No experts on meditation

[Gem]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Do you see the difference between between your method and what an expert on the subject may offer?

Big difference I would say.

I don't think I'm talking about method at all because no one talked about their method, and I don't know what I'm going to say in advance, but rather, I respond to what is said. Not as though I heard a question and have an answer. I'm not delving into my memory in order to disseminate information. I'm listening and responding to what is occurring now. This is not only an audible or read dialogue, because everything is upon my senses, and therefore, it occurs sensationally, so I'm not actually responding to you per se, but expressing what happens within me momentarily. The difference is then, the conversation becomes meditation as we know with immediacy what is happening within ourselves right now. If we're not that, then this conversation isn't actually about meditation.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

This is pure fluffing your ego.



What you are saying is that you are not listening. That as soon as they start talking you are lost in a daydream trying to find a answer or how to relate inside yourself.

I would encourage you to read Insight Dialogue if you really want to learn how to be present and not get lost in thoughts like that. How to really pay attention to someone while in a conversation.



A mistake like I mentioned above. A common one.

Not trying to be argumentative or put you down in anyway but what you are saying is what everyone does. That is the problem. You are not saying to do anything new at all Gem.

Of course you are primarily concerned with Gem, so I know there's a narrative that is being presented as a discourse of knowledge, and thus I must be positioned through self imagery in order to validate the expert, but to me, this isn't a relationship between self imagery. I know that you have no interest in listening because you write my narrative. To you I'm a self image that has the qualities you've imagined and that is of great interest to you and many others I'm sure, but it's all telling, people just entertain themselfves with the melodrama of it, but if people were listening, not listening according to the discourse on listening, remembering how to listen according to a book, but really being aware with their sensory capacity, there would be no interest at all in narratives about Gem.

[jonesboy]

Nice projections gem.

Why is it that when someone starts to examine your statements you pull the I have no position which flows into poor misunderstood gem.

Over and over again.

Take care gem.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Nice projections gem.

Why is it that when someone starts to examine your statements you pull the I have no position which flows into poor misunderstood gem.

Over and over again.

Take care gem.

Sorry JB, but you invented that narrative and you only listen to that narrative. Your posts almost always contain a Gem narrative and exceptions to that are very rare. I suggest that you examine why you do that, and I can tell you now, it's nothing to do with any issue of mine.

[Mr Interesting]

From Insight dialogue.
"Listen deeply means becoming a receptive field that receives the words and feelings expressed by another person. The invitation is to listen with kindness and compassion and allow yourself to be touched by another human being. This kind of listening is patient, nonjudging, and free from personal agendas. The attitude of listening deeply is a willingness to feel with and experience the thoughts and feelings of another human being without personalizing what you hear, meaning misinterpreting it on the basis of your personal concepts or preferences.

Jonesboy, it seems to me this is essentially the same as what Gem is saying.

There are some problems with this insight dialogue stuff but not for people who are beginners or some ways along the line but at a level of meditation where the mind is stilled even the idea of intending kindness and compassion gets in the way of the body ( this can be expanded but body will suffice) speaking it's truth and this is also the case when being present and listening fully to another and having an intention of kindness and compassion, not wanting to hurt the person, is a layer of dishonesty unless this is honestly the listeners internal response which would be unhindered by intention.

But it's not bad, insight dialogue, not bad at all and it's use of intention is justified but only until it's no longer needed. Intention is one of the subtlest of the minds speech but speech it is and when the mind is quieted, the body stilled then the intentive sense can be let go.

Then even thought and body feeling and intention can be brought back because they are now tuned... as it were, towards the deeper inner senses as opposed to the outward senses alone.

[Gem]

Listening is more like a broad term that means you're silent and observing, but alertly, so when you listen to someone, there's no answers forming in your head while they speak. To reply with a gem narrative is not a response to what I say, so there's no recognition of the central point I make. It's not constructive or contributive, but rather, disruptive and distracting, and it's only those who present as meditation experts who create Gem narratives.

Narrators will say like 'i don't intend to be mean' and then narrate in terms of fault and in terms of lack, and I know the belittlement is merely used to paint a 'diminished other' in order to define a 'superior self'. This is how the 'expert image' survives itself and it's all within the creations of delusions.

