Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 25, 2025 at 03:32 in reply to: A book that I promised – Being conscious of consciousness #50806
DestinationUnkown
ParticipantHi Amarynth, this is a reply to up above, and sorry I let it stagnate so long. I think you said that consciousness is something quite different from awareness. (Paraphrasing what you said, but maybe as Percival explains it). I tried to search the book, but as far as I can see, he uses the word “aware” 33 times in the whole book, but the word “awareness” doesn’t appear even once.
Can you give further clarification on your conviction that Consciousness is different than Awareness. This, I cannot understand. THANKS
January 25, 2025 at 01:37 in reply to: 17. Here is how I define certain terms I am using, how about you? #50804ParticipantI Nico, thanks for sharing about yourself. (I will go in reverse order of what you said).
I would have written that (fourth paragraph) verbatim about myself. (I have 3 cats and 4 dogs). Much of my life has been concentrated on my own projects, in business, and in personal pursuits, with very few others involved. I had some “customers”, but only on a casual level. I have distant (but cordial) relations with family.
There was one period, (at least 6 years), where I cast myself as a journalist. For those years I was the flip-side, extremely gregarious, engaging and talking with everyone, meeting tons of new faces, traveling the world. I was a publicist, and people were open to that. I was also very “at-home” with it, and I loved it. Why did it end? I guess I had learned everything that I needed from it. I can go both ways at the snap of a finger.
(Third paragraph), I feel absolutely no offence to be ignored or expelled from the group. Life is precious, and needn’t be frittered on compromising my process. Neither am I rigid in the front of others. I mentioned the coffee shop hang-out in another comment. Some tell me, “I can’t converse about anything with that (other) guy”. However I don’t cut-off, I generally attempt to take it as a challenge. What’s the use of only speaking with those who already agree? So I start slowly with some background material, and see where it goes. Then I have to gently come back to my points, after a series of non-sequiturs derail my discourse. Maybe I get close to making my point, or not. I enjoy the process.
You gave the example a while back saying, “You know God did not create religion.” That’s a “double-whammy” for some people, I think very difficult. I would suggest a softer entry.
(Second paragraph), so I understand that equating feeling to intuition is a “sensitive ground”. Maybe it cannot be “cut-and-dried” to hang out on the line like a thought structure can. May I assume that gradually a confidence has been confirmed, that these intuitions give good results in life?
Yet I don’t see any mechanism for thought to generate, other than from the anthology of yesterday’s experiences. I would surmise there is some compromise built into that transition, feeling to action. But maybe there is enough of the new for a good progress trajectory. I see that it is about the same, if I am only on a logic trail, why isn’t all of that also of the past tense? Perhaps very similar, that thought can be verified with a direct observation, from the platform of “NO-Thought”. We actually met on your posting about meditation.
Many of my thoughts are not about Truth, or any content or conclusion. They are about the mechanism of that very thought. For the most part thought always goes away from what is here and now, into conclusions ABOUT the here and now. IS THAT THE ONLY WAY TO RECEIVE THE HERE AND NOW, about it? Then doubt and investigation come into play.
(First paragraph), I can also read something or hear something, and get an immediate “knowing”, that hey, that is different and it seems to resolve much contradiction. It is worth pursuing. It is worth internalizing. It may have come from that other author, (but everyone might not receive it at the same level of revelation?) Or it may be some kind of “cross” between what he said and what I had previously defined. However, I have never been moved to source it from an “unseen world”. I don’t have to deny it either, but so far it has no allure nor traction in my own life. I define the unseen as a very dangerous place, and most likely, unneeded. It is here anyway, if it is.
So we both make a different impression on the G.S. Crowd. I may be the renegade, posting on my own thoughts, ignored by the “current-event-ors”, (they have their important work to recount what happened yesterday). I am also arrogant enough to number my posts, as if they were long-lived. Whereas you have the image of posting on the front page, the token spiritualist, very comforting messages, many thanks for explaining so clearly, now I feel better affirmed. You have more to live-up-to than I do. Is that an “authority”. Is your notoriety a limitation for you? I call it my freedom. I use it judiciously though, not to be shocking.
