jwkspeck

Meaning/meaninglessness is still a duality. Bringing meaninglessness into the world of meaning (language, philosophy--whatever you want to call what you are doing here) is an absurdity. You aren't seeing how you're attaching meaning to your current state of experience.

@deci belle I appreciate that. Keep going and pay attention, huh? @Leo Gura What might be the first refuge of a strong mind? Must all refuge be destroyed before it might be found? Should the mind turned against and into itself look only for truth and beauty without repose or hindrance? The ride's just only started and I don't know where I'm going. I have no idea if I give myself permission, or refuse firstly all idea.

I'm not discontent with the fear, I'm discontent with what it means. I want to give up the anchor--but I'm not sure giving up on giving up is the right choice, because it has no rationale and I may not give it one without deceiving myself (and so I may not). You did give me a valuable insight. The unknown keeps returning, and with a new mask each time. Thank you!

I've become hyper-tuned into my intuition, lately. In a scary way. It feels like I've abandoned rationality. I can do logic, although my abilities aren't so strong (and never have been.) Is this just ego-fear? Should I force myself to be more logical? Should I be ok with this feeling of freedom, like I'm becoming empty and God is my leader? I don't need answers, just advice. I'm both terrified and excited for the terror. It's quite surreal, and I'm unsure if my passion for this surrealism is misplaced. Can I transcend logic without itself? I feel like the answer is obvious, but some discussion will really be helpful. Do I dive into the deep end without a back-up plan? Is this only a danger to me because I want to live? Should I let go of my attachment to survival? I just want comfort in discomfort. But there's still a nagging voice yelling back away from the cliff! Can someone give me a reason to give up reason?

@Serotoninluv What stops this from also being the most beautiful realization? Nothing is out of place.

I think you're confused. The ego is the thing being hurt - it's not that it sometimes gets inside you, it's that you ARE the ego! Sacrificing short-term goals for the long-term goal is emotionally challenging. I'm not too sure what you mean by sleeping with your ego, but here's what you can do: sit down and write down your (1) obligations and (2) passions. By obligations I mean every habit that is necessary for you to live your lifestyle, and by passions I mean every habit that is necessary for you to live your purpose. Then, prioritize your obligations, and prioritize your passions. The ones at the bottom are the ones you will sacrifice. If you are struggling to do this, consider your attachment. Contemplate why it is so emotionally difficult.

What is your lifestyle like? What kind of activities do you do? And how does your diet, sleep schedule and exercise look? Have you tried journaling before?

To be truly connected to other people as well as open to (and conscious of) your own emotions probably does necessitate empathy. If you feel connected to others, it's because you have a better sense of the truth that there is no absolute distinction between yourself and others--the reality is you are one and the same. If you can become actually conscious of this, not just conceptually, you may find you are either (a) sympathetic, and then empathetic, or (b) emotionally repressed. If you care about your own well-being, and you are the same as everyone else, you would care about everyone else's well-being. However, I don't want to make it seem so black and white, and I won't pretend to understand you from this one post. I have been very agreeable and sympathetic over the course of my life, and consciousness work has bloomed my empathy into deep compassion, but has also let me be more disagreeable when I judge it worthwhile to do so. It seems I come from a very different direction than you do, so do be skeptical of my words.

Detach being from doing. Literally do nothing. Just be, consciously. I find it works best in conjunction with another practice like concentration or mindfulness so that there's a sort of contraction and release, akin to molding a mound of clay with your hands; sharpening the mind through disciplined direction, and then letting go to see how it has changed.

I find this interesting so I'd like to follow up a bit. Labeling these different centres (or repeating some cycle of labels onto different centres) is much different from being conscious of them. Do you find this to be the case? Observing negative thoughts and behaviours does two things: it labels a thought or behaviour as negative (this is critical judgment, a desire for the case of the matter to be otherwise) as well as reinforces your subconscious goal as these thoughts and behaviours (unwittingly). If you are labeling it negative, it won't help you to dwell on them. If you are going to ruminate, ruminate on a question or something positive, creative. How do you define "I" here? Is it an experience? A thought, or some sensation? Are you, the observer, an experience?

The advantage of Gurdjieff's system is that it is confusing, but the disadvantage is that is not direct. Pushing through and taking action whilst being conscious of your confusion, deliberately letting yourself be confused, is an emotionally difficult and rewarding path, akin to Zen Buddhist koans. I'm not too well read on his work, how much does he stress detachment? You said it yourself, but maybe I can help clarify: it is an inevitable process; "I dropped down to a lower level of consciousness" is attachment to a state - remain the observer of all experience, even when it is emotionally difficult or a thought says you should, want or need otherwise; understand important distinctions in your own experience; and my suggestion would be to really, deeply contemplate in length what (1) "I", (2) "self", (3) "ego", (4) "consciousness", (5) "being" and (6) "illusion" actually are in your direct conscious experience. You may have a robust set of theory, but now a deconstructive application is necessary. Really internalize the fact that the map is not the territory.

@LRyan Be careful about getting stuck in ideology. If this is truly profound, wouldn't you want to use this as motivation to do your own work, to realize these things very deeply in your own way? Language is so tricky. It's much easier to take this on at face value as ideals rather than contemplate and become conscious of these things.

@SOUL I mean it much more literally than you are considering. All your pain is inflicted onto you by you, in multiple ways, whether it comes from internal or external abuse, a broken leg, a house fire, or someone repeatedly stabbing you in the abdomen. The pain is self-inflicted, even if the abuse is not "self-inflicted" (it is, in a different sense), and the suffering results from resisting the pain - which is more than natural. And I am not saying realization begets embodiment. This is something that you can become conscious of. The difficulty is that you hold your ideas about what "pain" and "self" are as self-evident and clear-cut, rational and non-contradictory (because otherwise you would be contemplating this and digesting, not asking for answers, more language to stomach). But it's too obvious to be able to actually talk about it. No matter how similar, every perspective is so radically different from my own for the very fact that it is NOT my own, and so I can't actually work the comprehension for you. I seriously wish I could. These words won't reveal this to you, you need to deeply contemplate these things, these concepts and experiences. What is pain? What is suffering? What is self? Your job is to work out your understanding, as a process, with vigilance. Be honest with the beliefs you hold and question very deeply what the truth really is. And again and again and again and again, ad infinitum, for every aspect of your life.

Nothing is forbidden. That is very rigid, a blue way of thinking. The stages are not denoting literal actions, but rather the motivations and results of actions. You can always evolve socially and sexually, and so on. It's not like you'll just be in a stage and then move on - different areas of your psychology and your culture are in different stages. There is way more nuance here than you're giving credit. Even within dating and pick-up many aspects of your psychology come into play; there isn't just one stage having its influence on you and your interactions, so to speak. This is a very flexible model, don't make it out to be so black and white. And remember that you have to go through every stage!

@Power Everything you observe is impermanent, shifting and changing every moment. Were you born? Will you die? If so, you assume you are a constant from birth to death, a single thing, a self for the period of your life. If you are the constant from birth to death, how can you be the thing you observe? What thing being observed is constant? Every identity you have has not been a constant through your life - but you need to prove this to yourself. Look closely, then look closer.