'just be at peace'

[happy soul]

We've all heard the teaching 'just be', and maybe 'just be aware'. I've been contemplating the idea 'just be at peace' for a while.

It seems pretty easy to do, UNLESS you're upset in some way. Eckhart Tolle says that 'peace is our essential nature'. It can therefore be natural and effortless to just be at peace.

The teaching to 'rest in peace' is similar, and is definitely not merely a prayer for the dead, but an important approach to life and to one's moment to moment experience.

Here's the problem. WE LIKE DRAMA, CONFLICT, AND PROBLEMS.

U.G. Krishnamurti says that we love problems, and if we don't have one, we'll CREATE one.

It's like (and this may not apply to everyone, but it does to most people) we don't really, really and truly, WANT to be at peace.

If we can see this in ourselves, if we can recognize how we don't really want peace, maybe we can overcome it. If we practice the teaching to 'just be at peace', our tendency to AVOID peace will reveal itself, and then we can deal with that tendency - we can let it go.

We have to be willing.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by happy soul

We've all heard the teaching 'just be', and maybe 'just be aware'. I've been contemplating the idea 'just be at peace' for a while.

It seems pretty easy to do, UNLESS you're upset in some way. Eckhart Tolle says that 'peace is our essential nature'. It can therefore be natural and effortless to just be at peace.

The teaching to 'rest in peace' is similar, and is definitely not merely a prayer for the dead, but an important approach to life and to one's moment to moment experience.

Here's the problem. WE LIKE DRAMA, CONFLICT, AND PROBLEMS.

U.G. Krishnamurti says that we love problems, and if we don't have one, we'll CREATE one.

It's like (and this may not apply to everyone, but it does to most people) we don't really, really and truly, WANT to be at peace.

If we can see this in ourselves, if we can recognize how we don't really want peace, maybe we can overcome it. If we practice the teaching to 'just be at peace', our tendency to AVOID peace will reveal itself, and then we can deal with that tendency - we can let it go.

We have to be willing.

IF peace is our essential nature, maybe it will catch up to us even if we don't want it and want all the drama instead..

Practice makes perfect..so they say.

I was doing a reiki today on a elderly lady bed ridden for most of her day. she loves her Reiki..We went into a deep discussion about astral travelling and angels, god and perfection, where god resides and what perfection meant to her..I said to her. "Your just perfect"..She said. No god is perfect. I said. But didn't you tell me earlier god is within you? She said YES god is. I said. Well you must be perfect too.. She smiled and we laughed together.

It was a deeply peaceful reiki session. After wards she mentioned how she felt like she was floating in peace, I said, I felt it too, it was lovely.. We were the perfect peace makers today..

Originally Posted by naturesflow

IF peace is our essential nature, maybe it will catch up to us even if we don't want it and want all the drama instead..

Practice makes perfect..so they say.

Interesting, because quite honestly if "Eckhart Tolle says that 'peace is our essential nature'.", then Ekhart Tolle has got it wrong.

It may be an essential aim but as essential nature it's too highly questionable. It would be stasis, a point at which 'experiencing' stops - because a) there's no need for further experiencing as there would be no further unknowns; b) what's around us doesn't stand still. One person's peace isn't another's which may be in conflict with ours unless we all reach a state of entropy in which nothing matters any longer; c) we'd have to assume every environment we enter brings no conflict thus nothing to resolve; and d) those who like a challenge (which could be seen as an arm of spiritual growth) will have to disturb their status quo to find it- or if thrown at them, are ready to meet it.

We can enjoy moments of peace; we have the capacity to be peaceful (could even be 'content') but that doesn't make it 'essential nature' which is to me balance and steady state... I am not unpeaceful most of the time because I make continual adjustments and put up with non-peace, just as one factor: having to work to earn to survive.

As I see it, anyway. But this is all too early. I need a bit of brekkies before going to zumba which will bring joy, exhilaration... but that isn't peace.
Mr Tolle needs to rethink his premise... he needs to be Tolled off!

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

Interesting, because quite honestly if "Eckhart Tolle says that 'peace is our essential nature'.", then Ekhart Tolle has got it wrong.

