Natural vs. Man Made

[GreenGazer]

Originally Posted by Gem

(1) I'm assuming the 'meditation experts' consider me as idiotic because when I speak I so often contradict the rote of tradition.(2) I also notice that people in general do not respond in a meaningful way to what I write - but in my mind there are no references other than what is direct to me, so there is nothing old or repetitive here. You see, when I write I don't reach into my memory for the things that I know about meditation, and for that reason, there is no technique to it. I have to actually be there so I know in the immediate sense what I express. The reader can't take anything from what I say, there is no use remembering it as an acquired knowledge and these words are entirely without value. This writing is not apart from meditation. I have to present to say so and you have be present to hear it - and vice versa.

If your reading an act of attaining knowledge, or otherwise, a dismissal, or a balancing up of what's correct or incorrect, or if you see reflected in the writing a Gem who is this or that sort of person, then there is a judge present trying to convince you of things that aren't real. In my case, I say it as I think it and then I don't think it anymore, and I see none of myself reflected in thought gone by.

On learning. I had a lecturer at university who stood out to me. She was different to my other tutors in a way I could not define. I did the entire semester of that subject, and as a result, I saw the world differently. There is nothing to know in the sense of acquiring knowledge, but everything about transformation in how one sees. I mean to see truthfully, and be able to distinguish between what is actually perceptible and that judge who tries to convince you of things. It comes down to, if you yourself are seeing or if the judge is. (some cut for space)

(1) They probably do because some consider themselves experts on meditation. But who can honestly be an expert on something so broad and personal?

(2) I think you have done a very nice job describing your learning process. It reminds me of the principles behind remote viewing. From my understanding of this last post of yours is you speak/think/write what is on your mind before your inner judge can make those things conform to the ideas/principles you have already "learned". I think this is the only real way to get true organic growth in one's way of thinking.

Regarding the emboldened text perhaps this is because (it is for me personally) that people, when reading your comments instinctually, perhaps subconsciously, understand your process and learn from your posts in a similar way that you express them. Or they simply don't understand. I usually have to read your posts a few times to fully grasp the concept. I am witty just not quick witted ;)

Out of curiosity what class was her lecture in?

[Gem]

Originally Posted by GreenGazer

(1) They probably do because some consider themselves experts on meditation. But who can honestly be an expert on something so broad and personal?

I sometimes suffer a little paranoia about what people might think, appearing as a fool, and so on - so I was just expressing that outright as it really does seem like an obstacle to my self expression.

I am assured that there are no meditation experts simply because an expert must rely on acquired knowledge- whereas the meditation is immediate and not reliant on any acquisition what-so-ever.

There is really good book on this actually: Freedom from the Known by J. Krishnamurti. (which I accessed as an audiobook here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOowwi8xYUA)

(2) I think you have done a very nice job describing your learning process. It reminds me of the principles behind remote viewing. From my understanding of this last post of yours is you speak/think/write what is on your mind before your inner judge can make those things conform to the ideas/principles you have already "learned". I think this is the only real way to get true organic growth in one's way of thinking.

That's right. And we are talking about nature's way vs man's way as a general principle - as well as that - my last post reframed 'learning' as transformation of self and perception - so we're going beyond what experts 'know' and understanding our actual nature. That is what I'm doing here, anyway.

Regarding the emboldened text perhaps this is because (it is for me personally) that people, when reading your comments instinctually, perhaps subconsciously, understand your process and learn from your posts in a similar way that you express them. Or they simply don't understand. I usually have to read your posts a few times to fully grasp the concept. I am witty just not quick witted ;)

Out of curiosity what class was her lecture in?

I see. I'm talking about things one has to really engage in. It's not a question/answer exercise or an advice column. I am engaged in this myself, and I can't be whimsical.

The course was in the school of Gender and Cultural Studies, and the subject was called Sex, Violence and Transgression.

[Mr Interesting]

Are they not one and the same?

