Search the Community

"The story of Adam and Eve is an allegory describing the loss of “paradise” through the arising of self-knowing. So, it seems, there is wholeness (paradise) and within that boundless, free-floating, causeless energy, something appears which experiences itself as being separate from that wholeness (paradise). Here is a metaphor pointing to what seems like “the story” of self-consciousness, out of which is apparently born the knowing and experience of free will, choice, time and space, purpose and direction. As “the story” unfolds, so the self learns to know “the world out there” and attempts to negotiate the best deal possible for itself . . . it apparently takes action to find pleasure and avoid pain. The greater the knowledge the more effective the action, the results and the apparent sense of personal control . . . or so it seems. All of these efforts bring varying results, and so the individual comes to know fluctuating states of gratification and disappointment. However, it can be noticed that there seems to be an underlying sense of dissatisfaction which drives the self to find a deeper meaning. Because the apparent self can only exist through its own knowing, its search for a deeper meaning will be limited to that which it can know and experience for itself. Within these limitations there are a multitude of doctrines, therapies, ideologies, spiritual teachings and belief systems that the seeker can come to know. There can also be the knowing and experiencing of states of silence, stillness, bliss, awareness and detachment, all of which seem to come and go like night and day. All of these teachings, recommendations and prescriptions are attempting to provide the seeker with answers to that which is unknowable, and ways to find that which has never been lost. So the self is the separate seeker that pursues everything that it thinks it can know and do, excepting the absence of itself. That absence is the emptiness which is unknowable, but paradoxically is also the very fullness, the wholeness (paradise) that is longed for. Should the apparent seeker meet with a perception which reveals in great depth the real nature of separation and also exposes, without compromise, the sublime futility of seeking, there can be a collapse of the construct of the separate self. That totally impersonal message carries with it a boundless energy into which the seemingly contracted energy of self unfolds. A resonance can arise which is beyond self awareness . . . something ineffable can be sensed . . . a fragrance and an opening to the wonder of unknowing can emerge. Suddenly, there seems to be a shift and an impersonal realisation that this is already wholeness. The boundless, naked, innocent, free-floating and wonderful simplicity of beingness is already all there is . . . it is extraordinary in its ordinariness and yet it cannot be described. -- Tony Parsons

@Batman Thank you for posting this take on the mind. Just for the sake of reference, did you write it? It gives a very nice synopsis of how mind is actually secondary to Intelligence, which actually informs mind from its impersonal, transcendental viewpoint. The sense of self, identity, world knowledge, and experience are of the mind. More often than not, peeps never actually awaken from that world of boundaries, concepts, and delusion, living a life cut off from and, seemingly, lacking Wholeness. Consciously be aware of when, as Intelligence, touching the mind takes place and the bifurcation into/as duality begins. The sum of such bifurcated "parts/distinctions" will never amount to Wholeness/Oneness.