In the world and society, this is the way of things, my self image relating to your self image, and jostling and straining to keep some status, with all the discourses that create the norms in order uphold the privileged and suppress the oppressed. We citizens of the globe don't know any better because we were born into it. It was there before we were born and all we have to do to keep it all in delusion like this is continue to act normally, i.e. as we always have. We simply don't see how the relations of images built our human society, were cast in stone temples, written into the laws, formed our education systems and put us all into these little boxes that are formed by narratives. We narrate ourselves, and by so doing, we wrote the narrative of 'the other'.

I attract narrative because in my conversation I don't create narrative. That silence about me; about you; isn't what we're accustomed to, and therefore not comfortable with, so when we come across that silence, due to it being disquieting, a narrative is constructed. I mean, who are you if I have no narrative? How can we relate if we have no images to compare? How can you be defined unless I am defined?

This is what we've been doing, and it produces so much bulldust I can barely see two feet ahead, but it's too uncomfortable to spend time in extended quiet stillness because old life issues arise freely where there is no longer oppressions. The creation of narratives is akin to clinging to the security blankets of our safety zones. The volume of them effectively conceals the true inner turmoil we live with, and because these narratives tend to speak in terms of faults and lacks, the superior is he who presumes to compose the narrative, but then, what inner view is used to create that lacking and faulted 'other'?

What I was saying about myself in terms of being aware through all the senses in regards to listening is to know what is said in words and what kind of feeling those words have. To 'mean' something has two parts: 1) the meaning we convey in words and; 2) What we mean to intend, so any message has these elements, and more.

I don't really know what level we're talking on, but I can't entertain the narratives about constructed images and conduct pretentious conversations like that. Those who which to speak of selves should stick to the "I narrative". This indicates that they are self aware and speak from where they are.

The 'you narrative' is only possible when one projects themselves and tries to speak from where the other person is. To use the 'Gem narrative' means you project yourself to my position and speak from there. We can see how ridiculous that is, how fallacious and pretentious it all is. It's not sincere and truthful. It isn't self aware. It isn't communication in any form and It isn't anything to do with meditation at all.

To be a conversation about meditation the participants have to be present, which means to be self aware, to be conscious that you are here. We don't bring a discourse of truth from the past for each-other to believe because there is no space between this conversation and our meditation. You are presently aware as we communicate; not later on tonight or tomorrow, but now.

My feeling is that if this were a real conversation, it wouldn't be distracted from the moment we're living in. You know that feeling when you have a very engaging conversation where something that's actual is being communicated? We'd feel it moving within us with, and then, responsive and lively, and it would be a meditation in itself, in real time.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Mr Interesting

From Insight dialogue.
"Listen deeply means becoming a receptive field that receives the words and feelings expressed by another person. The invitation is to listen with kindness and compassion and allow yourself to be touched by another human being. This kind of listening is patient, nonjudging, and free from personal agendas. The attitude of listening deeply is a willingness to feel with and experience the thoughts and feelings of another human being without personalizing what you hear, meaning misinterpreting it on the basis of your personal concepts or preferences.

Jonesboy, it seems to me this is essentially the same as what Gem is saying.

There are some problems with this insight dialogue stuff but not for people who are beginners or some ways along the line but at a level of meditation where the mind is stilled even the idea of intending kindness and compassion gets in the way of the body ( this can be expanded but body will suffice) speaking it's truth and this is also the case when being present and listening fully to another and having an intention of kindness and compassion, not wanting to hurt the person, is a layer of dishonesty unless this is honestly the listeners internal response which would be unhindered by intention.

But it's not bad, insight dialogue, not bad at all and it's use of intention is justified but only until it's no longer needed. Intention is one of the subtlest of the minds speech but speech it is and when the mind is quieted, the body stilled then the intentive sense can be let go.

Then even thought and body feeling and intention can be brought back because they are now tuned... as it were, towards the deeper inner senses as opposed to the outward senses alone.

No it is not the same as Gem's post at all. It is one aspect of a bigger picture. Gem would get lost trying to relate within. No truely listening.

I don't really understand your post.

What are you talking about how it is not bad until it is no longer needed. Please let me know when theses techniques would not be needed. What level of depth is needed for them to not be needed?

[Mr Interesting]

At a market I go to there is an old Indian fellow with a long beard and despite this outwardly obvious depiction of wisdom I felt something from him worth investigating and he must have felt something in me because we became chatty very easily once we started.

