Spiritual Prostitution

[Nick_A]

I've been thinking about bito's thread about "Getting Beyond My Way", and thought to introduce a concern of mine on a separate thread. This will not be a wonderful post. The purpose is not to make anyone including myself feel good but to raise a concern of mine because of the mixed joy I receive from discussing esoteric ideas nd how they relate to man's purpose and the search for "meaning".

On the one hand it is necessary for those who do understand it to communicate this understanding to others. But, as with all things, the tendency te degrade the purity of concepts begins to enter simply because it makes a person feel better. Just turn things around a bit and it will be such a better read. But, in reality, this feel good approach must lead to the loss of meaning if the concepts being "fixed" have a conscious origin.

This idea exists in all the major traditions which is why the real meat of a teaching is hidden and kept alive through an oral tradition. In Christianity, it is brought out in the following passage for example:

Matthew 18


The Greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven

1At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?"
2He called a little child and had him stand among them. 3And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
5"And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me. 6But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
7"Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come! 8If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. 9And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.

The New Testament can be read on many levels. Each level introduces new meaning and, at the same time, turns away those who are not ready to become more open.

The word "child" here is not limited to a chronological age. Its psychological meaning is concerned with the esoteric level of development of a person. A child in this sense means someone who has felt the value of something higher while, at the same time, becoming more aware of their helplessness in front of it.

I have great respect for those able to communicate the reality of the truth of human existence. This is real art IMO. I wonder what would have become of me if I had only been exposed to the usual.

Yet on the one hand I know and have respect for the power of genuine communication but I must admit to the attraction of the "beauty" of certain ideas that have been so awe inspiring for me.

The question becomes if the beauty of communication and the desire to impress is worth sacrificing the stark reality, the nakedness of the truth.

I must confess that I do have an attraction for this beautiful prostitution. The point is if I would ever have an affect on someone younger than myself in their understanding that would deny him the affects of reality for the beauty of a conception.

Without going into this now, this biblical passage suggests that giving way to the temptation of spiritual prostitution is damaging not only to others but to oneself. I imagine the answer is to only communicate what you are able to live but just the thought of that arouses the most severe ego based protests.

In the humanitarian sense the same holds true. People talk about mutual respect and people getting along but it is just words. This is why nothing changes. Yet there is this minority that actually feel what they say. An internet friend of mine I never met in person has a profound natural understanding of the human condition and is so frank about it that she would appear cold to some, unable to say the "wonderful" things. Last year she told me that she was going to Iraq to witness the human condition. When she returned in a bad state we talked frequently about why we don't understand. Political organizations wanted to only use her but no one respected her motives. She even lost her job since some thought her to be another Jane Fonda. Yet, surprisingly so, this person, totally unskilled as a public speaker, managed to touch some people as the great speakers never could. The reason is because, in contrst to her, they didn't feel what they were saying. They only wished to say the "right" things. Here is an account from a reporter who interviewed her.

SOMETIMES IT'S BETTER
NOT TO HEAL
Journal of Healing – June 18, 2003
By Mary Koch

Three months in Baghdad, witnessing war while fasting for peace, took a toll on Bettejo Passalaqua. Weak and sick, she returned to the U.S. a few weeks ago.

Bettejo went to Iraq earlier this year as a peace activist. Before that, she'd served for six years as a pastoral assistant for the Catholic church on the Colville Indian Reservation. Now she's staying with friends in Okanogan

Resting and being with friends has been healing, she says, but she's not seeking full recovery.

"I'm not sure how healed I am at this point," she told me. "I wouldn't want to become so healed that I lose my my feeling for it. We carry these things with us for a reason."

Bettejo and I were having this conversation in a quiet backyard on a perfect June morning. A native of Florida, she set her lawn chair in the hot sun. A native of Minnesota, I chose a nearby chair under the shade of a large tree. She sipped what she called her "morning caffeine." I drank ice water.

Individuals have these small differences. But there was a yawning, gaping difference between Bettejo and me. For me, Iraq was a worrisome but distant problem. For her, Iraq is at the core of every waking moment.

"When I came back, maybe after ten days I walked outside and it was a beautiful day. I felt good for just a moment. It was maybe 15 seconds before I said, 'What's happening in Baghdad?' and broke down again."

A 42-year-old grandmother of six, Bettejo was not a stranger to hardship when she went to Iraq.

"I've worked in the South Bronx and I worked here on the reservation and encountered a tremendous amount of suffering among the people," she said. "But not so concentrated -- like going into a hospital with children dying. Then after the bombing, children paralyzed, no arms or legs."

Before the war began, Bettejo had participated in a vigil at the border of Kuwait. She'd traveled with the Iraq Peace Team across the desert, witnessing the devastation still visible from the Gulf War. Not as visible but omnipresent was the depleted uranium pollution of soil and air that remains from ammunition used by U.S. forces. Medical authorities in Iraq have been charting a dramatic increase in cancer caused, they say, by depleted uranium.

Bettejo worked in a Baghdad hospital, providing arts and crafts for children in a cancer ward.

"It was a diversion," she says, "this stupid white woman coming in with paper and crayons."

"Do you think it made a difference?" I ask.

She shrugs and answers, "Other people said it did."

That's the deepest wound from Iraq: "There's a feeling of devastation, a sense of defeat, of helplessness," Bettejo says.

How do you overcome helplessness?

"Maybe the healing I've experienced thus far comes from my feeling to do service, to be of service," she answers.

Bettejo doesn't know yet what that service will be. "The best I can do is to get people to ask questions . . . to ask, 'Is this right? Can we do better?'"

The day after we talked, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer carried a front page story about the problems hospitals in Iraq are facing, especially the problems of treating children with cancer.

Ordinarily I would have scanned the story, then moved on. This time, after reading carefully, slowly, I filed the story in my heart. I'd been with someone who'd been with those children. And now those far-away problems don't seem so far away.

(Mary Koch writes about health care issues and her experiences as a family caregiver. Her husband, retired newspaper publisher John E. Andrist, was severely disabled by a stroke in 1993. They welcome your letters at P.O. Box 3346, Omak WA 98841 or e-mail: marykoch@marykoch.com)

I believe this is the same problem I have in communicating ideas. Ideas themselves can only communicate the value in which they exist in ourselves. Of course, only a few will respect this. It is much easier and better for reasons of self importance to just be as wonderful as possible and make people feel good. Did Bettejo impreess this reporter by giving a speech or being eloquent. No. Her understanding is in her being. She is able to appreciate the value of looking at what we normally turn from since something in her realizes that such a witnessing is necessary for our species as a whole in order to get beyond our imagination. No glitz or beautiful dreams; just the naked experience that as humanitarian as man can be, there is another side that is equally cruel and callous.

So, I agree in the value of "getting beyond my way" but in what way is the sharing through communication really profitable? What is the foundation on which it can be built? Is there any benefit to building on lies? Could I ever be guilty of what is said from the above biblical passage "6But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. How to acquire the sincerity necessary for the ideas to live during the process of communication?

[bito]

She is able to appreciate the value of looking at what we normally turn from since something in her realizes that such a witnessing is necessary for our species as a whole in order to get beyond our imagination. No glitz or beautiful dreams; just the naked experience that as humanitarian as man can be, there is another side that is equally cruel and callous.

Why should the naked human experience exclude imagination? I do not see where compassion and dreaming are mutually exclusive ways of being.

So, I agree in the value of "getting beyond my way" but in what way is the sharing through communication really profitable? What is the foundation on which it can be built? Is there any benefit to building on lies? Could I ever be guilty of what is said from the above biblical passage
QUOTE
"But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.

As a Christian, this is for you to answer, as we must all answer according to our own 'path'.

Your post has me thinking though about the value of internet discussion forums vis a vis spiritual/philosophical connections. Perhaps it is not a good venue, given the opportunity for misunderstanding and miscommunication. Food for thought for me... :unsure:

[Nick_A]

Hello Bito

Why should the naked human experience exclude imagination? I do not see where compassion and dreaming are mutually exclusive ways of being.

It shouldn't be excluded if imagination is seen for what it is doing; taking the place of a necessary function.