Indeed. I can look at the cars rushing past and the people in them full of ideas and it will settle just into movement and alike be in the bush and all the insects and all the trees growing are clamouring but that is their way and it settles.

When I meditate what I hear is the birds singing alongside the dull throb of industry and it's infrequent crashings and bangs and initially, when I started hearing them they were different, at odds even, but they are both just things making noise and now they cede into each other as one.

So my ideas around the first post are that you are adding ideas as constructs to support the ideas of what action is and in that possibly to fashion in some way the ideas around compassion. Because if we feel we can help the human race then is there not a way to actually do it, a plan of action based on ideas of how to get to where what might be better, but in another sense isn't this just compassion pure and simple having a construct built around and over it?

These ideas, in the first post, thus remind me of my own interpretations of things as they seem to be to me, my own coming to terms with things that somehow seem different on the level of my perceptions of them and then, over time, somehow realising that the thing itself will always just be that thing and that it is how I bring myself to it that is of concern to me, and of me, not the thing itself for it will simply be whatever is of concern to it.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Mr Interesting

Are they not one and the same?

Indeed. I can look at the cars rushing past and the people in them full of ideas and it will settle just into movement and alike be in the bush and all the insects and all the trees growing are clamouring but that is their way and it settles.

It was a metaphorical story and not a literal account, intended to be impressionistic as would a painting of a pristine jungle with a smokin' great highway carved thought it. I think a bird's eye view of that scene would reveal in an instant, what is natural and what is man made, and not a single person would be unable to make that distinction. The image as a representation has several aspects. If you were to just leave these alone, in 100 years there's be no highway, though perhaps a visible scar where it once was - but basically just forest. It also marks a very strong line that is Not forest that divides the forest in two. The highway is something that has to be maintained so it remains the same, but the forest is maintained by its changing.

- and so it goes on in the metaphorical sense.

When I meditate what I hear is the birds singing alongside the dull throb of industry and it's infrequent crashings and bangs and initially, when I started hearing them they were different, at odds even, but they are both just things making noise and now they cede into each other as one.

So my ideas around the first post are that you are adding ideas as constructs to support the ideas of what action is and in that possibly to fashion in some way the ideas around compassion. Because if we feel we can help the human race then is there not a way to actually do it, a plan of action based on ideas of how to get to where what might be better, but in another sense isn't this just compassion pure and simple having a construct built around and over it?

Yep the first post was an impression I had after walking one morning, and subsequently I continue to 'ride that train', and I see what pops up along the way, as I go deeper into it myself in a real sense, though I can only speak in abstraction. I thought to myself, if others, by reading the abstraction, were to have a real sense of it, then all the better. This is why my threads on meditation are meditation, and the general idea of the thread is like a group meditation, minus the clown who tells you what to do and how to act. Teehee.

Compassion to me is a very particular thing that means to 'be with'. Much of the time we see compassion framed as mushy and loving; and 'wanting to help' and make things all right, but since I don't know what to do, I don't have that latter option. This, I claim, is the difference between someone who holds your hand over rough ground and someone who leads you through it. The difference between the listener and the teller. People want quick answers, but I don't have them. There is someone else who knows what they should do. Let them build the highway - (but not in my backyard, right? Hehehe)

These ideas, in the first post, thus remind me of my own interpretations of things as they seem to be to me, my own coming to terms with things that somehow seem different on the level of my perceptions of them and then, over time, somehow realising that the thing itself will always just be that thing and that it is how I bring myself to it that is of concern to me, and of me, not the thing itself for it will simply be whatever is of concern to it.

I like that phrase 'coming to terms'. It says to me that circumstances don't necessarily have to change, but I can be at peace with them. I have to do that a lot, because I'm completely powerless in terms what occurs, yet I know, there is no point walking toward the cliff face and falling off. This reminds me of a philosophy which Thich Nhat Hanh wrote in a book called 'peace in every step' - and the truth is, when walking, there is nothing to do but take this step.