I am developing a lot of posts in the hopper. Why don’t you post something that you question, or that you want to talk about? Give more time off of the front page. THANKS
.
January 24, 2025 at 06:11 in reply to: 17. Here is how I define certain terms I am using, how about you? #50761ParticipantHello Nico, I even get a lot out of one of your short replies. It stimulates me to think further about what is happening for me.
First of all I would say it is misguided to say that I think more, and feel less, and that you feel more, and think less. It is just another thought that you “could” keep all thoughts sort of fuzzy, or on the back burner, while feeling is the meaningful (and less confusing). How does feeling translate into action, (which is the only meaningful transition in life)? It has to be interpreted into words, doesn’t it? If you have another way, I would be fascinated to hear about it.
For me, every feeling has an underlying thought structure, and utilizing that link, feelings can change without any further process, as soon as you alter that underlying thought. Because I find feelings so malleable, I tend not to make meaning out of them. Again; That is my question, How do you derive action from feelings? Doesn’t it have to go through a phase of meaning?
I told you in another comment of the mystery on how I arrived here, and the several thresholds I had to pass through. But they did not phase me. I know the value of this forum tool. One of the thresholds are all those agonizing threads always pinned to the top. So If you ask me what the others do, I shudder to even think about it.
So far: I am very different from anyone I can know, on line or in person. I am very (extremely) proactive with my own life. Today I was in a local hang-out drinking coffee with “the guys”. I can partially get through to some of them, but in a shallow sense. And after years, nothing ever goes anywhere. It is a static life, some diversion or entertainment, or what’s for lunch. In the last couple days I met the sister of one of my friends who is visiting from a different country. She is completely alive, vibrant, sparkling, and wide open. I think we could talk for hours. It is face to face, but I could write her too. I don’t know if she is used to writing? Truly amazing that you can find a kindred spirit merely be chance. I think that me an her brother have also moved up a notch by her presence.
My approach is both organic, and empirical. It is based on the results, the shifts in my life. I will never go back to any old way. I number all of my posts, because none of them “go-out-of-date”. I am not recording current events or yesterday’s narratives. All of my current posts have a bit of a hard edge to them. Basically I am suggesting that maybe world society is an outgrowth from our personal mind-sets. I am further suggesting that an optimum thing to do is to enquire into yourself, to see if there are any traces of all those tendencies that you reject about world events. Yes that includes violence, fear, jealousy, greed, ALL OF IT. Let’s just each take a look. It is the only action step. It is not easy, because we have it so well hidden, (from ourselves). Not that difficult for others to see.
I know most others shut down when an different idea challenges. (Thanks for staying open). You might be analyzing me saying that I need to build my reputation. Nothing could be further from the truth of it. I have no need of any recognition, I have NO NAME.
For sure, there are people with like intensity in the world. True, I don’t know any of them. I post regularly on 5 platforms, something under 1,000 subscribers together. Different topics. There is no intensity there. I might need to post in another language to another culture. I think this one is running on empty. It doesn’t matter. I receive copious rewards, just by writing what is new for me, and then taking a look at it. Of course it is nice of you or another comment on it too. (Plus or Minus is OK.)
.
January 23, 2025 at 20:10 in reply to: A book that I promised – Being conscious of consciousness #50728ParticipantHi Nico: For me, I simplify it to the max. What we can’t see or touch appears as a thought. A thought is a symbolic image of the real world, (“real” – meaning that which is here with or without a thought). (Very) Much of humanity is run in the virtual world of the symbolic model. That’s OK because society wouldn’t be built without verbal agreements. We run by the map, not regarding the actual territory.
I think that you will want to say that what we can’t see or touch is received as a “feeling”. Well, then it is NOT what we “can’t see or touch”, because we are touching it, (with the feeling). But most important, that feeling is interpreted. SO IT IS A THOUGHT.
Pure thought can and most often does go into pure fantasy. Even the most rigorous science is a approximation, So in that sense it too is a fantasy.
January 21, 2025 at 19:48 in reply to: A book that I promised – Being conscious of consciousness #50567ParticipantHi Nico, [from the other part of your reply]; We are on the same page with regard to not upsetting, but encouraging other people’s personal development process. They must look at things for themselves to have anything “stick”. The measure is the shift in their outlooks and the shift in their outer lives. If nothing changes, you are not really looking.
