense with the ability to reason and therefore avoid the responsibility of action and the accompanying emotions ?

Animals like dogs have traumas of past events, and it prints into their behaviour patterns. Dogs that were treated bad way are more afraid than those who were not.

 

Suicide is due to the mind and false personality where the "me" suffers. You suicide cause youre afraid of life/ existence.... People generally suffer of wanting to became someone, wanting to experience sensory desires and wanting to destroy themselves/ negating themselves.. It triggers hormonal responces and influences nervous system.

In this model you dont suffer - doest mean you dont experience bodily pain, but the psyhological is gone.

 

"Being responsible for your emotions" is a new age slogan. Since you are a human you experience emotions and empathy as you experience metabolic processes. When youre open you just allow different emotions to happend, can't controll them alrhought people try to controll them by contracting different muscle regions

 

Am not negating individuality or responsibility. I would say that youre more responsible for yourself and others in this model than so far. Emotions in this state of consciousness are experienced more normal way you don't feed their existence through extensive thinking, cause you dont have a storry triggered by emotions...

Edited August 23, 2015 by Kubba

[Karl]

Animals like dogs have traumas of past events, and it prints into their behaviour patterns. Dogs that were treated bad way are more afraid than those who were not.

Suicide is due to the mind and false personality where the "me" suffers. You suicide cause youre afraid of life/ existence.... People generally suffer of wanting to became someone, wanting to experience sensory desires and wanting to destroy themselves/ negating themselves.. It triggers hormonal responces and influences nervous system.

In this model you dont suffer - doest mean you dont experience bodily pain, but the psyhological is gone.

"Being responsible for your emotions" is a new age slogan. Since you are a human you experience emotions and empathy as you experience metabolic processes.

Am not negating individuality or responsibility. I would say that youre more responsible for yourself and others in this model than so far. Emotions in this state of consciousness are experienced more normal way you don't feed their existence through extensive thinking, cause you dont have a storry triggered by emotions...

 

Dogs can also be trained, as can many animals. However they react more or less predictably, they don't reason over the trauma or training and modify that behaviour. They can be taught to modify it, but they don't reason, it's we, as humans that reason that a traumatised dog can be rescued.

 

I think there is a strong similarity between suicide and wanting to move into a life of automatic action in which reason and responsibility are abdicated for an easier option.

 

Everyone must decide the best course for themselves. If that option is appealing then this is what will be attempted.

 

I don't get 'being responsible for your emotions' ? That's another abdication. It's the complete responsibility for the individual and independently identified self that I'm talking about and not just the emotions arising from the actions.

 

The negative emotions that you seem to be talking about are the result of internal conflict/contradiction. These are the result of being fed/or accepting faulty concepts. These concepts don't accord with reality but they are accepted anyway and processed by the subconscious just the same. They are like a virus and the emotions are the warning mechanism.

 

Being 'responsible' for these emotions is really to say that they must be accepted and dealt with, but to ignore the underlying contradiction. In other words 'accept the program' and don't squeal. Accept the abuse and don't make a fuss. Trying to find a way to negate the emotions is like taking a drug to lessen the pain. The problem is that condition often makes it impossible to discover how to accept reality and delete the virus causing the problem.

[Kubba]

Dogs can also be trained, as can many animals. However they react more or less predictably, they don't reason over the trauma or training and modify that behaviour. They can be taught to modify it, but they don't reason, it's we, as humans that reason that a traumatised dog can be rescued. I think there is a strong similarity between suicide and wanting to move into a life of automatic action in which reason and responsibility are abdicated for an easier option.Everyone must decide the best course for themselves. If that option is appealing then this is what will be attempted.I don't get 'being responsible for your emotions' ? That's another abdication. It's the complete responsibility for the individual and independently identified self that I'm talking about and not just the emotions arising from the actions.The negative emotions that you seem to be talking about are the result of internal conflict/contradiction. These are the result of being fed/or accepting faulty concepts. These concepts don't accord with reality but they are accepted anyway and processed by the subconscious just the same. They are like a virus and the emotions are the warning mechanism. Being 'responsible' for these emotions is really to say that they must be accepted and dealt with, but to ignore the underlying contradiction. In other words 'accept the program' and don't squeal. Accept the abuse and don't make a fuss. Trying to find a way to negate the emotions is like taking a drug to lessen the pain. The problem is that condition often makes it impossible to discover how to accept reality and delete the virus causing the problem.

do you say that I promote abdication and automatic actions? I did not say it - you interprete it this way, I don't really know why..

There is inteligence when one steps behind the conditioned mind. It's not that you don't know anything and walk like a robot. There is just intelligent knowing. It is something impossible to reach from the mind perspective. Pure understanding withought thoughts. How one can test it withought actually being there? Untill that moment it is just academic speculation. Word against word, like discussing how an apple tastes

 

All I talk about is transcending and unifying these parts of our existence that are in separation, starting from being devided between subconscious and concious. So being totally conscious of who one really is. Being full

 

The way you talk about responsibility looks like another split - between the one who act and the one who is responsible

Edited August 23, 2015 by Kubba

[Karl]

do you say that I promote abdication and automatic actions? I did not say it - you interprete it this way, I don't really know why..

All I talk about is unifying these parts of our existence that are in separation, starting from being devided between subconscious and concious. So being totally conscious of who one really is.