I think when one comes to terms with things, the 'thing itself' takes on a new quality - it still looks the same, but appears different somehow.

Since my fridge is empty, I will go to the shops.

[Mr Interesting]

And possibly between listening and telling is suggesting which within could go from suggestion as possibility to veiled telling... but not quite.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink and while you can also give a man a book you can't make him think... for himself.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Mr Interesting

And possibly between listening and telling is suggesting which within could go from suggestion as possibility to veiled telling... but not quite.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink and while you can also give a man a book you can't make him think... for himself.

I think suggestion is a thing to be cautious with because people experiencing uncertainty tend to latch on to others' ideas rather than sort out what's going on for them. I find people usually have a lot of different options already, and a suggestion might be used to increase that range of options, but is no use making a suggestion unless one knows what that person is already thinking about.

The outside perspective is really good for bouncing ideas and going through the positives and negatives of whatever options there might be. A conversation like that can be so helpful, and I always find it helps me to have someone I can talk things through with.

Here's an ancedote:

I was deciding whether to continue the Social Work degree or change to a BA of Arts. It was a quandary and I didn't know which way to go. After my final exam, I talked to one of my peers, and without intention, just through general uni banter, I told her my dilemma. We talked about what I was thinking of, and about her experience in Arts subjects, and somehow, after that chat, I had become sure, and will change to BA of Arts. I felt grateful, but she never tried to help. It was just a personal chat between uni students who have that in common.

She didn't tell me anything, nor suggest what I might do, but she listened and understood and gave me that outlet. She was like a sounding board I could hear my own voice echoing off, and that got it out where I could see it rather than it all banging around inside my skull. Through talking, I knew what to do. Too bad I will be in a different degree to her next year, because I like her very much as a peer.

[Mr Interesting]

Of course it is a morass... of sorts, with every individual we might encounter being almost completely different which likely means everyone's at different levels of understanding themselves and how they might work and play within sometimes resonating environments and sometimes jarring environments.

Then there is us coming into view that and whether or not we are just viewing it to leave it be or whether, and always too a mixture of both, we might be able to see a way to quieten situations and let what might be wasteful settle into something more efficient.

My basic situation is one where people notice I am relaxed and peaceful, not to mention, and I will, that I'm also very lucky and they simply want that for themselves and it is the peculiarities in how they ask for that that ends up somehow defining how I might go about having a position from where to do any work that might be required.

And the usual admixture within all of these people is the natural and the Man-made, funnily enough, and it almost always comes down to tweaking people towards trusting there own intuitive senses and getting them to notice when they are covering that intuitive sense with rationalities as to why they shouldn't be doing this. Meanwhile this needing of a freedom in expression is shouting to be heard under the barrage of pragmatism.

So for me listening, suggesting, telling (off even) are all tools which might be used and are somewhat secondary to understanding the actual situation that appears in as much as any situation is a mixture of knowing what's going on, feeling what's going on and having absolutely no idea what's even happening and letting intuitive choices find their own way through.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Mr Interesting

Of course it is a morass... of sorts, with every individual we might encounter being almost completely different which likely means everyone's at different levels of understanding themselves and how they might work and play within sometimes resonating environments and sometimes jarring environments.

I just got an impression about these different levels of understanding, and thought, who really has a greater understanding? This seems to me to be a comparative exercise. I'm of the mind: Be yourself and don't make comparisons lest you judge yourself and other people. It's not that easy in this society of Jones', but as I like to say, 'you are as you are, and not some other way'.

Then there is us coming into view that and whether or not we are just viewing it to leave it be or whether, and always too a mixture of both, we might be able to see a way to quieten situations and let what might be wasteful settle into something more efficient.

My basic situation is one where people notice I am relaxed and peaceful, not to mention, and I will, that I'm also very lucky and they simply want that for themselves and it is the peculiarities in how they ask for that that ends up somehow defining how I might go about having a position from where to do any work that might be required.