I tried to address your concern that in writing it is difficult to get to the core, because of different backgrounds and different definitions. In my post 17, I wrote many of my definitions, written from just thinking about what works for me (for decades). It is not a list of benchmarks, written by somebody else. I recommend writing a similar listing for you. Just putting it together is self-revealing.
I don’t think you can invite a discussion by saying “Religion was not invented by God”. I usually start by acknowledging basic human fears, and consequently, there is a search for answers. Not finding satisfactory answers close, we tend to move afar, (even off of the plan of existence).
.
January 21, 2025 at 19:25 in reply to: A book that I promised – Being conscious of consciousness #50566ParticipantHello Nico, I very-much appreciate my contact with you. Neither do I deny mystery in my life. In fact, just being here for me is a real mystery. I did not come here directly, (so to speak). I followed a long series of links or connections out of curiosity, with no idea that they would lead me anywhere interesting.
From the first place I uncovered another link to the 2nd place, then a person, finding their background brought me here, then the outward look, with all the apocalypse people pinned to the top is not to my taste. Then I had to voyage through the dark tunnel of Gravitar, because I want avatar identification. (I think it was 3 days and doing everything correctly that Gravitar said – Oops, something went wrong, try again later; maybe 20 times.) Then I had a “hunch”. I went across town to the university and in a coffee shop I turned off my VPN. Bingo, Gravitar worked like a charm, and showed me all of their services and to set up my profile. They only wanted my home address. It is a horrendous SPY-program, collecting my data and didn’t get my home address. They did get my city though.
Then I met you on your meditation posting, (spiritual healing). For two months nobody but me and you posted on that thread. I had just been studying Mongolia, so the first meditation took my interest. Then I settled on the throat chakra.
I did one or the other of those meditations for 20 days in a row. I dare say not one other person took any interest. (They must know about everything already??) And what has followed? With another series of links I uncovered Krishnamurti. He gives hints on what and where to look for, in your own process. And my life has shifted immensely in two months.
IS THIS ALL FROM THE UNSEEN WORLD? We can call so many things synchronicity, magic, impossible in the normal world of billions of people. I choose (in my process) NOT to make meaning out of it. For me, making meaning is a devastating habit.
.
January 18, 2025 at 19:13 in reply to: 16. Judgement and dissatisfaction with the World Around Me #50401ParticipantThe premise of all my posts, is that world society is the natural outflow of individual beliefs. It is also true that those beliefs are conflicted, (and that they must be blinded in order to maintain those contradictions). Here’s an example:
We claim a high civilization which seeks conflict resolution through uniform laws. We also say that we, individually, wouldn’t resort to violence. We won’t use the will of the powerful forced upon the weak. Yet our personal belief in justice allows those whom we classify as guilty, to be punished. When we look out into the world, we define innocence and guilt to serve our vested interests. So America, and the west, (are we westerners?) roam all over the world to punish the “guilty”. That is called continuous WAR on all fronts.
It is nothing for western populations to accept, and pay $ Trillions spent for these wars. Now, almost a $ half Trillion of bombs have been sent to Ukraine. Are these bombs only 4th of July celebrations? NO, they very-well kill 100’s of thousands of people, and destroy a nation. So where is our personal non-violence?
If you might want to find it; the point of this post are some hints of where to look.
.
January 18, 2025 at 02:23 in reply to: A book that I promised – Being conscious of consciousness #50338ParticipantHello Amarynth, if there are pitfalls in this book would you want to consider them? Discussing the possible pitfalls IS discussing this book, and it’s not about someone else’s philosophy. Of course, I have opinions generated from what works in my life. Some of those opinions are my own discoveries, (which many others have also discovered before and after me). And some are hints from outside sources, but not just adopted. Those hints suggest where to look in my own life, to see if they are operating within me too. I see my comments here as perfectly valid.