What good is compassion if it is coming from a dream and directed at a dream. It is just an emotion being mechanically aroused in someone that isn't serving the purpose intended for such a quality of emotion. Is it really compassion that someone buys a hungry person a meal? This is just human consideration to me. Compassion has a deeper meaning for me and touches upon the human condition itself. Actually, I believe that acting compassionate can sometimes interfere with true compassion.

Buddha taught awakening. Christ taught awakening. For me the human condition that can arouse true compassion has to do with being sensitive to something beyond our daily lives and those of others and furthering this possibility even though those around you may think you've gone batty.

As a Christian, this is for you to answer, as we must all answer according to our own 'path'.

First I must say that I do not consider myself a Christian. I must agree with Father Sylvan when he said: "I like Kierkegard's distinction between Christiandom and Christianity, the former meaning what man has made of the latter. But "Christendom" has wrong implications in an era where political rule throughout the Western world is so disassociated from religion. Practically speaking, of course, one doesn't really need this distinction between Christendom and Christianity, between broken Christianity and real Christianity. We only know broken Christianity, so why worry about a word for the real thing?"
So I must answer from the path I understand as the essence of esoteric Christianity.

Your post has me thinking though about the value of internet discussion forums vis a vis spiritual/philosophical connections. Perhaps it is not a good venue, given the opportunity for misunderstanding and miscommunication. Food for thought for me...

Yes, this is my question also. The good side is that I have met some really special people such as Bettejo. The other side is that I witness the most brutal arguments that have no resolution and only serve to keep people's heads in the sand. The joys of this negativity only serves to deny the ability to see it for what it is.

Another concern of mine is that if I use sources for ideas without the necessary context, some people can draw premature negative associations since they can be a bit shocking in contrast to the modern feel good approach. So I must be wary for the sake of others. This Internet medium is truly a double edged sword.

Food for thought eh? We shall dine together. :)

[Corri]

Nick:

It shouldn't be excluded if imagination is seen for what it is doing; taking the place of a necessary function.

Imagination can be seen as a most necessary function... (wait, your definition is different than mine... yours is something about desire exceeding ability, right?) To me, this is an inability to physically carry out an imagined intent. In some realms of thought, even God has an inability to carry out an imagined intent.... not because he cannot, but because he will not, as it is contrary to His nature. In an example, can God make a rock so big that he cannot move it?

Your post has me thinking though about the value of internet discussion forums vis a vis spiritual/philosophical connections. Perhaps it is not a good venue, given the opportunity for misunderstanding and miscommunication. Food for thought for me..

Yes, this is my question also. The good side is that I have met some really special people such as Bettejo. The other side is that I witness the most brutal arguments that have no resolution and only serve to keep people's heads in the sand. The joys of this negativity only serves to deny the ability to see it for what it is.

Nonsense. YOU do not have an ability over anyone that they do not give you. Meaning, a person cannot make you feel bad (especially in a discuss forum) unless you allow it.

Another concern of mine is that if I use sources for ideas without the necessary context, some people can draw premature negative associations since they can be a bit shocking in contrast to the modern feel good approach. So I must be wary for the sake of others. This Internet medium is truly a double edged sword.

And who's problem is that? Why do you change your behavior.... Who You Are... for another? Who now is dreaming? (I'm not attacking, btw, only trying to give another angle of view).

Corri

[sahyo]

unless you allow it.

sunskying can allow or notallow skysunning?

...........:)

[Nick_A]

Corri

Imagination can be seen as a most necessary function... (wait, your definition is different than mine... yours is something about desire exceeding ability, right?) To me, this is an inability to physically carry out an imagined intent. In some realms of thought, even God has an inability to carry out an imagined intent.... not because he cannot, but because he will not, as it is contrary to His nature. In an example, can God make a rock so big that he cannot move it?

Yes, IMO imagination is the excess of desire over ability. In the physical sense, since our inability is so obvious when it occurs, it would be known as failure and to try and better ones efforts. However, in the psychological sense when verification is so difficult to either experience or express, this imagination is only successfully BSing yourself.

Yes, even God cannot do everything. God is constrained by his own laws of creation. As I've read it, he cannot beat the ace of spades with the deuce of spades. This is analogous to creation itself. To do so would mean changing the laws of creation which were found necessary at the beginning.

Nonsense. YOU do not have an ability over anyone that they do not give you. Meaning, a person cannot make you feel bad (especially in a discuss forum) unless you allow it.

Nonsense! hrmmmph. Why I've never been so insulted. Just kidding. :)

You give far too much credit for our ability to choose. We really do not know how gullible we are in the presence of someone that has transcended foolish fears and imagination. First of all, in the physical sense, rape is not consent but it is the expression of an unwanted ability over another.

Secondly, the field of advertising is dependent on our gullibility. Thirdly, it is not a matter of feeling good or bad. The whole purpose of esoteric thought is to allow one to experience that there is something beyond our normal feelings of good and bad. Politics and women can give me the emotional experience of good and bad. If I don't show it, representatives of both groupings just try harder. :) Esoteric thought allows me to feel. So the first consideration must be the aim of the discussion. I don't believe it is a good idea to mix aims.

And who's problem is that? Why do you change your behavior.... Who You Are... for another? Who now is dreaming? (I'm not attacking, btw, only trying to give another angle of view).

There is a danger in becoming more familiar with appreciating human purpose. You begin to become responsible. No, I have not reached that stage yet. If we are just living in a dream, what karmic responsibility can we really have? This is what is not understood about karma. Living in a dream and without any real will and controlled by desire, our responsibility is small. However, the more one begins to develop, obtain a degree of consciousness and inner unity, a certain quality of choice is possible and we become responsible for it. All the misunderstandings about magick (the conscious manipulation of the laws of resonance), and the aim of Christianity to allow humans to regain their humanity are as a result, I believe, from misunderstanding this idea of responsibility. So much harm has been done as a direct result of all such misunderstanding.

Just the understanding that you live in dreams and are not really yourself is a major step even if it is beyond your control. How many people have read Plato's Cave analogy. It is common KNOWLEDGE but how many UNDERSTAND it? How many really "see" their situation? What is the result of those that have begun to understand if they decide to prostitute it?

http://www.faithnet.org.uk/Philosophy/platocave.htm

[Corri]

Nick:

Asheera has an interesting point, and it was where I was going next anyway.

You give far too much credit for our ability to choose.

No, I do not. Feelings occur, or they do not occur. When they do, you either choose to let the emotion to run its course, with you as the feeler and observer of that emotion, or you choose to hang on to that emotion and let your mine use it to fuel analogous thoughts, which in turn refuel the emotion... hence, a cyclical, never-ending roller coaster of emotion/thought. But you can choose not to get on the roller coaster. A good number of people are not even aware that their emotions and thoughts are conducting such a dance... this is suffering.

We really do not know how gullible we are in the presence of someone that has transcended foolish fears and imagination. First of all, in the physical sense, rape is not consent but it is the expression of an unwanted ability over another.

The point was brought up in regard to discuss forums, so rape is not applicable here... and that gets into a whole other arena, anyway. As for not knowing how 'gullible we are,' no, I suppose you can never know the intent of another until the situation occurs, but why worry about it until it happens? You can't control the intent of someone else anyway... and you cannot control the gullibility of another, so I am not quite sure what it is you are pondering here.

Secondly, the field of advertising is dependent on our gullibility.

Yeah? So? Where is there a problem?

Thirdly, it is not a matter of feeling good or bad. The whole purpose of esoteric thought is to allow one to experience that there is something beyond our normal feelings of good and bad. Politics and women can give me the emotional experience of good and bad. If I don't show it, representatives of both groupings just try harder. Esoteric thought allows me to feel. So the first consideration must be the aim of the discussion. I don't believe it is a good idea to mix aims.

I'm not sure you can control it. Why not deal with what is, rather than contriving to 'beat the system,' which is just a projection anyway? If you discuss with awareness, what comes, comes, and you do what you do... I'm not sure where this prostitution enters into it... if it does, it does, you deal with it, or you do not... ????

Corri

[Nick_A]

Corri:

I'm sorry but I did not understand what Asheera meant. I hope she returns to elaborate.