Now there could be two reasons, but maybe more, I started with this with the first being what Gem talks of where the outward appearance or narrative persona of this Indian chap is being used to define a platform from which to sally forth with my ideas and have them hopefully construed as worthy. The second reason is that this outward depiction he has, while there in 3d, isn't there at all beside the feelings we might have which urge us towards becoming acquainted. In this regards the eyes are still the first response but it was the urge to look that way which is more important and once the seeing is done and comes to rest then we can listen to what the urge might be pointing towards. Listen within ourselves and see/hear a pulling towards or not.

So I'm writing this and I start to see where it's going and it's not the original intention I had as the original intention was to illustrate how I see the master/pupil relationship having advantages in certain situations especially when the people are within spitting distance of each other but that these advantages are based on proximity and feeling yet when the relationship is moved out into the world other dynamics come into play as the ability to feel something in others is diminished by lack of proximity and so groups have devised ways of manufacturing and passing on trust which because of this moving from proximity as the prime indication distorts the trust indicators and makes them intellectual and matters of belief become the currency.

So here, with me on a computer as the day begins, review the words before me and define whether a response can be made. And I take my time.

If this were written out linearly to represent time as well as space there would be huge gaps between each sentence as I sat back and went quiet.












I, myself, quite enjoy the possibilities of narrative which is why so many of my answers across this usage are storylike.






It's like a distancing I use to somehow sit creatively and while, I suppose, my intellectual sense sits in a creative vein I'm hopefully able to allow room for a sense of things to come up.









It may work.













It may not.













Nah, it's all just too complicated now. I find this alot now when I'm here which is why I revert to stories. So many variables arrive which feed back into a simple question it's like a whole book needs to be written.

But maybe the simple answer is jonesboy that you give Gem the benefit of your doubt... instead of wanting him to adjust to your approval (oops).











The surface is here, this is it. And what else is here if we still quietly?















As for the questions. I found that when I could quiet the mind, my mind, and sit comfortably within that for minutes and minutes at a time, that awareness would rest but still wonder, or sense, I suppose the I.











There was a sense of I. Then I would disappear and subtley touching that might be AM....






I AM I am











Hmm, maybe this is intention?






Better stop now. Peace bro!

[jonesboy]

First,

I give Gem the benefit of the doubt. Once someone starts to talk about themselves in the 3rd person.. I mean come on...

As far as your reply, that is a very LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOng way of not answering the question.

So let's start over. I don't have any more interest in GEM.

Please tell me when a technique like Insight Dialogue is not needed anymore? You said it not me, just looking for clarification.

[Mr Interesting]

Then, of course, I went away and did other things and a response became obvious, felt good, and it must be a story... well it is a story.

I was doing lots of building for a chap many years ago, no plans, but then also no real redefining of structure, so it wasn't a naughtiness experts might want to question and define as right or wrong. But I did have an idea to put a big window in a outside wall which would cut through some triangulation of the structure so I devised a way to re-introduce the triangulation in other ways when low and behold an Engineer of structures came onto the site and so I asked him, queried him about my ideas.

In the past though, before this, I'd gone out and done some quite structural things for people and then had engineers arrive to question what I'd done, given that I was supposed to have asked permission but didn't, and my luck brought old timey engineers who actually enjoyed what I'd done and complemented that I was able to be intuitive with structure to a degree that was actually quite extraordinary... and I am, I know this because when I attempt things I eventually figure out what will work.

So fast forward to this big window in a wall that holds up a house with a recent graduate engineer and I tell him what I think is possible, and even draw a picture to show him. He gets a dumbfounded look on his face and says 'I don't know, I'd have to do the calculations.'

The old timey guys had experience. With experience comes possibilities as possibilities become probables and cede into do-ables and then measurables. But this graduate did not have the experience and all he had was measurables which hadn't even ceded to do-ables never mind probables and no idea whatsoever that possibilities even existed.

His only recourse was the measurement of what had already been do transformed into calculations as a way to get to do-able.

An engineer with experience would have seen what I was trying a achieve, seen how I pulled apart one solved problem then re-orientated the problem to be solved in another way and would have been able to supply a set of calculations, which, of course could only be understood by other engineers, so it looked like he knew his business but more importantly, alongside his qualifications (in return for remuneration) would have stated it, this adjustment of trusted reality, could be undertaken with his consent... and as is now understood in the world, his indemnified responsibility.


So when we find a master what do we see? Measurable? Do-able? Probable?


Possibilities?


Do we need indemnified responsibility?