You say that consciousness does not move, does not act, and does not do. The Triune self is doing the evolution. What is your view on why the triune self is not more aware now. Is awareness a learned trait? Are animals also in this learning process? What is the hold on awareness? What then, is the process to overcome that hold, and what is the path through which more awareness trickles in? (I have a simple explanation, but what do you say?)
There are at least three ways to consider a philosophy:
✓What is the evidence that convinces us it is true? Without evidence, what is the logic behind it. Without a direct experience, should we consider other people’s written testimony? If it is handed down for 1,000’s of years, doesn’t that make it sacred? NO, another thought from wherever, is just a bio-chemical movement and it is only of the material world.
✓Or we can notice that every philosophy or ideology, or proposed truth sets up a pattern to follow. That pattern has both enticements and cautions, (the carrot and the stick), and it leads you by the nose. What is the probable trajectory of that path? Is it constructive to this life, then choose it provisionally without any evidence. Or is it destructive and life-denying? Don’t choose it.
✓Finally, who are the followers and disciples of this teaching? Are they still reactive people? Are they full of contradiction, struggle and conflict? Or have they overcome most of destructive human conditioning? Where is their adopted philosophy leading them?
____________
Hello Nico: You say, it can be useful to discuss issues with like-minded people because it can be enjoyable and bring awareness. Why do they have to be “like-minded”, to ensure more agreement? I think it would be better to have differing opinions. As long as discussion is NOT defined as Asserting an unsubstantiated position louder and louder.
You say writing on a forum is very difficult to get to the core, because our languaging, background and definitions are different. I think we can state our definitions, maybe in a mini-dictionary. We can also each use different ones, but knowing how each other is interpreting it.
I thought this above was really good: “We all have our own truths and, moreover, they are always only temporarily valid until we have discovered and embraced new truths.” OPTIMUM
I would reserve the word “truth” for what-is in the moment, but substitute belief, or I use the word “definition” instead of belief, because there is more responsibility in it.
The meaning, to me, of what you said, is that we are all working on our own process of understanding. My wish is that everyone would be encouraged to stick with THEIR process, and not try to jump around for shortcuts. If some shortcut robs your attention from what you are discovering and knowing yourself, that is destructive.
In another place I was impressed with your comment when you asked, “why is “God” talking to the other guy, but not talking directly to me?” Isn’t it because God talks to you through your own process, and not if you are imitating some wise man? When your attention is drained away from your personal findings, God goes mute.
.
January 16, 2025 at 03:39 in reply to: 15. When I look around, I see that people (including me) don’t change much. #50212ParticipantHi Nico, I really like talking with you, (writing), I hope that we can keep the dialog going.
True, I don’t consider the unseen. That is because I don’t see it, (or sense it), and I have no way to determine why people are talking about what is unknowable. You can say that you are on speaking terms with the unseen, but prey tell, how do you know that is the source? It is a path that can, AND HAS, gone all over the universe, and it’s been used as THE tool to maul planet earth.
(By the way, AI has no consciousness, only enormous memory and speed.)
You’re saying learning to detach equals thinking better. I see it as the opposite, more thinking is more attachment. Well, you can’t be sure.
__________
I going to answer your home-page post here because I don’t appreciate that abbreviated comment set-up. Yeah, you can click “more”, but it is folded up in 3 lines.
My life doesn’t necessarily develop from the precepts you are working with. But it does develop, and with a brisk dynamic. I’ll comment on a couple of things here:
> the intuitive comes in as a feeling, (perhaps from the unseen source?) Does that source guide you to interpret it, or are you left to your own devices? (Then you said “perhaps something else is dominant.”) That’s mystic!
> Equating “feeling” with “knowing” in animals and plants? A bird knows how to make a nest. Is that a feeling?
> We cannot yet do this thinking very well is another issue. What is the basis of that judgment? It is only about our current likes and dislikes, isn’t it?
> Most people run after others. If the others are making it through, isn’t that the proof of safety? I view security as the main human preoccupation.
> Intuitive-Knowing can be enriching, if you can learn to integrate it. Is it desire based? Most desire is probably a learned cultural conditioning. Is our culture building or declining?
> Consciousness can only materialize (expand), with thinking. (This broad statement is surely limiting.)
> What I possess is actually on Lease. That is a valid transaction.