No, I do not. Feelings occur, or they do not occur. When they do, you either choose to let the emotion to run its course, with you as the feeler and observer of that emotion, or you choose to hang on to that emotion and let your mine use it to fuel analogous thoughts, which in turn refuel the emotion... hence, a cyclical, never-ending roller coaster of emotion/thought. But you can choose not to get on the roller coaster. A good number of people are not even aware that their emotions and thoughts are conducting such a dance... this is suffering.

We react to desire. We find certain sequences of emotion/ thought/emotion/thought etc. more satisfying for one or a combination of reasons and strive for them. However, they are following the cycles of mechanical life normal for man on earth living in a dream. You say that you can "choose" not to get on the roller coaster but what is it that chooses?

The point was brought up in regard to discuss forums, so rape is not applicable here... and that gets into a whole other arena, anyway. As for not knowing how 'gullible we are,' no, I suppose you can never know the intent of another until the situation occurs, but why worry about it until it happens? You can't control the intent of someone else anyway... and you cannot control the gullibility of another, so I am not quite sure what it is you are pondering here.....

For you to write this suggests that you do not suspect its importance. If I used the same idea in say drug addiction, the why of it would be obvious. You would say that it is just not right to get people hooked on drugs because they think that that they have a choice. You must consider their welfare even though they think you a dogmatic idiot. Just because people are gullible and do not realize certain things should not make them fair game.

Yeah? So? Where is there a problem?

How to answer this? All of the bloodshed of man's history of destroying itself is only because of living in a dream and the gullibility that results. Yet somehow, as horrible as it is, it isn't considered a problem. This is just another reason why enough people must be on the earth at one time to serve as a counter influence. Our dreams are too real.

I'm not sure you can control it. Why not deal with what is, rather than contriving to 'beat the system,' which is just a projection anyway? If you discuss with awareness, what comes, comes, and you do what you do... I'm not sure where this prostitution enters into it... if it does, it does, you deal with it, or you do not... ????

You can only know if you are prostituting yourself through a genuine impartial examination of your own motives. This is the question. If a person values what esoteric thought can bring but not enough to counter the affects of the desire for achieving their imagined self importance, then they are prostituting their understanding. This is a deep personal consideration and it won't sell books.

[Corri]

Nick:

We react to desire.

If emotions are running the show, then this is correct. If there is an awareness of feelings, then desire is present in the body, but I do not have to act upon the emotion. The way you are saying this is, I shouldn't do anything that will make you angry because you cannot control yourself. Then everyone is a slave to everyone else's emotions.

We find certain sequences of emotion/ thought/emotion/thought etc. more satisfying for one or a combination of reasons and strive for them.

Pursuit of pleasure, avoidance of pain. If one is not a slave to either, then there is no striving or avoiding of either. What is, is. What you have described is suffering. This is the roller coaster.

However, they are following the cycles of mechanical life normal for man on earth living in a dream.

If you are living your life mechanically, then I can see how you would view it as so.

You say that you can "choose" not to get on the roller coaster but what is it that chooses?

No one. Understanding is, or it is not.

For you to write this suggests that you do not suspect its importance (RE: Gullibility). If I used the same idea in say drug addiction, the why of it would be obvious. You would say that it is just not right to get people hooked on drugs because they think that they have a choice.

They do have a choice. They can choose to take the drug, or they can choose not to. If they get hooked on the drug, become 'additcted,' then they can choose to be a slave to the addiction, or they can choose to beat the addiction.

You must consider their welfare even though they think you a dogmatic idiot. Just because people are gullible and do not realize certain things should not make them fair game.

Fair game for what? What is 'should?' It is projection and conjecture of something yet to occur. I am now morally responsible for the entire world because it might be gullible? Where, then, is free will?

How to answer this? All of the bloodshed of man's history of destroying itself is only because of living in a dream and the gullibility that results. Yet somehow, as horrible as it is, it isn't considered a problem. This is just another reason why enough people must be on the earth at one time to serve as a counter influence. Our dreams are too real.

This is such a blanket statement, it cannot be considered valid. Yes, I would say problems exist in the world, but it is because people choose to make problems.

This is just another reason why enough people must be on the earth at one time to serve as a counter influence. Our dreams are too real.

Soooo.... who's morals are we going to adopt to thrust upon the world? If everyone took responsibility for themselves, chose to do a little inner work, then it seems like this could work itself out. As it is, many people chose to stay in a dream world. That is their God-given right.

You can only know if you are prostituting yourself through a genuine impartial examination of your own motives.

Yes.

If a person values what esoteric thought can bring but not enough to counter the affects of the desire for achieving their imagined self importance, then they are prostituting their understanding. This is a deep personal consideration and it won't sell books.

Agreed. So what is the point? Many people do not value esoteric thought. Many people are not allowed to value esoteric thought. I'm not sure where you are going with this.

Corri

[Nick_A]

Hi Corrie

We are so far apart on this primarily because we are beginning from different premises. I am asserting our being is, as suggested by St. Paul, as that of the "Wretched Man". Because of this we are unable "to be" and thus "to do". All these ideas about having free will or the ability to choose as opposed to reacting from desire are purely fictional. You say "If you are living your life mechanically, then I can see how you would view it as so." Again, it is as though as we are that we had a choice in the matter.

"Soooo.... who's morals are we going to adopt to thrust upon the world? If everyone took responsibility for themselves, chose to do a little inner work, then it seems like this could work itself out. As it is, many people chose to stay in a dream world. That is their God-given right."

Morals are the results of a gradual mechanical compromise between conscious understanding and egotistic reaction. They just happen. It isn't as though some new morals could be invented. Since we are the way we are, life continues for our species as it is. We are just a reflection of our being.. There is no choice in this. What do morals have to do with anything?

This is why I believe those that are truly seeking, not for consolation, but for meaning itself, have to be able to find something beyond just misguided egotism and even the work of open charlatans. Heck, I know of charlatans on my path and I cannot see how they would wish to be so.

Before a person can prostitute themselves, they must have something that can be prostituted, some form of higher understanding. Technically, someone living in fantasy and trying to acquire a following isn't prostituting themselves since there is no understanding to begin with.

Jesus had the ability to prostitute himself. He could take something of great value in himself and change it into a lesser quality but of greater quantity. He could rule over the fools or assume his place in the hierarchy:

Matthew 4

8Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.

He chose quality over quantity and self importance.

The real meaning here is that it is the same in us. When we begin to understand, we have the possibility for prostituting ourselves. Is it worth it? It is a personal decision. But before the possibility can even present itself we have to begin IMO by seeing ourselves for what we are and building on such a foundation. I can see though that we see ourselves differently.

[bito]

Quoting Nick: IMO imagination is the excess of desire over ability. In the physical sense, since our inability is so obvious when it occurs, it would be known as failure and to try and better ones efforts. However, in the psychological sense when verification is so difficult to either experience or express, this imagination is only successfully BSing yourself.

Desire seems to be the key word here. When imagination is attached to desire (as in I need this to happen, either physically or psychologically) then our imaginings are bound to disappoint, as they are attached to our perceived future-happiness. Pure imagination is the flow of idea, form, color for no reason except to express it and/or share it. As you state in your sub-thread title - it’s all about motivation - in this case, if there is one, then imagination 'fails' us.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I was one who was once caught in spiritual imaginings. Without going into details, I learned much from this dark, dark, place - perhaps just how easily one can get caught and how long one can remain caught - hell, pure hell.

As for desire, I used to believe there was such a thing as pure desire. No longer. Desire is belief in separation of self from the object of self’s desire. Since this is the dream that requires our awakening, why hang onto that which perpetuates the dream?

[bito]

Quoting Nick: What good is compassion if it is coming from a dream and directed at a dream. It is just an emotion being mechanically aroused in someone that isn't serving the purpose intended for such a quality of emotion. Is it really compassion that someone buys a hungry person a meal? This is just human consideration to me. Compassion has a deeper meaning for me and touches upon the human condition itself. Actually, I believe that acting compassionate can sometimes interfere with true compassion.

If we are just living in a dream, what karmic responsibility can we really have? This is what is not understood about karma. Living in a dream and without any real will and controlled by desire, our responsibility is small.

If I am understanding your meaning, are you saying that if we see self as a dream, that we will no longer feel our humanity, ergo not act to relieve suffering? As if seeing our dreaming ‘destroys’ human-compassion-experience?

[bito]

Nick, would you explain what you mean by magick (manipulating the Laws of Resonance)?

