Self - open discussion

[Gem]

Originally Posted by andrew g

There is Creation without thought. Rocks dont think. Space doesnt think. Neither does Creation vanish when you are in deep sleep. You wake up in the morning and there is stuff to respond to on the forum.

Thought is the attribution of meaning TO Creation. Thats all.

Why do they call the universe an illusion?

[andrew g]

Originally Posted by hybrid

what is someone is not bothered by what he projects the way you do?

.

Paying attention to our projections is only useful I think if we have an interest in increasing the odds. The moment we see that we are projecting a self-image is also the moment our attention is brought directly to the 'I am'. The unconscious would have no use for it, the very enlightened would have no use for it, and the neo-advaita group would have no use for it.

[andrew g]

Originally Posted by Gem

Why do they call the universe an illusion?

I could make some guesses, but you will have to ask them.

[hybrid]

Originally Posted by andrew g

Paying attention to our projections is only useful I think if we have an interest in increasing the odds.

what odds?

The moment we see that we are projecting a self-image is also the moment our attention is brought directly to the 'I am'.

okay.

The unconscious would have no use for it,

why?

the very enlightened would have no use for it,

why?

and the neo-advaita group would have no use for it.

why?

.

[andrew g]

Originally Posted by hybrid

what odds?


okay.


why?



why?


why?

.

The odds of becoming fully conscious.

Those who are unconscious dont do it because they dont realize they are projecting and dont realize they are seeing subjectively - they think they are seeing objectively.

Those who are very enlightened have all but released the need for attainment and strategies so dont feel the need to 'look' particularly (they are the looker and the looked)

The neo-advaita group dont do it because they are busy telling themselves that there is nothing to be done and that they are 'that'.

[hybrid]

Originally Posted by andrew g

Those who are very enlightened have all but released the need for attainment and strategies so dont feel the need to 'look' particularly (they are the looker and the looked).

so you don't think tzu belongs here?
.

[andrew g]

Originally Posted by hybrid

so you don't think tzu belongs here?
.

No. From the debates that Bob and me have had, I think he has been thinking that he sees objectively. Neither can he see that stilling the mind in order to perceive with more clarity is still part of the conditioned want to attain something and 'be' somebody.

Im not saying that we shouldnt still the mind or engage in other practices, but I think its helpful to see that the reason we do this is because we are seeking, wanting to attain, and wanting to 'be' somebody.

I guess now Bob and me are going to converse again and my best guess is that he will tell me that his stilling the mind isnt a practice and isnt about wanting to attain or wanting to 'be' somebody.

The difficulty for the likes of spiritual explorers is that we are aware that there is a realized state. The likes of Eckhart Tolle and Byron Katie werent into spiritual exploration prior to their awakening and I dont think had any real insight into there being a realized state. Their awakening just kind of happened. Its not like that for most of us, we are aware that there is a realized state so we have to play the game of increasing the odds, or of conscious seeking. I guess we could just forget the whole thing and go and get drunk.

[hybrid]

Originally Posted by andrew g

Im not saying that we shouldnt still the mind or engage in other practices, but I think its helpful to see that the reason we do this is because we are seeking, wanting to attain, and wanting to 'be' somebody.

what about this realization ...

" oh shet! i'm a clay, i'd better shape up to be somebody/something!" ????

.

[andrew g]

Originally Posted by hybrid

what about this realization ...

" oh shet! i'm a clay, i'd better shape up to be somebody/something!" ????

.

What I think is that we have been given conditioned standards and ideals and visions to live up to, and I actually think we have our own unique standards and ideals and joyful vision.

I think its a cool thing if someone in jail says, 'ok, enough is enough. Im better than this. I can be someone better than this''. But then we need to pay attention to whether the standard we set ourselves comes from within or if it comes from an outer source (family or society). I would even say they are in jail to start with because they have been living with other people's standards and ideals!

For example, by my Dad's standard, Im probably not currently living an excellent life. By my standards, I would say Im getting there, because I have a different standard of excellence. I am consciously seeking to become someone who is free, in joy, who is light, easy, playful, passionate, loving, compassionate. I would say these are my standards and ideals, and I think I have high standards and ideals. But I also see that the day that I have achieved these standards of excellence is also the day that I have released that need to be identifiable, its the day that I am at peace with all potentials of who I am. I am pretty at peace and am pretty surrendered TO the seeking. I see that Im still seeking, I see that there is an inner conflict there that comes with the seeking, and Im kind of at peace with that bit of inner conflict. Im kind of happy and at peace with using tools sometimes, yet Im also fairly happy and at peace with allowing the process to unfold as it wants to. Which tells me that I am getting closer, slowly but surely, to achieving my standards of excellence. I just take each day as it comes.

[hybrid]

Originally Posted by andrew g

What I think is that we have been given conditioned standards and ideals and visions to live up to, and I actually think we have our own unique standards and ideals and joyful vision.

are not these the things that supposed to drop in the moment of realization?

.