> Many animals mate for life, with or without a marriage ceremony.
> Thinking will be integrated with feeling and inner intuitive knowing. Thinking and feeling are linked by old judgments. Inner knowing is up-for-grabs, maybe never.
> Consciousness will materialize to a greater degree in our brain and body. I don’t know, but I sincerely doubt this is a necessary definition. What if you just say: Consciousness-IS, and as you strip away the web of stray thoughts, it becomes clear what is the content of that consciousness?
> HERE ARE SOME GOOD ONES.
Thinking is the causative agent of all problems man makes and has.
If God doesn’t talk to you directly, why does he talk to someone else? Or visa-versa.
Other people’s wisdom can only have value when we ourselves are wise.
Habits and traditions we can forget because they keep us stuck in the past.
You only have to look clearly at nature to learn how everything fits together.Thanks
.
January 14, 2025 at 03:44 in reply to: 15. When I look around, I see that people (including me) don’t change much. #50098ParticipantHi Nico, Good to talk, as always.
I am not describing the content of thoughts. I am describing the mechanism of thoughts. The only doorway to the past or the future is through thinking. That is obvious for anyone that looks, it is not a distorted subjective determination. THEREFORE, a huge amount of thought is wandering in regret or replaying the past, or in the projected plans (fantasies) for tomorrow.
Thought is mostly busy rejecting or upgrading the present, by busying the attention far away from this life. What percentage of attention is left over to run this life? (Not enough to make a difference.) What are all these “thinking directions”? I am suggesting they are only backwards and forwards, and only because I feel my present life is painful. Thought is the major tool of escape and disengagement.
I commented in #13 that I use thought every day. I trust it for what it is useful for, and I doubt it for escapes, or where it has never produced a result. Like with the elimination of WAR.
January 14, 2025 at 03:42 in reply to: 14. Why Doesn’t Mankind change? The start of a series. #50097ParticipantI wonder if you are giving “collective” an esoteric or mystic meaning? Are you saying to consult the Akashic Record or some god-consciousness? In everyday parlance the collective means the societal stereo-types of behavior. That collective says Yeah, go ahead be greedy, competitive, jealous, envious, and use force to get what you want. If you don’t snatch it, someone else will.
OK, people change in a lifetime, and things change in millennia. That may be some kind of evolution, but how do you arrive that it is all thought-based? Are you almost saying that thought is our only tool? If you are satisfied with the changes in a million years, why not just say that you give “two pins” about the present situation, and let it fester.
Of course the dislike of torturing or killing human beings, (called disappointment), is held in memory, which is conditioning. Is disappointment a intention? Maybe it is a reverse intention? Is your life the result of your intention. What a limited reach that must have. “Cannot change” is only about psychologically, not the growth in physical and civilized infrastructure. In fact, it is not cannot-change, but will-not-change, and that is empirical. The evidence is written on the wall for all to see.
.
January 14, 2025 at 03:38 in reply to: 13. Freedom is not building a better future; it is the dissolution of the past #50094ParticipantHi Nico, thanks for keeping this conversation going.
I am not against thought. I use it daily for many chores. In fact thinking is mixed in with most everything I do. Just because thinking is present, here mixed with my other faculties, doesn’t mean that it is the author of new insights. (You even mentioned intuition.) If I become aware of a conditioned mechanism, without any judgement about it, (not brining in thought based preferences), then with little or no thinking I begin to see what does not work. For me, I lose interest in that part of habituation.
It stops, or reduces significantly. If I see that; do I have to do anything with it? NO, it just drops. I am not going to manipulate it through future evolution. It is gone in the now.
What changes come out of feeling? Maybe you don’t stick your hand into fire. But feeling also reinforces old trauma, and keeps it going, not changing it.
I like your last point, even in a simple family relationship, or any throughout the day. Do you see the other so you can “figure him out” and be wary, or do you observe your own reactions in that mirror of relationship, AND FIGURE YOURSELF OUT? Surely that is much more important.
.