I don't see him as wrong, but you can of course. What I find Lorelyen, is often as I am moving through shifts on the surface, as in when past conditioning or even emotional binds arise, often I find I go through a process where by I become aware of something, face it, release it and then I notice I move deeper into a state of clarity and I guess you could say peace at the core. Over time that peace has become and is becoming a deeper interconnected feeling of peace only because I have found peace within each stream I needed to make peace with. The more I make peace with external stuff that might unsettle me, trigger me, the more expanded my peace seems to become. So I suppose it comes through what we could perceive as a conscious practice to build peace at the level where peace seems to reside more naturally as an arising as part of my more "true" nature. I guess I would call it part of my true nature, only because when all the other conditioned stuff moves out of me, (like really face it fully) I do feel a deeper more grounded sense of peace at the core of my being.

It may be an essential aim but as essential nature it's too highly questionable. It would be stasis, a point at which 'experiencing' stops - because a) there's no need for further experiencing as there would be no further unknowns; b) what's around us doesn't stand still. One person's peace isn't another's which may be in conflict with ours unless we all reach a state of entropy in which nothing matters any longer; c) we'd have to assume every environment we enter brings no conflict thus nothing to resolve; and d) those who like a challenge (which could be seen as an arm of spiritual growth) will have to disturb their status quo to find it- or if thrown at them, are ready to meet it.

Perhaps your right. As I perceive it through process, it seems to arise as a end point of process, in the core of the surface movements, "not at peace" in myself. I still experience myself of course. Life goes on. I guess I know it exists within me to find, but I am not consciously aiming for it. It tends to be an arising point after the fact of "doing the work" to clear everything out of its way holding on in feeling.

We can enjoy moments of peace; we have the capacity to be peaceful (could even be 'content') but that doesn't make it 'essential nature' which is to me balance and steady state... I am not unpeaceful most of the time because I make continual adjustments and put up with non-peace, just as one factor: having to work to earn to survive.

Balance is as I experience myself part of peace, so I guess the flow of life movements and awareness points we can enter into, give rise to knowing there is more if we get stuck or out of balance, 'not at peace' in someway. I guess once you know what you can be within, it becomes a knowing you can attain to it.

As I see it, anyway. But this is all too early. I need a bit of brekkies before going to zumba which will bring joy, exhilaration... but that isn't peace.
Mr Tolle needs to rethink his premise... he needs to be Tolled off!

Mr Tolle has found what he thinks works, it serves those who need it I guess. I wonder if within our essential nature their is a deeper connected peace that is unmoved by any external happenings that might otherwise move one into discord if not connected that deep in peace? May be the DL could hint us and let us in on his understandings.

[sky]

Originally Posted by happy soul

We've all heard the teaching 'just be', and maybe 'just be aware'. I've been contemplating the idea 'just be at peace' for a while.

It seems pretty easy to do, UNLESS you're upset in some way. Eckhart Tolle says that 'peace is our essential nature'. It can therefore be natural and effortless to just be at peace.

The teaching to 'rest in peace' is similar, and is definitely not merely a prayer for the dead, but an important approach to life and to one's moment to moment experience.

Here's the problem. WE LIKE DRAMA, CONFLICT, AND PROBLEMS.

U.G. Krishnamurti says that we love problems, and if we don't have one, we'll CREATE one.

It's like (and this may not apply to everyone, but it does to most people) we don't really, really and truly, WANT to be at peace.

If we can see this in ourselves, if we can recognize how we don't really want peace, maybe we can overcome it. If we practice the teaching to 'just be at peace', our tendency to AVOID peace will reveal itself, and then we can deal with that tendency - we can let it go.

We have to be willing.

' Rest in peace ' or Rest in the present, which comes first or are they both the same. From my own experiences I know that if I can accept internally what's happening externally then I am at peace with myself, but I can only do this by being present in the moment. Yin/Yang comes to mind.

[Dargor]

Originally Posted by happy soul

Here's the problem. WE LIKE DRAMA, CONFLICT, AND PROBLEMS.

U.G. Krishnamurti says that we love problems, and if we don't have one, we'll CREATE one.

It's like (and this may not apply to everyone, but it does to most people) we don't really, really and truly, WANT to be at peace.

No..... I'm allergic to bullsh#t so this doesn't apply to me at all indeed. I seem to be among the select few who truly crave for peace then.