[Nick_A]

Bito

As for desire, I used to believe there was such a thing as pure desire. No longer. Desire is belief in separation of self from the object of self’s desire. Since this is the dream that requires our awakening, why hang onto that which perpetuates the dream?

You are raising two important questions. I must admit having an interest in this conception of separation and would like discussing it but not for the sake of argument or putting you in an uncomfortable position. You imply that you've had some rough experiences and maybe its time for you just to lay back. Do you have a desire to further elaborate on this idea of separation.

If I am understanding your meaning, are you saying that if we see self as a dream, that we will no longer feel our humanity, ergo not act to relieve suffering? As if seeing our dreaming ‘destroys’ human-compassion-experience?

Another juicy topic. In Christianity this is the essence of the Crucifixion and Resurrection.

In the Bhagavad Gita, it is Arjuna's question at the end of chapter One where he refuses to kill his family.

http://www.asitis.com/1/index.html

This is rough stuff and I'll be gone most of Tuesday but maybe in the meantime read Chapter One and see if Arjuna's expression of compassion is similar to yours. Then we can compare notes on a very deep, meaningful, and potentially volatile topic.

[bito]

You are raising two important questions. I must admit having an interest in this conception of separation and would like discussing it but not for the sake of argument or putting you in an uncomfortable position. You imply that you've had some rough experiences and maybe its time for you just to lay back. Do you have a desire to further elaborate on this idea of separation.

I am not questioning you for the sake of argument or out of curiosity, but out of a sense that you yourself or someone you know (your reference to your friend who studied under Timothy Leary) had experienced what I have come to call ' boundary shattering' - without the proper understanding of what is happening. What I understand from your posts, is that you have a deep concern for those who experienced what I experienced - for some, perhaps the young (I am middle-aged ) there might not be a 'return' (transformation, integration).

I noticed you did not answer my question on magick. I sense this comes from the same concern, that you perceive that you might be opening a pandora's box that cannot be closed. Be rest assured; such is not the case. I asked, only for the sake of understanding that we are referring to the same 'thing' - spiritual alchemy, occult practices, paranormal experiences.

Although I am well aware of such consciousness 'experiences', I give them no spiritual weight whatsoever. To me, these things are spiritual drama and have nothing to do with enlightenment. My own spiritual imaginings (no techniques 'employed') were consciousness drama - distractions from looking at what I needed to be seeing. All spiritual 'experiences' (whether 'heavenly' or 'hellish') are just that - procrastination thought-drama.

By all means, go forward with your thoughts on separation, for now, I KNOW (personal inner experience) that there IS no separation.

This is rough stuff and I'll be gone most of Tuesday but maybe in the meantime read Chapter One and see if Arjuna's expression of compassion is similar to yours. Then we can compare notes on a very deep, meaningful, and potentially volatile topic.

I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that it is only rough stuff if you believe that this is so. I do not, so, no problem. If you desire :) to compare notes on the first chapter of The Gita re compassion, I would be happy to do so.

[Corri]

Nick:

I echo Bito, even if I didn't say it like he has.

Corri

[bito]

Corri:

I echo Bito, even if I didn't say it like he has.

Just for the record, bito is of the female persuasion :applause:

It was probably all those two-step dancing (and face-slapping ;)) emoticons I shared with asheera that confused you; perhaps Thomas could add a few bow-to-bow (as in hair bows, note to David S :)) tete-a-' tetters' to his emoticon repetoire.

[Corri]

Bito:

well, outSTANDING. Sorry, don't know why I assumed you were male. Must have been the kissy faces. :) Just for the record, I don't know that Asheera is male or female, either.

Corri

[sahyo]

nick


unless you allow it.

sunskying can allow or notallow skysunning?

...........:)



does perhaps seem allowing-notallowing happening? :)

[Nick_A]

Asheera

does perhaps seem allowing-notallowing happening?

I'm still not sure if I understand you. Are you saying that by openly allowing what is to happen, somehow the happening is more visible? I agree. The only trouble is that it requires the witness in you to appear to consciously observe it without identifying with it. I am contending here that if people just try to verify it within themselves it will become obvious that we can only sustain brief intervals of such self awareness in an open environment. In a quiet meditative space where conditions are perfect, than such a state can be held longer. But just try and sustain it when walking down the street.

Happening is happening. We can only truly profit from it through the effort of its conscious observation. I am not speaking of changing an unwanted behavior pattern into a desired behavior pattern. I am speaking of the conscious freedom from unconscious behavior patterns whether or not they seem desirable at the time. This is real "choice".

[Corri]

Nick:

The only trouble is that it requires the witness in you to appear to consciously observe it without identifying with it. I am contending here that if people just try to verify it within themselves it will become obvious that we can only sustain brief intervals of such self awareness in an open environment. In a quiet meditative space where conditions are perfect, than such a state can be held longer. But just try and sustain it when walking down the street.

I hate to sound flippant, but 'practice makes perfect,' you know? It is quite sustainable walking down the street, as a matter of fact, it is one of the most sustainable places of all for it to happen. I would argue that it is much more difficult to sustain this in a quiet place, than in the middle of the street. Or a grocery store.

Happening is happening. We can only truly profit from it through the effort of its conscious observation. I am not speaking of changing an unwanted behavior pattern into a desired behavior pattern. I am speaking of the conscious freedom from unconscious behavior patterns whether or not they seem desirable at the time. This is real "choice".

Again, I'd say, practice is and practice does.

Corri

[Nick_A]

Bito

Female persuasion eh! Now I just had to go and change my shirt. Just kidding. :)

As far as the Laws of Resonance, It is also known as the Law of Octaves and was used by Pythagoras and further goes back into ancient Egypt and before that, Everything in the universe is based on vibration and they do occur in seven steps with the eighth being both the beginning and end of the octave differing only in scale. The color chart is an octave. The seven tone musical scale is an octave. But the point is that for those that have become master of themselves, meaning not completely controlled by fear and imagination, Instead of the body just wasting its emotional force, it can be harnessed to influence the nature of the desired vibrations within the steps of the octaves. The seven chakras compose an octave and those that can understand and have required "presence" can influence these chakras.

You can get a bit of an idea here from this article as well as the linked "musical scales" If at some point you'd like to explore the why for example there are no straight lines in nature as a result of the law of octaves or resonance, we could do it.

http://home3.inet.tele.dk/hitower/harmonics.html

Normally fear and imagination would prevent a person from real "doing" or manipulating these inner vibrations. We lack emotional force. However, imagination substitutes itself for our power of attention. Attention is the tool of consciousness and that which allows for inner development. When imagination substitutes itself for active attention, the results are also imaginary.

I'll start a thread on the relationship of Christianity and Magick in the Religion board. It should be done since there is so much fighting about this over nothing and I'd like to post some direct excerpts that could at least present a side, for some reason, only a few are aware of. It is also serious stuff since by working in ways to change being itself and not just habits, we can either strengthen the real or unreal within ourselves. Not knowing what we are doing from not understanding our own nature can result in real harm. Our ignorance will not matter one bit. I must admit that I do care about this.

As far as Arjuna's question and view of "compassion, tell me if your concern would be the same as his expressed in this excerpt from Chapter One of the Gita:


There Arjuna could see, within the midst of the armies of both parties, his fathers, grandfathers, teachers, maternal uncles, brothers, sons, grandsons, friends, and also his father-in-law and well-wishers--all present there.
Chapter 1, Verse 27.
When the son of Kunti, Arjuna, saw all these different grades of friends and relatives, he became overwhelmed with compassion and spoke thus:

Chapter 1, Verse 28.
Arjuna said: My dear Krsna, seeing my friends and relatives present before me in such a fighting spirit, I feel the limbs of my body quivering and my mouth drying up.

Chapter 1, Verse 29.
My whole body is trembling, and my hair is standing on end. My bow Gandiva is slipping from my hand, and my skin is burning.

Chapter 1, Verse 30.
I am now unable to stand here any longer. I am forgetting myself, and my mind is reeling. I foresee only evil, O killer of the Kesi demon.

Chapter 1, Verse 31.
I do not see how any good can come from killing my own kinsmen in this battle, nor can I, my dear Krsna, desire any subsequent victory, kingdom, or happiness.