In a prior thread, I used the ancient phrase "it has no location" in reference to the Center, which is the impersonal unity of the immaterial body of awareness. Another related alchemic phrase is to "float around in the center of the compass." That it has no location is not to mean that it is somewhere else. It is a teaching device to prevent misguided materialistic people from attempting to pander to the development and/or pursuit of derivative psychological spinoffs characteristic of habituation to pimping aesthetic naming and their values, indulging in self-reifying visualization practices, addiction to formal quietism or psychosomatic techniques (energetics) that only confuse the order of authentic practice by the mishandling of the terminology of alchemy only to fool themselves and others unfortunate enough to be misled by such calculated activity. The reason that [having] no location is emphasized, is because even though the effect of the Center is by virtue of having a physical body, and it is not beyond the body of the being that is going to die, there is nothing relative to personal aesthetic, mental or physical manipulation, deprivation or effort relative to the body, in private or in public situations, or is there any part of the body, physical, plasmic or subtle, that constitutes this Center of the immaterial Body of Awareness. Therefore consciousness itself cannot be construed to have any such personal attributes constituting it. Consciousness cannot have an appreciative or antagonistic perspective relative to itself or any thing. Consciousness has no point of reference such as sentient beings do. Why? Consciousness is simply the quality and capacity of one's selfless awake nature. It has no point of view. Consciousness doesn't see. It is seeing itself and is therefore selfless, uncreated; no different than true reality, nonoriginated. This is the inconceivable nature of ignoramuses and buddhas alike. Even in ordinary situations, they are hardly discernible to the awakened, but for tell-tale signs of karmic momentum, which cannot be stopped. In other words, this Center, being the body of immaterial awareness, is not relative to the physical body nor is it accessible in terms of any of the so-called "apertures" in the body used by the lowest of the low who employ perverted practices to "nurture essence", or else obscured by the attempts by some to posit identity values with respect to what it is. When people see this for themselves, they are liberated from the tyranny of psychological qualifications pertaining to self and other, including personalistic value judgements relative to self-reified projections identifying "creativity", "beauty", good and bad, right and wrong, and before and after. Liberation is liberation from having a self to posit as "self." This is realizing the nature of "awake" as itself, stripped bare, utterly naked with nothing to hide, nothing to show, and most importantly, nothing to know. To float around "in the center of the compass" is to be just this quality of awake in the very midst of delusional, situational, karmic existence. Applying the selfless intent of open sincerity liberated from habit energies relative to egoism hiding behind personal views and projections, and without dwelling on anything or clinging to anything is the highest practice of self-refining enlightening activity, in which vulnerability to what is, is the basis of carrying out subtle spiritual adaption in the midst of everyday ordinary affairs, neither courting perfection nor avoiding potential impurities in terms of peoples' habit-energy, or blind malpractice (agreeable or otherwise) constituting situationally karmic momentum.

For that, she needs to be aware first. How would he react if she were to interact with young guys? What if she acts in a child-like manner - would he get annoyed? Does he act in an authoritative manner around her, just because he is older to her? You can look at a lot of things - and believe me, it’s easier, too - given this age difference. There’s some well-defined territories here, that can be used as a means for assessment. Also, to truly get to know any individual- no matter what the age- takes time. There’s going to be an investment of time and energy, and we cannot deny that. The only thing I would advice is - stay close to her, talk to her about it, and do the impersonal assessment yourself. Your sister is going to be invested, and people in relationships overlook these things and give too many chances. To be very honest, you got to be her rock. @BornToBoil

