Forestluv

Same thing, a trick of the ego. That is. . . "we really don't know who is right, but my method of figuring is more right than your method of figuring. . . (so therefore I am right).". . . A psychological self can be oh so sneaky. . . Notice how the ego wants to set the rules for the correct method of figuring and what counts as evidence. My mind did this for 20+ adult years and knows this dynamic well. . . This is still within an external objective universal truth dynamic. Again, I am not saying it is "wrong". What you are saying is very useful in certain situations, yet the problem occurs when the mind completely contracts itself within this dynamic.

My impression is that beliefs in an external objective reality are a source of grounding for your mind-body and there is a lot of resistance to shaking that grounding. My sense is that if I push harder the mind will try and reinforce that grounding. Notice how your mind has been reinforcing and defending your beliefs in an external objective reality. There is no curiosity or interest beyond that contraction. So I think I would do more harm than good to keep pushing and it is best that I just step aside. The last thing I want to do is push you further into a contraction. If you would like to expand awareness, observe the attachment and identification that is going on here. Notice how strong the sense of "me" and "you" is. Lastly, I am not saying that you are "wrong". This is a very important point. I am saying I think your mind is contracted within a psychological dynamic. That does not mean you are "wrong". If you perceive what I write as saying you are "wrong", it will make it harder to expand. You are not wrong here. It is not a matter of being right or wrong. It is a matter of contraction and expansion - increasing one's level of awareness.

My statement was in regards to Leo's image. You stated what Leo's image meant. I responded that I gave it a different meaning. So the two of us have given Leo's image two different meanings. I say that in a relative sense, we are both right. I can see your perspective. From your perspective, you are right - Leo's image has that meaning for you. Yet it does not have the same meaning for me. Trust me, that is not what my mind-body experienced when I saw Leo's image. I am NOT saying one of us is right and one of us is wrong. I am saying we are both right in a relative sense. How can the meaning you gave Leo's image be objectively and universally true if that is not what I am experiencing? Are you saying the meaning my mind gave to Leo's image is wrong? Your mind seems to be highly contracted into an objective universal mindset. I am trying to crack that shell so you can expand. If you don't have interest in expanding, please let me know so we don't waste each other's time.

To me it seems like he has indicated to you over and over that he doesn't want to be in a relationship, yet is open to friendship or casual sex. He may want to keep you around as a friend or for casual sex. What is your intention here? Are you open to friendship or casual sex? My impression is that you want to be in a relationship. If it were me, my response would depend on my feelings. If I still wanted to be in a relationship with the person, I probably wouldn't respond. Or I may respond out of courtesy that I am not yet ready to interact as friends and that I need more time and distance - and that I will contact you when I am ready to be friends. Yet I would avoid engaging in a fantasy that maybe we can get back together and have a relationship. He has already indicated in many ways and many times that that is not what he wants. No strategy is going to change is orientation from friends/causal sex to a committed relationship orientation. He would probably be into some casual sex, yet my impression is that is not what you want and you would get emotionally attached. Just my impressions. . .

Are you saying that your meaning of Leo's image is right and my meaning of Leo's image is wrong?

Notice how both of our minds put that image into context. Both of us have been reading all the posts and writing our own posts. Both of us have been engaged in this thread and is aware of the context. Notice how your mind gave different context and meaning to the situation than my mind. I am not saying you are "wrong". I am saying that the meaning your mind gave to that image (with all the context) is different than the meaning my mind gave to the image (with all the context). We both had all the context and say the same image - yet each of our minds gave different meaning to it. So the meaning you gave is not universal objective truth and the meaning my mind gave is not universal objective truth. In general, expanding beyond an external objective universal reality and seeing the relative nature of reality is a major expansion - yet it comes with dangers as well. One can take it too far. . . It makes perfect sense to your mind and I can see that. It also makes a different type of perfect sense to another mind - can you see that? In a relative sense, we are both right. Leo's image could be given many different meanings (including all the context). I've already imagine two new meaning since writing this post. . . If we put our minds to it and got creative, how many different meanings do you think we could create?

This is a great example of relativity. My mind interpreted Leo's image very differently than your mind. Can you see that your mind gave relative meaning to that image and that the image has no inherent universal objective meaning? My mind gave it different meaning than yours, so it clearly has relative meaning.