January 13, 2025 at 06:11 in reply to: A book that I promised – Being conscious of consciousness #50051ParticipantHello Amarynth,
Now I have read the introductory chapter one of Thinking and Destiny. It seems to require a prudent reply, since I want to respect what you may have found to be an addition to your life. I don’t know if you are just investigating, or if you count on it for your values. Let’s try to be objective, and see what the possible benefits could be. The difficulty with this book is not the 1,000 pages, but the content on those 1,000 pages. The book purports to unmask the mysteries of the universe, and the mysteries of life on earth.
So, these “mysteries” are dealing with the unseen, enigma, or perhaps the unknowable, and the author claims to put these mysteries into perspective. The introductory chapter is 27 pages, and more than 100 paragraphs. These mysteries are presented as assertions, because they don’t follow anything we see, they come from nowhere we know, and are not directly sensed by you and me. So chapter one contains about 100 assertions to sort through, determine their ramifications, or make heads or tails out of them. (Does it all clear up in chapter two, or chapter 20?) It tries to make a system out of these assertions, but the unifying links are of course also assertions, so they do not really clear up anything. I can comment on only a small fraction of what was said. (I CAN comment on all of it), but why write a book, to review a book? If the 1,000 pages of the book are anything like the first chapter in the density of assertions, then the book might contain up to 3,500 assertions that you must give your attention to.
And where could that attention come from? It has to be peeled off of your attention on this physical life, your consideration of what is really here through the senses, or on attention assuring sustenance and safety for yourself and your family. So first of all, those interested already have sustenance handled. This book is the playground for the rich and prosperous that believe they can ignore some of life on earth, and delve into the presumed non-physical realms. They’re realms of assertion, supposition, and made-up spiritual ideology.
There are people that are undernourished or starving, and they are not looking into this. But this is a book for people that love the abstract, and disdain or are tired of their concrete life. Actually, the reaching out for anything, and the escape from life as it now is, (the coming and going), are in exact balance. The book coaches you to further hate the present life, and dwell only in the future, where what should-be will happen, (if you’re diligent).
Basically, this is a book for people that have run into a block of how to unfold their life any further. Nobody is teaching the development of this life, but only a development through leaving it. Leaving it with your attention, which is the same thing. They are stuck in their ways and their beliefs, and refuse to look beyond (or before) them, to enquire about what’s in the present. If your only solution is the destruction of what-is, well, I suppose WAR is not out of consideration. We see many people like that. Some call this the “anti-system”, those people that are anti-life.
Later I will consider further aspects of some of his key points, (in chapter one). I’ll probably do it on a new post, since this one is rather dead. One can’t really determine the truth of an assertion. Can one try to approach it with neither belief nor disbelief? If it is so extensive, (100’s) what is the point of consuming that much time and attention? Just for fun I guess, or to better understand someone who wants to believe in it.
____________
There is another standard of acceptance. Every belief contains rewards when you follow it and cautions and obstructions if you don’t follow it. You go to heaven or hell. Therefore, all ideologies are trying to lead you down their particular path with the carrot and the stick. What is the trajectory of this path? Does in influence you to be positive and constructive, and build on the life and the relationships that you have, or is it negative and causing you to only fend for yourself at the expense of all others.
Those are the negative teachings that presently dominate in the world, and they are destroying whatever they touch. I am not saying Percival is preaching hate or violence. But he is leading your attention away from your life, and setting up a dense web of thought that obscures all else. That is a danger right there.
.
January 12, 2025 at 03:55 in reply to: 14. Why Doesn’t Mankind change? The start of a series. #49973ParticipantHi Nico, and thanks again for weighing in on this one. I’ll just give my impressions on what you say, or ask questions.
The material world is the playground of life, and life must be conscious in order to sustain. Many thoughts have changed drastically over time. And many thoughts have not changed at all. Those are like insecurity, anxiety, fear, isolation, (isolation from what we are afraid of), with that separation there are contradiction, conflict, aggression, there are me and you, we and them. Let’s have a WAR. All those thoughts are identical, for all of recorded history. Are you saying that we need to give it more time? Another million years will due? Actually, future (time) is the only place fear can exist. And of course hope, worry, evolution, and what-should-be reside in the future also. (The future is a dangerous place.)