Chapter 1, Verse 32-35.
O Govinda, of what avail to us are kingdoms, happiness or even life itself when all those for whom we may desire them are now arrayed in this battlefield? O Madhusudana, when teachers, fathers, sons, grandfathers, maternal uncles, fathers-in-law, grandsons, brothers-in-law and all relatives are ready to give up their lives and properties and are standing before me, then why should I wish to kill them, though I may survive? O maintainer of all creatures, I am not prepared to fight with them even in exchange for the three worlds, let alone this earth.

Chapter 1, Verse 36.
Sin will overcome us if we slay such aggressors. Therefore it is not proper for us to kill the sons of Dhrtarastra and our friends. What should we gain, O Krsna, husband of the goddess of fortune, and how could we be happy by killing our own kinsmen?

Chapter 1, Verse 37-38.
O Janardana, although these men, overtaken by greed, see no fault in killing one's family or quarreling with friends, why should we, with knowledge of the sin, engage in these acts?

Chapter 1, Verse 39.
With the destruction of dynasty, the eternal family tradition is vanquished, and thus the rest of the family becomes involved in irreligious practice.

Chapter 1, Verse 40.
When irreligion is prominent in the family, O Krsna, the women of the family become corrupt, and from the degradation of womanhood, O descendant of Vrsni, comes unwanted progeny.

Chapter 1, Verse 41.
When there is increase of unwanted population, a hellish situation is created both for the family and for those who destroy the family tradition. In such corrupt families, there is no offering of oblations of food and water to the ancestors.

Chapter 1, Verse 42.
Due to the evil deeds of the destroyers of family tradition, all kinds of community projects and family welfare activities are devastated.

Chapter 1, Verse 43.
O Krsna, maintainer of the people, I have heard by disciplic succession that those who destroy family traditions dwell always in hell.

Chapter 1, Verse 44.
Alas, how strange it is that we are preparing to commit greatly sinful acts, driven by the desire to enjoy royal happiness.

Chapter 1, Verse 45.
I would consider it better for the sons of Dhrtarastra to kill me unarmed and unresisting, rather than to fight with them.

Chapter 1, Verse 46.
Sanjaya said: Arjuna, having thus spoken on the battlefield, cast aside his bow and arrows and sat down on the chariot, his mind overwhelmed with grief.

His comapssion made him powerless, becoming "overwhelmed with grief" How do you value this comapassion?

This is an open question and not just for bito. The Gita can provoke some serious meaningful thought

[sahyo]

Are you saying that by openly allowing what is to happen, somehow the happening is more visible?*



no....does seem as though an-entity which can allowing-notallowing?



The only trouble is that it requires the witness in you to appear to consciously observe it without identifying with it.



"observe it" not possible



In a quiet meditative space where conditions are perfect, than such a state can be held longer.



not possible meditative space and to hold as though a-thing-notthing



But just try and sustain it when walking down the street.



does seem a-entity to "try"



Happening is happening. We can only truly profit from it through the effort of its conscious observation.



"profit from it" as though entity-s to gain and a-thing-notthing to be gained?



I am not speaking of changing an unwanted behavior pattern into a desired behavior pattern.*



desiring "unwanted"?



I am speaking of the conscious freedom from unconscious behavior patterns whether or not they seem desirable at the time.This is real "choice".



cannot "choice"-notchoice

[Nick_A]

Corrie

I hate to sound flippant, but 'practice makes perfect,' you know? It is quite sustainable walking down the street, as a matter of fact, it is one of the most sustainable places of all for it to happen. I would argue that it is much more difficult to sustain this in a quiet place, than in the middle of the street. Or a grocery store.

Have you seriously tried it? Have you walked down the street looking at and listening to what is around you like the buildings? Have you seen through self awareness that corrie is looking at a building and something also is observing corrie looking at a building from a higher perspective? This is active self awareness. It is a higher level of consciousness than our normal dream state. You are aware of what your "self", (corrie) is doing.

[sahyo]

It is quite sustainable walking down the street, as a matter of fact, it is one of the most sustainable places of all for it to happen. I would argue that it is much more difficult to sustain this in a quiet place, than in the middle of the street. Or a grocery store.



as though a-where-"places" and a-someone-noone which can "sustain"?

[Nick_A]

Asheera

cannot "choice"-notchoice


Obviously we can never agree since I believe that all material manifestation is lawuful fractioning of a higher whole and for you, it seems that this fractioning is pure imagination.

Let me ask you if you differentiate between no-thing and nothing? "No-thing" is pure potential. Things can exist but now only exist as a potential. "Nothing" is the opposite. Since there is no potential, it is the ultimate death.

[sahyo]

looking at and listening to what is around you?



at? to? what? around?



a higher perspective?



higher-lower? perspective?

[bito]

I'll start a thread on the relationship of Christianity and Magick in the Religion board. It should be done since there is so much fighting about this over nothing and I'd like to post some direct excerpts that could at least present a side, for some reason, only a few are aware of. It is also serious stuff since by working in ways to change being itself and not just habits, we can either strengthen the real or unreal within ourselves. Not knowing what we are doing from not understanding our own nature can result in real harm. Our ignorance will not matter one bit. I must admit that I do care about this.

I can feel your caring, and I will follow your new thread with my mind and heart open, but I must reiterate what I said in my previous post. For me, magick is a distraction, a belief, and when no-separation is 'revealed', 'known', then all need for beliefs and techniques disappears. Awareness of no-separation is the ultimate healing - all grasping, comparing, analyzing, manipulating, explaining of one's human nature becomes, for lack of a better word, redundant. This no-separation awareness IS love - what more is to be done 'to/with' self when this love is 'known'?

His compassion made him powerless, becoming "overwhelmed with grief" How do you value this compassion?

This compassion proceeds transcendence of belief in duality. I value it highly, for it is the 'foundation' for awareness compassion. Without the fire of the pain of 'frozen acting out of attachment love', awareness compassion is impossible. This grief is the most intense grief one call feel. As if the universe is tearing one's heart apart....

[Corri]

Nick:

I hate to sound flippant, but 'practice makes perfect,' you know? It is quite sustainable walking down the street, as a matter of fact, it is one of the most sustainable places of all for it to happen. I would argue that it is much more difficult to sustain this in a quiet place, than in the middle of the street. Or a grocery store.

Have you seriously tried it? Have you walked down the street looking at and listening to what is around you like the buildings? Have you seen through self awareness that corrie is looking at a building and something also is observing corrie looking at a building from a higher perspective? This is active self awareness. It is a higher level of consciousness than our normal dream state. You are aware of what your "self", (corrie) is doing.

Of course I have done this, and now -- as important -- I am aware of when it is NOT happening. That is why I brought it up.

Corri

[Corri]

Nick:

Obviously we can never agree since I believe that all material manifestation is lawuful fractioning of a higher whole and for you, it seems that this fractioning is pure imagination.

Let me ask you if you differentiate between no-thing and nothing? "No-thing" is pure potential. Things can exist but now only exist as a potential. "Nothing" is the opposite. Since there is no potential, it is the ultimate death.

I do not agree with this, although I will say that Owen and I are discussing this very thing in another thread, so perhaps this is not the place to discuss it, as I don't really want to scatter your focus.

Corri

[bito]

Nick:

A question, and I will be using dualistic language in order to express my meaning:

Do you 'desire' that 'state' of not-losing no-separation awareness?

[Nick_A]

Corri

Of course I have done this, and now -- as important -- I am aware of when it is NOT happening. That is why I brought it up.

My experience has been different. At those rare intervals when I am in this state is when I am more aware of not having been in it.

Bito

Do you 'desire' that 'state' of not-losing no-separation awareness?

What is no-separation awareness? Does this refer to a quality of essence that lives within a higher reality, a type of soul? What is it that is either separated or not separated and from what?

For me, man is a plurality which means that my presence exists as a plurality without a central big "I". Instead I am composed primarily of the unconscious reactions of many small i's often in opposition to each other.. This is separation also and it is our inner separation. Do I desire this? Usually my imagination finds it acceptable and often agreeable since it does not understand what it has replaced.