From what I have observed, it can be a significant source of inter-personal conflict in some psychological dynamics, have a mild impact in some dynamics and have no impact in other dynamics. In the case here, it's obviously very significant. You are spending a lot of effort trying to express how significant it is. This is clearly true within this psychological dynamic. It's so purely true that a mind would not be able to see any falsities within it.

I appreciate this point and I find it helpful for my own development in communication. I can see how that impact you describe can cause inter-personal conflict. Thank you.

That is a good question. I would say psychological dynamics get more and more subtle/sneaky as a mind-body expands it's consciousness. When one works through psychological dynamics in themselves, it becomes very easy to spot in others. What used to be elusive and subconscious becomes totally obvious. Imagine the development of childhood to adolescence. Are there things that you are conscious of that a 5 year old child is not conscious of? Of course. Are there things a monk is aware of that you are not aware of? Of course. The problem with the earlier stages of consciousness work is that the psychological self has control over the narrative. Within this the psychological self sees things as very personal. By it's nature it desires to protect and defend itself. Are you "better" than a 5 y.o. child because you are more aware of certain things? Of course not. The two of you are simply at different developmental stages. During consciousness work, there comes a time in which perspectives and ideas are not "mine" or "yours". There are simply perspectives and ideas floating around in space. There is no attachment or identification to them. . . Imagine if we we listening to two different birds chirping. One in a pine tree and another in an oak tree. Imagine someone said to you "my bird chirps in the pine tree is better than your bird chirps in the oak tree". Wouldn't that sound odd to you? Yet that's what human minds to all the time with thoughts - they get attached to them and identify them. Yet be aware of drawing false equivalencies. The idea that "well we both just have opinions here" can be a technique of an ego to maintain control of the narrative. It can neutralize another and block one's own mind from learning and expanding. There are many many egoic games. It's fascinating to my mind.

Yes, that is something I am working to deepen. Thank you.

I acknowledged that this storyline you are offering has a point and value. My sense is that I do see this. I'm making another point: if you stay contracted within this storyline, your mind's awareness will not expand - it will stay contracted. Sometimes pointing out conscious levels can be very helpful. I've been in many dynamics in which a mind is open to observing their own psychological dynamics and pointing out levels of consciousness has helped them. That is what they have told me. However, in other dynamics using terms like "conscious levels" are not helpful at all. In the psychological dynamic playing out here, usage of conscious levels is not helpful. Your mind has shown a strong reaction to the term and you have explicitly said you don't like it. My sense is that using related pointers such as developmental "stages" would not be helpful either. I'd go so far to say that any type of hierarchical terminology and concepts in this dynamic here would not be helpful. I therefore find it to be a very difficult dynamic to engage with. My sense is that your mind-body wants to engage within this dynamic and has no interest in expanding beyond it.

You are touching upon a "place" I don't know how to communicate. That is part of the yearning, to communicate and express it. Sometimes there is surrender that it cannot be communicated and shared - and often a deep deep sense of sadness arises. There isn't resistance, yet I would say there is avoidance of it.

There is an underlying dynamic here your mind-body doesn't seem open to observing. On a personal level, I think the storyline your mind is immersed in has a point and value. Yet your awareness won't expand if it stays contracted within that storyline. This is an impersonal observation. If it is helpful, great. If not, ditch it.

I currently don't feel the energy to exert authority. I may have worked through aspects of "authority", depending on the definition of "authority" used here. My mind-body is not oriented toward being an "authority figure". My mind-body is not oriented toward being a manager or father type of authoritarian figure - at all. Yet in the past, there has been a psychological dynamic in which my mind desires to be an "authority" on a given academic topic, yet I would say this orientation is transient. My mind-body is more oriented toward harmony. What that yearning is, is very difficult for me to describe. It's not as simple as a binary choice between intelligence and love/connection. As well, there is a transcendental aspect to it. Although my mind-body does drop down into psychological self dynamics at times. For example, the concept of "intelligence" has broken down for me. There is an integration between empathic, intuivitive, cognitive, emotional and social intelligences into one holistic intelligence.

@mandyjw I don't get the sense that my mind-body is experiencing that dynamic. The reason I put "teaching" in quotes is because it's not really teaching. It's something else, yet I don't know the right word to use. It's not something a "me" wants or needs. It's a different energetic source.