Originally Posted by naturesflow

7
Mr Tolle has found what he thinks works, it serves those who need it I guess. I wonder if within our essential nature their is a deeper connected peace that is unmoved by any external happenings that might otherwise move one into discord if not connected that deep in peace? May be the DL could hint us and let us in on his understandings.

The DL?

This is the problem with many similar thinkers – Mr (or is it Mrs) Hicks is the same and cynical as it may sound it seems to be resolving as a repository of spiritual platitudes. For the depressed and worldly weary it makes them feel better but it also raises false hopes, not only reinforcing people's feelings of their current un-optimal state but about what could be if they followed a doctrine.... that may not be workable in their circumstances, which could raise problems of despair if they have no control over their circumstances. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with aiming for peace. What a lovely world it would be if everyone took the same drug at the same time.

Last night I happened upon a passage from a book on neurophysiology representing fairly up to date research. It'll bear repeat here in context.

Evolution is driven and directed by the physical survival of the species not by the happiness of individuals. Thus much of the brain’s functioning is based on primitive fight or flight mechanisms as opposed to conscious and compassionate decision making. The conscious and unconscious management of fear and anxiety remains the core component of our attachment relationships.

It got me thinking. The way the brain deals with situations is an extension of its earliest incarnation, evolved over millions of years. It is still prepared for all eventualities. So it would seem that peace is not a human’s essential nature. Rather, it’s self-preservation, the brain’s job above all is keeping its owner safe.

It does seem to run counter to Mr Tolle.

(But please accept...although it's probably good insomnia treatment I don't look on neurophysiology as good bedtime reading!!)

♥

[Jyotir]

Hi happy soul,

Even what is undesirable now in our lives was at one time emergent, radical, and a transcending departure from the status quo in a continual evolution of consciousness that is life. And this is also true of mental and vital attributes of human life - acquired habits - that at one time were urgently necessary to be emphasized and integrated - must now be superseded.

Yes, peace is our essential nature, however it is veiled, buried, or predominated by layers of our familiar instrumental nature which is not peaceful.

This is the point of spirituality, yoga, sadhana - to reveal and practice the essential so that it becomes the instrumental consciousness.

~ J

[God-Like]

Even those that are Self realized have peaceful opposites arise .

It's such a diverse situation regarding peace .

Who/m is at peace? Is one peaceful because they are at peace with their own self?

Is there peace because one has no worries, is one at peace with their worries?

One could go on and on with this pertaining to where one actually stands in reflection of self or what you are .

One can suggest that this and that is our true nature or essential nature, but what are the conditions for our true nature or essential nature ..

I would say that being totally at peace would be totally at peace with oneself.

If you are not at peace and you want to be at peace then it won't work simply by suggesting like Tolle supposedly did that it is effortless .

One is not at peace for a reason .. In the midst of Tolle's depression / self hate experience was it effortless to be at peace?

like J has suggested certain workings can eventually allow that peace to the fore . It won't happen through conscious choice, but through specific processes .


x daz x

Originally Posted by Jyotir

Hi happy soul,
Yes, peace is our essential nature, however it is veiled, buried, or predominated by layers of our familiar instrumental nature which is not peaceful.

Have to contest that, a view borne by western philosophy that tends to view the self in isolation as a kind of ideal state which in this discussion turns out to be inappropriate or nonsensical. The brain acts in response to an environment, not just the self who owns it.

Any stimulus from any aspect of the environment is acted upon before the nature of that stimulus reaches the conscious mind (that takes between 100 and 300ms). It's no different from the tendency of all organisms. It 'asks' "should I approach or should I avoid as it's dangerous?" some time before it gets to the veiled and buried stuff.

If peace were "our essential nature" the reaction would invariably be fronted by withdrawal since it would take deliberation in conscious awareness about the degree of avoidance necessary. Or the brain would initially treat all as peaceful and decide on the validity of the decision later (if the organism is still alive to check). Or the person would exist in isolation unreactive to anything of the environment.

The brain simply doesn't go out there looking for peace. Its first action is to keep you safe. The world isn't peaceful and the brain is fully aware of that without our conscious awareness.

So...if you can come up with better factual evidence of your position I'll stand corrected.