Those who glibly claim to have "no practice" and trumpet simply living as "my life" are sadly deluded. This is because following random activity and calling that spontaneity, may be accomplishing "no practice", but this has no affinity with the function of subtle concentration observing mind and arriving at perpetual cessation of random consciousness. This is because "my life" at this point is not yet one's own, independent of conditioned existence. This is because "my life" at this point is bondage to karmic momentum where one follows thoughts unawares, only occasionally glimpsing moments of open lucidity and being thoroughly unable to sustain authentic acquiescence in perpetual inevitability. Such sustainability is not straying from the perpetual incipience of enlightening potential before the first thought. Until ignorant individuals arrive at the will to enlightenment and struggle deliberately for years to turn their lives around by reversing the light of their own consciousness, and finally arrive at the incipience of Complete Reality, will they discover for themselves that "my life" has no power in or outside of karmic evolution until it is blown away forever by realizing enlightening nature void of self. Until practice reaches the realm of unattributability, there is no autonomy because until one is finally and continuously aware of causelessness, one cannot transcend being bound by the conditioned self which constitutes the incrementally kinetic karmic matrix going through its inexorable cycles of birth and death in the perpetual revolving nature of created yin and yang (the oscillating polar nature of duality for agnostic readers). Obviously, it is only when individuals reach their serial impasses do they endeavor to deploy their defiant "my life" proclamations. This would be the very antithesis of the selflessly autonomous adaption of enlightening being in everyday ordinary situations unbeknownst to anyone which is the middle way whereby neither absolute nor mundanity stand. The "middle way" is a technical buddhist term of authentic teaching pointing to the nature of reality, which is immaterial. The definitive term is not relative to a sense of "moderation" per se, although in provisional teaching, this term is relevant to carrying out reformative practices. True effective practice is arrival at the subsequently permanent activation of reversal to illuminate enlightenment at its source and have that source void of self or other identify one's life. Those who fall back to the refuge of "my life" when it suits them are proving their ultimate ignorance of the source of spontaneity and their partnership as coeval with creation— and not subject to it. This is then where phenomena is empty and characteristics have their variables. Enlightening being is governed by random karmic activity in that selfless response has no set categories, only relying on the timing of heaven, the situations of earth, and the phantoms of self and other in concert as the creatively evolving karmic matrix alternates cyclically. Operating independently in the midst of bound creational influence doesn't mean existence is in isolation, as is what already constitutes the perspective of the deluded. It means one is dedicated to unmitigated vulnerability to such influence, as the essence of true potential is not relative to the person— it is inherent in the situation itself. That is, it is through our relationships that potential becomes apparent. That is not to say that unmitigated vulnerability is being a spineless psychological and emotional doormat for others. What is most critical in terms of true vulnerability to absorbing selfless potential is that one must stop letting the natural expression of true enlightening potential be a doormat for the false consciousness of habit energy. That means false identities of pattern-based ego function is ultimately subordinate to the impersonal nonpsychological enlightening function. Self-refinement is the long process of reverting the false identity from a position of dominance which obscures enlightening potential to a relational function in service of the subtle nonoriginated awareness. The person comes to assist the expression of Complete Reality by virtue of recognition of the true potential inherent in all created situational cycles through exercise of natural principles. In terms of the situation, such practice is called subtle adaption. In terms of potential, such practice is called the firing process of yin and yang, paying critical attention to the timing of the waxing of generative energy and the arising of the natural influence of each created cycle's killing energy. These two aspects of evolutionary and devolutionary process operate in both temporal and spiritual realms of manipulation. In taoist spiritual alchemy these aspects of enlightening practice are called the sciences of life and essence. In terms of the realm of enlightening potential, it simply is not and has never been an issue of good and bad, right and wrong, self and other or before and after. The issue is awakening to the the quality of awareness in which one assimilates in moment to moment adaption in everyday ordinary situations. It is the degree of variability between projections of self and other and the amorally selfless open sincerity of human being void of personality biases and inclinations. Enlightening function simply isn't the person, even though it is none other that who you really are. Arrival in terms of enlightening function transcends the puny morality of "my life" in that one sees through phenomena without denying their characteristics. You see through your life without denying its characteristics as well. Therefore one does not go along with conditions but subtly stands apart by not harboring ulterior motives in speculation on outcomes or for one's ego-securities, only adapting impersonally by assessing potential objectively in the midst of situational changes. The primal and temporal are originally not two. This is not beyond the function of enlightening being seeing through "my life". Complete Reality is one's function in terms of unity of absolute and conditional in one breath. Otherwise, what would be the point of seeing your nature? It is just to enable one to activate the real in ordinary situations unbeknownst to anyone. If anyone knew, it wouldn't be real~ nor would it be natural. "Nevertheless, it is necessary to wind up at the point where 'heaven is open, earth is broad, and all things are just as they are,' for only this can be considered attainment." ed note: add "at" in first sentence of 7th paragraph; split 8th paragraph in two

Rupert Spira made a comment once which made sense to me. I forget the details, but the gist was that for most people, nondual experiences are beauty and love. Beauty is when you forget yourself in something impersonal, like some art, or nature like a beautiful sunset. Love is when your ego merges or expands into another person. Basically you realise the boundaries of self are relative, change according to the situation, not fixed to your individuality.