When we are not-separated and exist more as a balanced inner unity becoming aware of itself, I believe is the first step towards human consciousness. No-separation can mean several things. However if inner unity is meant, then perhaps you are referring to the connection between the higher and lower I have been referring to. You may find the following excerpt taken from the notes of Jeanne de Salzmann enlightening as to my idea of separation and no-separation:

The Look from Above
By Jeanne de Salzmann

Objective thought is the look from Above. A free look, one that sees. Without this look placed upon me and which sees me, my life is the life of a blind man, who goes wherever impulse pushes him, without knowing why or how. Without this look placed upon me, I cannot know that I exist.

I have the power to lift myself above myself and see myself freely . . . to be seen. I have the power that my thought not be enslaved. For this, it must let go of all the associations that hold it captive, passive. It must cut the threads that bind it to all these images, to all these forms; it must free itself from the constant pull of emotion. It must feel the power it has to resist this pull, to see it while lifting itself steadily above it. In this movement thought becomes active; it becomes active in the act of purifying itself; and in this way it acquires an aim, a single aim: to think “I,” to realize “who I am,” to enter into this mystery.

Otherwise, thoughts are only objects, occasions for enslavement, snares in which real thought loses its power of objectivity and voluntary action. Troubled by words, images, forms that attract it, real thought loses its faculty of seeing. It loses the sense of I. Then I am nothing more than an organism adrift. A body deprived of intelligence. In the absence of this look, I am compelled to return to automatism and the law of accident.

This look at the same time situates me and frees me. And in my best moments of collectedness, I come to a state where I am given to know, to feel the goodness of this look which descends upon me, which embraces me. I feel myself under the radiance of this look.

Each time, the first step is the recognition of a lack. I feel the necessity for a thought. The necessity for a free thought turned toward myself, so that I might actually become conscious of my existence. An active thought whose sole aim, sole object is I . . . to find I again.

This is my struggle: a struggle against the passivity of my thought. A struggle without which nothing more conscious can find room, can be born. It is a struggle to leave the illusion of “I” in which I live, in order to come closer to a more real seeing. At the heart of this struggle an order is created in the chaos, a hierarchy: two levels are revealed, two worlds. As long as there is only one level, there can be no seeing. Recognition of another level—that is the awakening of Thought.

Without this effort, thought falls back into a sleep inhabited by words, images, set notions, approximate knowledge, dreams and various disturbances. It is the thought of a man without intelligence. It is terrible to realize suddenly that one has lived without one’s own independent thought. Without intelligence. Without anything that sees what is real. And so, without connection with the world Above.

It is in my essence that I reunite with that which sees. If I could stay there, I would be at the source of something unique, something stable, at the source of that which does not change.

[bito]

Nick

In love, I ask: Why do you quote others ?

It is in my essence that I reunite with that which sees. If I could stay there, I would be at the source of something unique, something stable, at the source of that which does not change.

What 'happens' if this I that rises above 'refuses' to leave?

[Nick_A]

I quote others because they have experienced what they are relating and it can be transmitted through their writings. they know what it means to separate the wheat from the tares within.

What 'happens' if this I that rises above 'refuses' to leave?

This is the whole point of considering spiritual prostitution. Most are ignorant when they venture into these things especially in a lot of modern philosophy. As I've previously said, you can either develop and strengthen the real or the unreal within your presence. This is why when people are really serious, they need an AUTHENTIC teacher and not your usual charlatan.. In order to do this, they must have some "inner taste" for truth otherwise people are just sheep.

Yes something can desire to "see" for you and take the place of true consciousness. This is not "I" but an artificial creation like a thought form. This is why no authentic teacher would ever get beyond the superficial with someone that has not first seen and experienced their own nullity. Then it is possible to build on a solid foundation. Of course there is great danger. Why do you think I buck the modern trends to my own disadvantage.

[Nick_A]

Bito

I believe I should add one more thing in regards this question of the "I" to avoid that develops from our egotism. When you read the letter from Jeanne de Salzmann I can see how you could associate it with an egotistic experience but actually we are the middle in relation to this look from above and what it sees. It is these modern teachings that suggest we are flying around the universe etc. that invite what we least expect. The true teaching, as I've said stresses the difficulty of really beginning to see our two natures. it is the reality that can shine the light of consciousness on illusion. I'll post one more letter by Jeanne de Salzmann. You will see how there is nothing cutsey pooh here. She doesn't flatter anyone that has a serious search. It was a letter written for people who already had experienced a bit but is now widely published. This is real compassion for the human condition expressed by an extremely strong woman but how many would see it as such and become more attracted to the feel good approach to justify oneself.

First Initiation
By Jeanne de Salzmann

You will see that in life you receive exactly what you give. Your life is the mirror of what you are. It is in your image. You are passive, blind, demanding. You take all, you accept all, without feeling any obligation. Your attitude toward the world and toward life is the attitude of one who has the right to make demands and to take, who has no need to pay or to earn. You believe that all things are your due, simply because it is you! All your blindness is there! None of this strikes your attention. And yet this is what keeps one world separate from another world.

You have no measure with which to measure yourselves. You live exclusively according to “I like” or “I don’t like,” you have no appreciation except for yourself. You recognize nothing above you—theoretically, logically, perhaps, but actually no. That is why you are demanding and continue to believe that everything is cheap and that you have enough in your pocket to buy everything you like. You recognize nothing above you, either outside yourself or inside. That is why, I repeat, you have no measure and live passively according to your likes and dislikes.

Yes, your “appreciation of yourself” blinds you. It is the biggest obstacle to a new life. You must be able to get over this obstacle, this threshold, before going further. This test divides men into two kinds: the “wheat” and the “chaff.” No matter how intelligent, how gifted, how brilliant a man may be, if he does not change his appreciation of himself, there will be no hope for an inner development, for a work toward self-knowledge, for a true becoming. He will remain such as he is all his life. The first requirement, the first condition, the first test for one who wishes to work on himself is to change his appreciation of himself. He must not imagine, not simply believe or think, but see things in himself which he has never seen before, see them actually. His appreciation will never be able to change as long as he sees nothing in himself. And in order to see, he must learn to see; this is the first initiation of man into self-knowledge.

First of all, he has to know what he must look at. When he knows, he must make efforts, keep his attention, look constantly with persistence. Only through maintaining his attention, and not forgetting to look, one day, perhaps, he will be able to see. If he sees one time he can see a second time, and if that continues he will no longer be able not to see. This is the state to be looked for, it is the aim of our observation; it is from there that the true wish will be born, the irresistible wish to become: from cold we shall become warm, vibrant; we shall be touched by our reality.

Today we have nothing but the illusion of what we are. We think too highly of ourselves. We do not respect ourselves. In order to respect myself, I have to recognize a part in myself which is above the other parts, and my attitude toward this part should bear witness to the respect that I have for it. In this way I shall respect myself. And my relations with others will be governed by the same respect.

You must understand that all the other measures—talent, education, culture, genius—are changing measures, measures of detail. The only exact measure, the only unchanging, objective real measure is the measure of inner vision. I see—I see myself—by this, you have measured. With one higher real part, you have measured another lower part, also real. And this measure, defining by itself the role of each part, will lead you to respect for yourself.

But you will see that it is not easy. And it is not cheap. You must pay dearly. For bad payers, lazy people, parasites, no hope. You must pay, pay a lot, and pay immediately, pay in advance. Pay with yourself. By sincere, conscientious, disinterested efforts. The more you are prepared to pay without economizing, without cheating, without any falsification, the more you will receive. And from that time on you will become acquainted with your nature. And you will see all the tricks, all the dishonesties that your nature resorts to in order to avoid paying hard cash. Because you have to pay with your ready-made theories, with your rooted convictions, with your prejudices, your conventions, your “I like” and “I don’t like.” Without bargaining, honestly, without pretending. Trying “sincerely” to see as you offer your counterfeit money.

Try for a moment to accept the idea that you are not what you believe yourself to be, that you overestimate yourself, in fact that you lie to yourself. That you always lie to yourself every moment, all day, all your life. That this lying rules you to such an extent that you cannot control it any more. You are the prey of lying. You lie, everywhere. Your relations with others—lies. The upbringing you give, the conventions—lies. Your teaching—lies. Your theories, your art—lies. Your social life, your family life—lies. And what you think of yourself—lies also.