Our thinking has brought us technology, fast communications and travel, art and architecture, all the infrastructure of civilization. Most importantly thinking has brought us urban supply chains. Unfortunately, man’s stultified psychology has developed technology primarily to discover more weapons and killing machines. That is the fraction of thinking that controls all the rest of it. Now we might think man will cooperate when brain hemispheres unite. Boy, that is a lot of status-quo leading up to it. You say the collective consciousness is about sensitivity. But I see collectively, man is inventing new torture and atrocity baggage, and building the reasoning to use them.
Who will live on Mars? 200 people in a box who will all die from un-shielded gamma rays. The finite part of earth means that billionaires already own it all. They need a new real estate boom on the moon. YOU BELIEVE THAT?
I said some simple things in this post:
Pressure doesn’t change us.
Surrender doesn’t change us.
Positive teaching doesn’t change us, (following conventional wisdom).
What is the role of the fear of insecurity? Are you secure, and thus have no fear?Let’s assume that life on earth started 4.5 billion years ago. Then only one million years ago man appeared. So for 4.499 billion years the rhythms of the earth and the rhythms of life on earth sustained itself, WITHOUT ANY COMMENTS, INTERPRETATIONS OR ANY THINKING OF MAN. Isn’t that the evidence of a giant gift from earth toward life?
Can we integrate with that gift now? Of course we can, but it is veiled by a dense web of thought, that captures all of our attention. The future is our way to avoid the present. The present is where that gift is located.
Isn’t all thinking the manipulation of the current situation, which we judge as deficient?
Isn’t that done by moving away from reality into a “made-up” should-be?
Isn’t that the process called evolution which requires “a long time”?
What seems like a negation is just recognizing the false in the false, and letting it drop by the wayside.What is left is the TRUTH. Trying it out is my proposal.
.
January 12, 2025 at 02:46 in reply to: 13. Freedom is not building a better future; it is the dissolution of the past #49972ParticipantHello Nico, thanks for sharing your experience on this matter. I am NOT giving a “teaching” from personal experience, but I am making a proposal, that in my perception, has changed my emotional responses, my outlook, and my actions.
I understand when you say that freedom is a concept. It is a made up definition, out of a judgement of comparison; that I could be more free. So this-here must not be FREEDOM. In that sense, before the definition, (the thought) is applied, we are already free.
Can our thinking go in all directions, and come up with new thought? Isn’t there the context of all that I presently know about the world, and about life; and beyond that context, I have absolutely no awareness. Nothing other is even registered, much less considered. Those are the new thoughts, new territory, and the presently unknown.
Somehow the boundaries of that context have expanded, but it could very well be in spite of thinking. When the limits do expand, of course thinking jumps right in. So it might be interpreted that thinking found that growth. The proposal is that it is far from sure where growth comes from, (inspiration), and needs to be further investigated. If you hold conclusions, you can’t investigate.
You have introduced “Consciousness” that might contain, or control memory. Consciousness is just life, and no further definition is required. Life does hold memory. You mention that Akasha might have something to do with memory. Akasha means the basis and essence of all things in the material world; the first material element created from the astral world, (Akasha is “æther”).
So are you saying that memory is “Astral” or impressions in the “æther”? That is nice, and who am I to deny it? Maybe that is your experience. Do you voyage in the astral plane with an awareness of it? I don’t; so for me it is a diversion.
You say:
Our memory is not limited to our brain.
Our character is not limited to our brain.
Our choices are not limited to our brains.Well, brains, or mind, or awareness, or consciousness, I am not sure that we have to pin down the location. (which is just another word attached to the reality of it). But if you look, I think you will see that our character is limited to our context of beliefs that reside in our memory, (even our personal memory), and our choices are also limited by the content of our memory.
If we were more in touch with a collective memory (like the libraries of the world?), could our choices be broader? I sincerely doubt we would make any such choice that came from afar. So many choices are robotic and habitual. They don’t go beyond our skin. So to what extent is the individual able? I would say NIL, until we give up the conditioning that we only act for our own benefit, only for our self-aggrandizement. (Which includes the spiritual search by the way, done to fulfill a personal desire.)
.
-
AuthorPosts