AWARENESS OF THOUGHTS MEDITATION By learning to watch your thoughts come and go during this practice, you can gain deeper insight into thinking altogether (such as it’s transience) and into specific relationships among your thoughts and your emotions, sensations, and desires. This practice can also help you take your thoughts less personally, and not automatically believe them. Additionally, this meditation can offer insight into any habitual patterns of thinking and related reactions. Observe your thoughts as they arise and pass. By “thoughts,” we mean self-talk and other verbal content, as well as images, memories, fantasies, and plans. Just thoughts may appear in awareness, or thoughts plus sensations, emotions, or desires. Sit or lie down on your back in a comfortable position. Become aware of the sensations of breathing. After a few minutes of following your breath, shift your attention to the various thoughts that are arising, persisting, and then passing away in your mind. Try to observe your thoughts instead of getting involved with their content or resisting them. Notice the content of your thoughts, any emotions accompanying them, and the strength or pull of the thought. Try to get curious about your thoughts. Investigate whether you think in mainly images or words, whether your thoughts are in color or black and white, and how your thoughts feel in your body. See if you notice any gaps or pauses between thoughts. Every time you become aware that you are lost in the content of your thoughts, simply note this and return to observing your thoughts and emotions. Remember that one of the brain’s major purposes is to think, and there is nothing wrong with thinking. You are simply practicing not automatically believing and grasping on to, or ‘clinging’ to your thoughts. When you are ready, return your attention to your breath for a few minutes and slowly open your eyes. Optional: There are various metaphors and images you can use to help observe your thoughts. These include: Imagining you are as vast and open as the sky, and thoughts are simply clouds, birds, or planes passing through the open space. Imagining you are sitting on the side of a river watching your thoughts float by like leaves or ripples in the stream. Imagine your thoughts are like cars, buses, or trains passing by. Every time you realize you are thinking, you can “get off the bus/train” and return to observing. Please be gentle with yourself if you notice that you are constantly caught up in your thoughts instead of observing them. This is both common and normal. When you realize that you are thinking, gently and compassionately return to observing your thoughts. If the content of your thoughts is too disturbing or distressing, gently shift your attention to your breathing, sounds, or discontinue the practice. Remember that you are not trying to stop thoughts or only allow certain ones to arise. Try to treat all thoughts equally and let them pass away without engaging in their content. This practice can initially be more challenging than other meditations. As you are learning, practice this meditation for only a few minutes at a time if that is easier. It can be helpful to treat thoughts the same way that you treat sounds or body sensations, and view them as impersonal events that arise and pass away. Some people like to assign numbers or nicknames to reoccurring thoughts in order to reduce their pull and effect.

I wanted to have my kids my whole life, and I have two kids now, but I had two miscarriages before I had them and no way of knowing that I'd ever have a baby. I remember what hearing pregnancy announcements or seeing babies would feel like during that time. It was joy for someone else, but I was NOT seeing it. I know this probably seems like it has nothing to do with your situation, but it has everything to do with it, because it's just the tendency of the mind to notice what is missing. Don't look at what is missing, look for what is there. A sunset is stunningly beautiful, but you don't get tempted to try to claim it, own it or get worried that you won't be able to have it or hold on to it. If you can train that sort of impersonal appreciation of little things, you can apply them to the things you really, really want. Then you can take intelligent or inspired action to experience those things too.

I decided to create a character for myself that will help me understand what I want better. I name this character Parsivales Ritter and the nickname is Ute Lyttle. I kinda felt odd referring to myself as Dear Preety in my personal letters in my journals. It felt too personal that way. So I decided that I had to have an impersonal way of reference and I was interested in this character that I created in my head. I was literally trying to grow into this character. So I will refer to myself as "Dear Ute" in letters addressed to me. I get a certain joy in talking to myself. I know it sounds odd. I also have an idea how Ute is going to look like.