And the usual admixture within all of these people is the natural and the Man-made, funnily enough, and it almost always comes down to tweaking people towards trusting there own intuitive senses and getting them to notice when they are covering that intuitive sense with rationalities as to why they shouldn't be doing this. Meanwhile this needing of a freedom in expression is shouting to be heard under the barrage of pragmatism.

That's well said. I place trust as the highest principle, just above love there on my principle chart - and indeed, because I can't advocate being 'led along' by some kind man made system, like a highway where you need to obey all the road rules, and if you think 'i'll just stop here for a while' all the others on the road are going nuts honking and swearing like the gooses they really are hahaha. Then a zen guy pops out the recesses of your own mind and belts you with that spiritual stick.

Ok - I'm really rabbiting on there, giggling like a little girl hahaha.

I heard Krishnamutri speak once, and I thought one thing he said was great. He said, I don't choose. I have an insight and I act. That speaks to me of intuition somehow.

Oh yes, these shoulds and shouldn'ts are a terrible thing really, all based in expectation and dread - my word that is stressful.

Shouting is how the society works, what happens is based on whose voice is heard, though it has to also be a legitimised voice. That's the power of legitimised knowledge. Thus is it a very noisy world, and most people are never heard at all - which is something I might ponder on my Self and Society thread in my next post.

So for me listening, suggesting, telling (off even) are all tools which might be used and are somewhat secondary to understanding the actual situation that appears in as much as any situation is a mixture of knowing what's going on, feeling what's going on and having absolutely no idea what's even happening and letting intuitive choices find their own way through.

You know what, I think the bottom line is, listen and respond. It's like answering back in full context of what was heard - and that implies a full understanding. I think the issue is, projecting ones own preferences onto another person. The conversation is more something that has no particular purpose in itself, but it's like a river, which one way or another, by meandering, is sure to find the sea. That's how I depict trust.

[adamkade]

Originally Posted by Gem

I was just thinking how I derailed my last thread by dismissing tradition, which I do dismiss, but I'm not against practice methods per-se, because they have been shown to be good for people's health. The reason I dismiss them is I want to talk about the deeper aspects of meditation.

Considering there are 1001 practice methods, and they all go by the name of meditation, it follows that meditation itself is not any method in particular. We even find methods directly contradict each other, so we if we look at that from a pure standpoint of reason we can see that method is not actually meditation.

I often go walking in the bush, and also along the highway, and there are very different vibes going on. The former is not organised purposely for reasons, but it is still extraordinarily highly ordered where everything in it and it's whole movement is precise. The latter is also highly organised, but the vibe from it is chaotic, the movement isn't at all graceful, and when I walk along there in the morning, the rushing, the noise and the aggression is distinctly palpable to me.

How can I apply this metaphor to a practice where the former is wonderful in the fact that it is, and the latter is constructed for intents and purposes of humanity? with this imagery I claim that meditation does not serve the intents and purposes of man's desires, but a method of meditation necessarily does.

There is so much said already, and I feel like elaborating on these aspects, symbolically speaking, how ultimately, nature is sole provider for Man, yet being intrinsically unsatisfied, Man, with desires other than what is, makes these metaphorical highways, which thereafter need to be maintained, and thus he becomes enslaved to this artifice manifest of desire.

I now take it back to what is already there prior to the making of 'highways'. That is, the very existence of conscious awareness and the very essence of acknowledgement - where at that instant of noticing... that's it.

This is a statement and not a question. Your thoughts seem to be complete, and you seem to be assured of your own answer. So I feel no need to provide you with one, because you have not asked me for one.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by adamkade

This is a statement and not a question. Your thoughts seem to be complete, and you seem to be assured of your own answer. So I feel no need to provide you with one, because you have not asked me for one.

On the contrary, I am utterly uncertain. It's true my thoughts are complete, generally speaking, but only because they complete their entire process without being interrupted. I am not provided with any answers nor am I made certain. I think it, and once it has finished its foray, then I don't think it anymore. I have no answers for you or anyone else, or myself, so I can't possibly provide that.