But you never stop yourself in what you are doing or in what you are saying because you believe in yourself. You must stop inwardly and observe. Observe without preconceptions, accepting for a time this idea of lying. And if you observe in this way, paying with yourself, without self-pity, giving up all your supposed riches for a moment of reality, perhaps you will suddenly see something you have never before seen in yourself until this day. You will see that you are different from what you think you are. You will see that you are two. One who is not, but takes the place and plays the role of the other. And one who is, yet so weak, so insubstantial, that he no sooner appears than he immediately disappears. He cannot endure lies. The least lie makes him faint away. He does not struggle, he does not resist, he is defeated in advance. Learn to look until you have seen the difference between your two natures, until you have seen the lies, the deception in yourself. When you have seen your two natures, that day, in yourself, the truth will be born.

Not so easy to prostitute your own nullity when genuinely experienced. One can begin to respect their potential.

[bito]

Why do you think I buck the modern trends to my own disadvantage.

Are you then expressing the converse, that those who embrace the modern trends are at an advantage? A friendly poke...I believe I do understand your meaning...:)

Nick, I understand your concern with regards to authenticity in teachings, and agree that it is ideal for someone with a taste for 'inner truth' to locate just such a teacher, ideally physical person to physical person. The reality is that for most people, this is not possible, ergo, the visit to the bookstore...ergo, the surfing of the internet...the dining on the buffet of spiritual goodies begins...

I mean this from the bottom of my heart and the very depths of my being...go, spiritual warrior, go!

[Corri]

Nick:

My experience has been different. At those rare intervals when I am in this state is when I am more aware of not having been in it.

You know, a light bulb went off for me, and I think I now know of what you are speaking. Is it more along the lines of, 'are we kidding ourselves into thinking we are in this state, or are we really there?' Then living your life as though you are, when in fact, you are really not -- yet talking to others as if you are? I have to say, for me personally, when I am walking down a street, or in a crowded place is when these 'moments' occur. They come and stay for longer intervals, but "I" do not "chose" to make them happen. The only thing "I chose" is to quiet my mind, and in most instances, I don't even do that. And then what happens, I cannot explain (as I mentioned to you on some other thread once).

Awareness is very easy to determine now... meaning, understanding of what it is and what it is not. How I got to that point was through reading and discussion and a life-long 'feeling' that something was there, just out of reach... and one day, SLAM!! There it was. I went through that period of feeling as though I were going 'mad,' like Bito mentioned... and then I... guess... just 'accepted.' And the madness went away...

Talking about it to others is a whole other issue...

Is this what you are talking about?

Corri

[sahyo]

The only thing "I chose" is to quiet my mind



not possible

[sahyo]

Let me ask you if you differentiate between no-thing and nothing? "No-thing" is pure potential. Things can exist but now only exist as a potential. "Nothing" is the opposite. Since there is no potential, it is the ultimate death.



can "No-thing" "Nothing" without imagining as though "thing" happening?

[bito]

Nick

I just now noticed your second post to me - I must have sent mine minutes before you sent yours. I am going to give it a serious read and respond...in the meantime, my warrior cheer still stands :) .

[sahyo]

a serious read

hehehe

[bito]

a serious read

hehehe

No matter how you don't or won't explain it, hehehe is not a response from a compassionate heart.

[bito]

asheera

I apologize for my wording in my previous post, for I did not mean you do not have a compassionate heart; you do, for I have experienced it.

What I meant to say was that 'hehehe' was not a response from compassion.

Perhaps I'm way off base in reading your response as being one of sarcasm, but I felt the need to express to you what your words appeared to be saying/suggesting to me.

[Nick_A]

Corrie

You know, a light bulb went off for me, and I think I now know of what you are speaking. Is it more along the lines of, 'are we kidding ourselves into thinking we are in this state, or are we really there?' Then living your life as though you are, when in fact, you are really not -- yet talking to others as if you are? I have to say, for me personally, when I am walking down a street, or in a crowded place is when these 'moments' occur. They come and stay for longer intervals, but "I" do not "chose" to make them happen. The only thing "I chose" is to quiet my mind, and in most instances, I don't even do that. And then what happens, I cannot explain (as I mentioned to you on some other thread once).

I know what you mean and it has also been my experience. I've felt that all of a sudden I woke up. It happens this way because your ego doesn't understand it so it cannot get in the way. The danger is that after a while we become satisfied with the ego's "interpretation". People start to argue and debate and the experience is lost. We find it so hard to respect it enough to keep it pure. Our lower nature does not want it and fights against it by bringing it down to its level. Look how Buddha put it but how many understand it

I Am Awake

When the Buddha start to wander around India shortly after his enlightenment, he encountered several men who recognized him to be a very extraordinary being.

They asked him, "Are you a god?"

"No," he replied.

"Are you a reincarnation of god?"

"No," he replied.

"Are you a wizard, then?"

"No."

"Well, are you a man?"

"No."

"So what are you?" they asked, being very perplexed.

"I am awake."

Buddha means "The Awakened One". How to awaken is all he taught.

Being "awake" is not something we can classify with our normal dual thought. This is why Christianity doesn't exist in public and I'm beginning to believe the same about Buddhism. People do not know what being awake means and its relationship to re-birth. There is a law: "The higher can understand the lower but the lower can never understand the higher". Yet this is what so many modern teachings try to do. Take this course in ten easy lessons for only $59.95 and you will talk to God. And you wonder why I say we live in a dream.

It seems as though you've been fortunate to have an inkling of Man's possibilities. This is a very valuable experience. You've got to decide if it is worth pursuing.

[Nick_A]

Bito

I like that: "go, spiritual warrior, go!" :)

As has been said: "We are seekers of pearls in manure". So maybe we can prowl around a bit and discover some things for mutual benefit in the midst of it all so to speak.

[sahyo]

What I meant to say was that 'hehehe' was not a response from compassion.

Perhaps I'm way off base in reading your response as being one of sarcasm, but I felt the need to express to you what your words appeared to be saying/suggesting to me.



:)

can't "a serious read" hehehe-d,
wasn't sarcasming
sweetbito

[Corri]

Nick:

I know what you mean and it has also been my experience. I've felt that all of a sudden I woke up. It happens this way because your ego doesn't understand it so it cannot get in the way. The danger is that after a while we become satisfied with the ego's "interpretation". People start to argue and debate and the experience is lost. We find it so hard to respect it enough to keep it pure. Our lower nature does not want it and fights against it by bringing it down to its level. Look how Buddha put it but how many understand it

Okay. NOW we are on the same page.

Being "awake" is not something we can classify with our normal dual thought. This is why Christianity doesn't exist in public and I'm beginning to believe the same about Buddhism. People do not know what being awake means and its relationship to re-birth. There is a law: "The higher can understand the lower but the lower can never understand the higher". Yet this is what so many modern teachings try to do. Take this course in ten easy lessons for only $59.95 and you will talk to God. And you wonder why I say we live in a dream.

No, I do not wonder why you say we live in a dream.

It seems as though you've been fortunate to have an inkling of Man's possibilities. This is a very valuable experience. You've got to decide if it is worth pursuing.

Well, I guess this is where I see us diverging, because I do not see this as something that "I" can pursue. There is no pursuing to it. There is only accepting... yet, even if you do not 'accept it,' it is there anyway.

I consider myself fortunate that as I was going through 'awakening,' I kept a journal. As a matter of fact, tonight was the first time I actually sat down to reread what I wrote. I was stunned silent by the things I read... not because "I" wrote them, but because I was completely aware that "I" did not write it. I have a recollection of "writing,' but not a specific recall on what was written. Out of curiosity, and an inkling to what you meant in your posts, I pulled out the journal to read it.

The....hmmmm... transformation is there, plainly. But it was not "I" that had transformed, because there is no "I" to transform. (Jesus, this is not making any sense).... for example, this is my first 'experience' of awareness:"

And then there was Nothing. But nothing like I had ever known. It was 'void.' Absent of everything known and unknown, so dense, so black, so silent, so utterly absent, that it simply 'was not.' It wasn't anything. There is no adequate way to describe it, except to say that it completely and totally enveloped me to the point that there was no 'me.' No lighs, no angels, no tunnels, no music, no peace, no fear. It was absent of anything I could possibly describe. It just was.