Get curious about the mystery of the mind. . . It’s not personal. I’m pointing to something impersonal. At one cognitive level, it’s perceived as “a flaw in the individual”. At another cognitive level, it is seen as a mind dynamic, integrated between individual and collective. An interesting development. . . ? This is within the perspective of a mind identified and attached to “the social issue”. Notice the repetitive assumption of the social issue. That is a major assumption and the key to expansion. If that assumption is deconstructed, the mind can expand another cognitive level. Yet the assumption serves as the grounding for which the whole story is based. There are many ways to look at this “social issue”, yet doing so destablizies the story that “there is a serious problem and social issue here that needs to be addressed”. Story vs anti-story is a block to story transcendence. When there is a block from transcendent views, engaging within the block re-enforces the block. It increases construction. It makes it feel even more real and problematic.

Not every thread is about self-development. When someone points out an issue he observes within a given society, not always is it appropriate to point to the flaws of the individual who is pointing out the issue. It seems like there is an underlying assumption here that the issue I am describing is not real and that it is limited to my own projections. This is already very close-minded. This thread was not about the importance of curiosity, it was about the importance of a very particular curiosity, a unique kind of curiosity that I described in my first post. It seems to me that you could have dismissed any criticizism possible with the way you are looking at this. You do not seem to recognize the complete relativity of what you deem distracting. To you, this thread is a distraction from an opportunity of self-observation. To someone else, your persistent pointing out of this individual problem is a distraction of the pointing out of the societal issue. You yourself are actively engaged in creating a story of a problem, and you are quite persistent at doing this. You are here protecting your own story, your own problems, and it seems like that is your priority, rather than listening to what the student is saying. Everything can be a distraction. There is a time and place for everything. I am glad that you are trying to help, but as so many times before, your impersonal communication feels to me inappropriate in this setting. It is perceived primarily as a dismissal, rather than a genuine effort to help.

"Not separate from anything" is Love beyond any personal experience (object to object) love, it is a Divine Impersonal Love. 'I" alone Am, is Ultimate Freedom. Limitless,boundless Freedom not confined to the limitation and deep rooted belief of being just a physical body. The experience of being inside and simultaneously outside the body ( a metaphor would be like the empty space inside the cup, is also the empty space outside the cup). is not something that can really be articulated in words.

Yes abrakamowse, and summarizing enlightening activity in a word is an effective entry for those with enough accrued potential through long gradual practice of gathering it and by preserving the fundamental basis in the course of everyday ordinary situations. Then it is necessary to penetrate further into the mystery of selfless accord by virtue of ordinary delusional realms. This is because effortless action means that subtle spontaneous response is nonpsychological (spiritual) in terms of virtuous accord in reality. This is why it is properly not the person, nor by the person's effort. Wu-wei is the quality of perceptive practice not by the person but only through the auspices of the person. Why? Through a long process of impersonal intent, such is the natural result. One's unbending intent is an invocation by open sincerity beckoning the real by inner emptiness. We beckon spontaneous accord in reality by invoking the Virtue of the Receptive as our inmost being. The Way spontaneously alights where emptiness (selfless accord) is stabilized. Thus, resting in the highest good by sincere open intent, we watch over the incipient upwelling of the breath of awareness much like a cat watches the opening of a mouse-hole in total concentration, ever vigilant for the spontaneous arising of true potential. Clarifying the purpose of prior illuminates' intent by the use of the word wu-wei means the reality represented by the word is in terms of impersonal subtle adaption without relying on one's own power. Effortless action is what has to be evaluated in certain and precise terms based on real experience. Enlightening response not relying on one's own power requires that one see potential in the first place because potential is properly inherent in the situation itself, not the person. Subtle spiritual adaption based on reception of potential (by seeing alone) is what is "effortless." Spontaneous action based on such effortlessness is naturally without personal bias or inclination. Only this can be properly termed "selfless accord in reality." This is where "neither seeking honor nor avoiding ignominy" really comes to the fore. Not because of the ordinary convention of "selflessness", but because such concern is actually nonexistent in reality. It is in such attitudinal audacity that one's enlightening function awakens and rises to the occasion of actually intending open sincerity and virtuous receptivity of potential and actually seeing reality in terms of selfless response in the first place. We must always strive to move beyond the zero point of the transcendent meaning of the words of all prior illuminates and actually apply the power of wu-wei in terms of "taking the forward step and accepting your (enlightening) function with hands open, sharing yourself freely." ed note: spell "abrakamowse" correctly in 1st paragraph