The way you talk about responsibility looks like another split - between the one who act and the one who is responsible

 

'Being divided between subconscious and full consciousness awareness' what makes you think this is so ? Your emotions prompt the subconscious to bring the underlying conflict into full conscious awareness. Concepts are stored in the subconscious. It's like a disc drive on a PC. Full conscious awareness can only handle a certain amount of direct input so, in general, everything else is handled without choking it, that leaves it free for discovering new experiences and integrating concepts.

 

Not sure where you get the idea about the split in acting and responsibility. I certainly don't see any split.

[Brian]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120322131504.htm

http://animalwise.org/2011/10/07/analogical-reasoning-in-animals

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8267558

http://m.pnas.org/content/104/35/13861.full

 

Etc., etc.

 

Curiously, but not surprisingly, as we get better at looking, we see more clearly...

[thelerner]

It seems you wish to think like as a Salmon. You are trying to create an automatic consciousness in which animal instinct and emotions are the proving ground for you. That is unfortunate. I have no idea why that should be appealing but that's not my business. It just seems a waste.

There is a state that is unthinking but not mindless.  Even for say, athletes, to get maximum performance they often need to shut off there minds, be in the moment.  For high level problem solving it can be important to stop thinking at a problem and letting it percolate in an empty mind.  I do this with the Jumbles and Sudoku all the time.  

 

There is a power within the quiet mind that the weighing thinking mindset lacks.  If you can access it And it works for you  then you've tapped into the power of Zen and will do quite well in life. You've thrown away crutches and your accessing your minds full power.   That being said if you keep a quiet mind and your life and decisions suck, then its time to go back to the older slower more primitive operating and think your way through things.

Edited August 23, 2015 by thelerner

[Karl]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120322131504.htm

http://animalwise.org/2011/10/07/analogical-reasoning-in-animals

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8267558

http://m.pnas.org/content/104/35/13861.full

Etc., etc.

Curiously, but not surprisingly, as we get better at looking, we see more clearly...

 

Logic is useless without grammar to convey complex concepts. Animals can be as logical as you like, but it is only necessary for the integration of concepts, first grammar then logic and finally rhetoric.

[Kubba]

'Being divided between subconscious and full consciousness awareness' what makes you think this is so ? Your emotions prompt the subconscious to bring the underlying conflict into full conscious awareness. Concepts are stored in the subconscious. It's like a disc drive on a PC. Full conscious awareness can only handle a certain amount of direct input so, in general, everything else is handled without choking it, that leaves it free for discovering new experiences and integrating concepts..

Good that you pointed it. What you talk about is an average human functioning which function as you described. Conscious, and subconscious. Things from the subconscious bubbeling into awarness which can process limited amount of informations. When you dont think you seem not existing at all

 

What I meant by being totally conscious is transcending this what was so far in subconsciousness. in this state you don't have subconsciousness anymore as it was so far. Disc is not your operating system anymore, emptied, no conflicts. You still have conscious awarness but you dont identify with it, you are able to think but no more operating from conditioning. You Experience from the heart region, not From the head

Edited August 23, 2015 by Kubba

[Brian]

Logic is useless without grammar to convey complex concepts. Animals can be as logical as you like, but it is only necessary for the integration of concepts, first grammar then logic and finally rhetoric.

Your infatuation with your newfound God makes you blind, Karl.

 

I asked you once how you would "prove" to someone born blind that vision was not imaginary.

 

Now, let me ask a different question -- if your friend woke up one morning convinced not only that his sense of vision was imaginary but that yours is, too, could you convince him he was mistaken? Would you try?

[Karl]

There is a state that is unthinking but not mindless.  Even for say, athletes, to get maximum performance they often need to shut off there minds, be in the moment.  For high level problem solving it can be important to stop thinking at a problem and letting it percolate in an empty mind.  I do this with the Jumbles and Sudoku all the time.  

 

There is a power within the quiet mind that the weighing thinking mindset lacks.  If you can access it And it works for you  then you've tapped into the power of Zen and will do quite well in life. You've thrown away crutches and your accessing your minds full power.   That being said if you keep a quiet mind and your life and decisions suck, then its time to go back to the older slower more primitive operating and think your way through things.

 

Absolutely for problem solving and skill activities a mind full of turmoil is pretty limiting.

[Karl]

Your infatuation with your newfound God makes you blind, Karl.

I asked you once how you would "prove" to someone born blind that vision was not imaginary.

Now, let me ask a different question -- if your friend woke up one morning convinced not only that his sense of vision was imaginary but that yours is, too, could you convince him he was mistaken? Would you try?

 

The operative word that gives you away is the word you use 'convincing'.

 

I am not in the habit of 'convincing' anyone. I leave that to the word weavers. Would I argue the point if my friend was willing to discuss his premise ? Most certainly. Would I continue the discussion if we could not settle on clear definitions in the order of the Trivium method ? No.

 

My infatuation as you call it, it not a tool of persuasion, it's a method of learning to learn. It's a tool for my own comprehension and safety. Like an anti virus tool. If the grammar is incorrect, the definitions not defined, or their are specific fallacies present within the grammar it gets rejected. This allows the flexibility to have ideas re presented in a clearer form.

 

If you offer me rotten meat, or a food that I can't identify should I just eat it ? It is exactly the same. I'm clunky at it that's all. It takes time to poke at the layers and see the fallacies. The more I do it, the easier it is to see the errors in the grammar as presented. Far from making me blind, it stops me blindly accepting rubbish.