Do you think that some spiritually-gifted people are discouraged from developing their abilities and never reach their potential? Like a child that is artistically gifted, yet his parents condition him to pursue a career in medicine. Or a spiritually-gifted person conditioned to pursue a career in business or science. I imagine a spiritually-gifted person that got pigeonholed into science. . . and his whole life he felt a deeper spiritual calling that he repressed. He goes on an Ayahuasca retreat and has an awakening "Oh my gosh, this is me. I may have spiritual/paranormal abilities". Or do you think that the person would just know during their life that they had abilities and knew they weren't developing them? In my own case, there were things people have noticed about me since I was a young adult and they would occasionally point it out to me. Yet I would dismiss it as being unscientific and woo woo. Yet now that I'm more open-minded, I think I'm realizing there may be a there there.

@lukej My sense is that this is a genuine facet of awakening. I would go with it - come to know and embody it into the mind-body. For me, egoic fragments often return to try and claim "ownership" of it, dismiss it or contextualize it. I do my best to be aware of that and let that egoic thought noise just flow by and evaporate.

If I could transmit it I would. Yet I don't know how. I'm trying to get better at it. My mind-body is conditioned to be a "teacher". I can transmit so many things - yet there are things I cannot transmit. And there is a deep aching and yearning inside of me because of that. There is nothing I'd rather give in this thread than the key to unlock the trap. At times it's like seeing someone stuck in a bear trap that they are unaware of. Yet they want to argue about what's the best cat litter on the market as they writhe in suffering. Sometimes I try to communicate something and it just doesn't come out quite right and received quite right. I'm trying to observe that and develop better communication skills. In the area of consciousness work, I consider myself average communicator at this point. I don't get the sense talking about nonduality would help here. Yet, I could be wrong. Whatever helps, I'm all for. . .

@Leo Gura Thanks for sharing your insights in this thread. It's helping me make connections. . .

Of course it is. Various contexts may arise. If someone asks me a question about algebra in English, I'll do my best to help them with algebra. Talking about calculus in Chinese wouldn't be very helpful.

@Shakazulu It depends on the mind-body. Highly developed / conscious mind-bodies can do all sorts of stuff that may seem paranormal or super-natural to others. I know a Reiki master that can gain information from a person through energetics. I also know high level monks not able to do this. In general, I would say awakened beings are much more "in tune" with the people they are with - in part because there isn't a bunch of egoic chatter of thoughts and feelings. This allows for a lot of space for awareness and new abilities to arise. Imagine going an entire week without a single thought. That would be one heckuva week. . . Some awakened beings may communicate very well verbally, some non-verbally. Some may be more cognitive-centered, others may be more heart-centered. There is a diversity. That is one of the exciting parts of consciousness work. You don't know what will unfold for your mind-body. You don't know what magic will arise.

@MM1988 You are not making the distinction between egoic and trans-egoic. From the perspective of the ego, there is egoic love and egoic hate. There is egoic beauty and egoic ugliness. There is egoic bliss and egoic pain. There is egoic peace and egoic suffering. From the perspective of the ego, it wants to get rid of the egoic hate, ugliness, pain and suffering and keep egoic love, beauty, bliss and peace. This is the obsession of the ego and the cause of great suffering. Transcending the ego means it all dissolves: egoic love, hate, beauty, ugliness, bliss, pain, suffering and peace. All of the ego-based interpretations are transcended and dissolve. At a trans-egoic state there may arise transcendental forms of Love, Beauty, Bliss and Peace - yet these are distinct from egoic self-need based versions. If one transcends the ego, there is no "you" to be ugly anymore. The mind-body is whole and complete - whether or not anyone thinks the body is beautiful or ugly. The mind-body will not desire to make racist jokes because it can do whatever it wants. The is no "you" vs "me". You are missing the transcendental aspect of this. This is why direct experience is so important. A mind-body can intellectualize transcending itself, yet that aint it. Not even close. The emodiment comes with direct experience.

I’ve found that I first need to introspect my individual consciousness as a higher priority. If I have a distorted lens, I will not see reality clearly - it will be distorted. What you propose at the collective conscious level takes a very high level of awareness, maturity and skill.

One question I often ask myself is if I have a stronger desire to be right and protect my beliefs or if I have a stronger desire to observe the underlying nature of my thoughts / beliefs and expand my awareness. When I am honest with myself, sometimes the answer is the former. It’s one of the hardest things to do in consciousness work and something I am still working on. Leo explains in very well in his 65 keys to a good life video