Understood, Blackhawk. It's true and I apologize for the difficulty in reading my posts, especially for a non-native english speaker. The real problem (on my side) in talking about ineffable reality is that it is inconceivability itself. I was silent about it for 15 years; now I've been writing about it for 15 years. The nature of inconceivability in terms of Mind is that immediate knowledge without inside or outside is completely whole. Undifferentiated unity is utterly empty as well. The space of true emptiness has no space. The true void has no such void. Even absence is absent from reality. I'm not referring to sudden enlightenment, but, as abrakamowse implicated above, since the absolute and enlightening activity in terms of delusion cannot be separate, I am forced to elucidate wordless authentic teaching within the constraints of words. This means that I need to somehow express immediate all-at-once knowledge without leaving the ultimate freedom of no outside or inside. If I do, then the living expression of reality turns into dead words. That is the challenge for me. The problem on your side is that the natural affinity with ineffable reality isn't able to resonate within you to the degree that is necessary for you to recognize within yourself that you already know without a word. There is nothing either of us can do except to sincerely intend an open wonder in terms of one's inherent potential. Hope is unnecessary and counter-productive. That means it is an obstacle to realization. It is already your own mind right now. Enlightenment is already fully intact. The mystery isn't in the unseen Absolute. The mystery is in the scene before you. It's not that Creation is other than it is, it is just that our perspective in terms of personality-consciousness is evidence of habit-energy not only in ourselves, but in an ageless universal human consensus that is literally as old as sin. Self-referencing thought (much like hope and fear) obscures the point of illumination which is unborn awareness itself. Self-referencing thought sustains the illusion of self/other (the necessary element for functional being), to the exclusion of selfless awareness. Selfless awareness isn't some other mind, exclusive of ego-conscious habit energy. It's just that ego-function (psychological habit-energy) excludes one's enlightening function from its purveyance. Both functions are valid; yet ego-consciousness must be at the service of spiritual (nonpsychological) consciousness. Self-refinement is the long process of restoring the proper relationship between ego-function and enlightening function. Both functions must co-exist in real terms much like teeth and lips without harming each other. True practice is the practice of reversal, whereby the obscured (impersonal real knowledge) is eventually recognized in terms of non-differentiation, by the diminution of the recalcitrant (habitually self-referencing conscious knowledge). The work of self-refinement is a long and gradual path which is in seamless accord with the sudden all-at-once. They are a continuum. There are no two minds. Mind is one. Even those who practice lucid dreaming know that in transitioning between lucid and ordinary consciousness, there is no break. The transition between the two is seamless. Gradual and sudden are undifferentiated, just as reality has no differentiation between delusion and enlightenment. It is not a matter of the two being all mixed up— THEY ARE THE SAME …and empty as well. Don't stoop to believing such is the case. It is necessary to actually see it in real life. The buddhist teaching device of "sameness within difference" is a provisional teaching. Take the forward step in expressing the truth that undifferentiated reality IS you. It's not you seeing it. The seeing is itself who you are. Awareness is selfless. When seeing is impersonal, there are no personal distinctions: this is selfless accord in reality. It's just how it is, and no one knows why. ❤︎ ed note: change "reverting" to "restoring" in 5th paragraph; add "they are the same…" in penultimate paragraph