And even THAT doesn't get it. Another entry:

As near as I can put an expression into words, the phenominal "I-self" is a continual expresssion of The Nothing... in being what It is not. Fear of loss of an 'awakened state' seems to be an ego attempt of reclaimation, a personalization of what is not the mind's right to reclaim. Awareness is in the continual, non-ceasing release.... or continual, non-ceasing acceptance of what it (mind) isn't.

I am experiencing periods of 'madness.' I have no other word for it. It feels as though my mind is burning and twirling, faster and faster, out of control. It is observed, though, that always present is ALL-present stillness and calm. It has never, ever, been absent, just not 'seen.' When "I" reaches panic stage, the 'breaking-point,' stillness is, and panic recedes. No, it doesn't 'recede. It merely flows to Nothing.

I guess I had been waiting for the big explosion, the blinding 'realization.' and I thank God for its absence. I had one of those "blinding, amazing, pure-bliss" moments, once, and I've never forgotten it. Somehow I have always longed for a repeat performance. yet the longing creates a 'need' which creates suffering. It was an amazing experience. I can recall it, relive it. But it was an experience only, just like any other, in the moment that it happened. It belongs to that moment, not to me.

This, this, awakening experience, realization... whatever it is... just... came. Not there one moment, and then just there the next. It came from nowhere out of NOTHING. I have been feeling its surfacing for a long time... and then... there it was. And there it is again... and again, and again... and again. The experience of no thing... and I say, yes, that's right, that's exactly right.'

It comes and it goes. When I stop the 'pondering' of it, it comes back. And then a thought emerges. You cannot consider The Nothing. For in so doing, It is creating. You just have to 'stop' to get it. You have to 'feel' The Nothing to experience it... and in the exact instance that you do, It becomes what It isn't.

Corri

[bito]

can't "a serious read" hehehe-d,

Maybe you can't, but I can :naughty:

:loveyou:

[Nick_A]

Corri

The....hmmmm... transformation is there, plainly. But it was not "I" that had transformed, because there is no "I" to transform. (Jesus, this is not making any sense).... for example, this is my first 'experience' of awareness:"

I agree that there is no "I" to transform since, as I've said, it is something we do not have. We are only a collection of small i's and contradictory wills often unaware of each other which is why life remains as it is.

I am in an awkward position because my belief is neither Christian nor Buddhist as they are normally understood. Buddhism believes that there is no "I" and not the concern of ours. Christianity believes that we have this "I" which is our soul. As I've grown to understand it, we have the potential for a soul and it is man's evolution to acquire one and partake in man's higher purpose with the inner unity established as "I". As of now, we are a nullity so we basically do agree. "I" isn't transformed since we do not have it. Our evolution is in the creation of our own I through our presence established through consciousness. "Know Thyself".

There is also a difference between an altered state of consciousness and self awareness. Not knowing what one is doing here can also lead to trouble. The body should serve as an anchor in self awareness but in an altered state of consciousness one can sort of get the feeling of flying off leaving themselves completely out of balance.

I guess I had been waiting for the big explosion, the blinding 'realization.' and I thank God for its absence. I had one of those "blinding, amazing, pure-bliss" moments, once, and I've never forgotten it. Somehow I have always longed for a repeat performance. yet the longing creates a 'need' which creates suffering. It was an amazing experience. I can recall it, relive it. But it was an experience only, just like any other, in the moment that it happened. It belongs to that moment, not to me.

And what is wrong about this need and its associated suffering?

[jesupocaplypse]

Originally posted by Nick_A@Nov 8 2004, 09:47 PM
If I am understanding your meaning, are you saying that if we see self as a dream, that we will no longer feel our humanity, ergo not act to relieve suffering? As if seeing our dreaming ‘destroys’ human-compassion-experience?

This might be slightly off topic, but for 'some reason' i feel it applies.

Recently I was assaulted on my way home, nearby/outside a club. Mostly superficial damage, fleshwounds, except for one Major damage... A kick in the groin.

My scrotum swelled up from internal bleeding (subdermal hematoma) to the size of a softball or a grapefruit... dark purple.

For the next week and a half , I was in such EXTREME pain and suffering that i could not stand nor do Anything but lay in bed and hurt.

I found that my entire life had been replacecd with pain. From waking to sleeping, was a wave like, rythmic rise and fall of pain. Endorphins helped a bit... but not enough.

But soon I found that the more i tried to resist, and fight the pain, the worse it was. When i finally tried to give in, and accept the pain, focusing on it. Concentrating on feeling that pain. actually Trying to mentally amplify it, it would fade.


The more i focused on the pain, the more it.... Dissolved.

The more i concentrated on the agony, the more it disappeared.


I came to realise... the more i focus on anything, the more it dissolves. That the best experiences of my life, came when i wasn't thinking about anything relative to that moment...

does this apply? or :alcoholic:

[bito]

I came to realise... the more i focus on anything, the more it dissolves. That the best experiences of my life, came when i wasn't thinking about anything relative to that moment...

does this apply?

My quote about dreaming and suffering referred to the Buddhist concept of no-self, questioning - if there is no-self, can there be the experience of compassion/desire to relieve suffering?

Your experience (I can't imagine it, sounds worse than childbirth) appears to be an example of ''being the pain' - no thinking about it, analyzing it, just being 'it' .

I suffer from chronic neck arthritis and take no medication for the pain. Perhaps one day, if it gets unbearable, I will. An occasional dose of the heating pad, movement and acceptance works for now.

I hope everything is back in working order :D

[Corri]

Nick:

I guess I had been waiting for the big explosion, the blinding 'realization.' and I thank God for its absence. I had one of those "blinding, amazing, pure-bliss" moments, once, and I've never forgotten it. Somehow I have always longed for a repeat performance. yet the longing creates a 'need' which creates suffering. It was an amazing experience. I can recall it, relive it. But it was an experience only, just like any other, in the moment that it happened. It belongs to that moment, not to me.

And what is wrong about this need and its associated suffering?

There is not a right or wrong to it. But it is as you spoke earlier, when living mechanically, we pursue pleasure and avoid pain... we inerpret life as a series of 'needs to be fullfilled.' When we can't have, or get, or relive, our pleasure, we suffer. When we can't escape, or get away from, or stop our pain, we suffer. We get to the point that we ruin even our pleasure, for we always fear its departure. If you want to live like that, okay... there isn't anything wrong with it. Most people are not aware that there is any other way.

As jesupocaplypse noted, what you resist, persists... I suppose this resistance comes in the form of our 'attention,' or 'obsession.'

Corri

[Nick_A]

corri

There is not a right or wrong to it. But it is as you spoke earlier, when living mechanically, we pursue pleasure and avoid pain... we inerpret life as a series of 'needs to be fullfilled.' When we can't have, or get, or relive, our pleasure, we suffer. When we can't escape, or get away from, or stop our pain, we suffer. We get to the point that we ruin even our pleasure, for we always fear its departure. If you want to live like that, okay... there isn't anything wrong with it. Most people are not aware that there is any other way.

This refers to a very important question (for me anyhow) as to how to understand suffering in relation to our being itself. So I thought to start a thread on it called "Suffereing" and maybe we can find some common ground.

[Trevor]

Bito

I like that: "go, spiritual warrior, go!" :)

As has been said: "We are seekers of pearls in manure". So maybe we can prowl around a bit and discover some things for mutual benefit in the midst of it all so to speak.

Maybe we are in fact pearls seeking in manure.

[lolipop]

The word "child" here is not limited to a chronological age. Its psychological meaning is concerned with the esoteric level of development of a person. A child in this sense means someone who has felt the value of something higher while, at the same time, becoming more aware of their helplessness in front of it.


I'm sorry, but I would have to disagree with this idea to an extent. It is true that children have a sense of wonder when it comes to viewing the world around them, but when the New Testament view the concept of being like a child, it really means what is said in this verse from the Book of Mormon:

19 For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.

So, when the New Testament mentions being as a child, it means that you should be willing to do anything that God wants you to do without a second thought. Does this strictly mean that you are to do everything he says and not think of the reason you do it? No. It just means that you regard him as your father and do what He says because, as the Omnipotent being that He is, knows more than we do.

I'm not sure how to answer your question, but I believe with this new perspective you might be able to answer the question by yourself. I hope it helps.