Yes, yes!! …and someone else wrote: Well, at least you now know how I feel when I try to read Dogen sometimes! Oh, dear… Self-reflection clouds natural impersonal awareness in terms of an objective realization of ordinary situations. It is possible to assess situations and respond spontaneously to the very conditions dictated by temporal affairs by cultivating the habit of non-interference. It is not a matter of imaginary separateness, but rather resting readily in the perspective of nonspeculative nonavoidance. Neither avoiding nor defining the inevitable nor speculating on outcomes is the closest one can come to a practical accord. A preliminary aspect is the ploy to gain detachment from internal and external bedevilments in order to save energy, but eventually it becomes the process of taking over creation and stealing its potential. Further still, it is the means by which enlightening beings carry out tasks and fulfill accomplishments in secret. It just comes back to using the world for self-refinement instead of using it in terms of pattern-based self-gratification. In terms of self-refinement, we develop the habit of not seeing situations as arenas for speculation. When we have nothing even potentially invested, we develop real autonomy— which is beyond the self-referencing sensual detachment of the lower vehicles of formative moralities of renunciatory provisional teaching. When we refuse to invest ourselves in terms of potential, we gain that potential— it is unsaid. The rule is in not using what is seen, and in using what is not seen. Not-using is not having attachment, however subtle, to objects, situations or outcomes; using is in not-using potential. It works as one, because temporal and absolute are one. As above, so below. We see potential by not speculating on inert temporal manifestations; we steal it simply in not-seeing it relative to the person. It is the way it is for no reason. No one knows why or how enlightenment and delusion are actually one in the same. Only those who see reality by a long process of simply forgetting to perpetuate self-reifying habit energies ever-cloying one's life eventually come to realize absorption in complete reality's potential instead of perpetuating karmic momentum when observing the same from the perspective of the personality. So by not speculating on temporal manifestations, and refusing to entertain intellectual ramifications relative to self and other, we realize absorption just by virtue of seeing— this how to use its potential. It is not in the sense-organ, nor in the object; it is mind alone. Now when we then relegate potential to nonpsychological awareness, we don't even say what could possibly be by discursive discriminatory thought relative to a self. Not doing so is what seals potential away from intellectualism after absorption (seeing). No one knows the strategy of not-knowing. What those who steal potential know, is that potential is not an inevitability (in that what could not be other than "all things are just as they are"), yet, in terms of inconceivability, to the degree we absorb potential in the course of ordinary everyday affairs, we enter the mystery. If inevitability is just responding to affairs without speculation on outcomes is selfless adaption, what else could possibly be construed as enlightening activity? The prior few paragraphs are an admission of the sequential aspect of acting in accord with the time in reality. There is before, and there is after: they must not be mixed up. Ok, so it's crazy; but that is the secret to taking over creation, stealing potential, and seeing through phenomena without negating appearances. It all depends on selfless awareness. Practice is what practice does, that is, our habitual perception is gradually influenced to have no habitual, reflexive connection to gratifying or avoiding sensually speculative concerns; "neither courting honor nor avoiding ignominy." By sensual, I mean anything perceivable by any avenue of perception— this isn't just a matter of sex, drugs, money, power, personal or professional influence or cravings of any sort. It is much more subtle, and pervasive. It is the means by which to transcend one's conditioned awareness of self-illusion and enter the inconceivable mystery of the Way by seeing your nature in action long before actually seeing its essence in terms of sudden realization. In fact, enlightening activity isn't dependent on the sudden at all. Rather, the sudden is the result of having turned the light of awareness around in terms of seeing independently of the person, and sustaining its influence in one's life for a long long time. This means turning the light of awareness around to shine on its source. This is direct activation of enlightening being in the midst of ordinary affairs unbeknownst to anyone. When we don't use ordinary conditioned awareness to follow ordinary conditioned affairs, then the light of awareness is turned around automatically with no effort involved at all. Its activation is in what you don't see and its arrival is in realizing what has been aglow all along. ed note: typo 2nd paragraph; change "reality" to "realization" in 3rd paragraph; typo 6th paragraph

Imo if it's wrong then eventually you'll just grow out of it. I am also stuck on this lol. Just like how one comes into spirituality for personal purposes, but ultimately ends up the most impersonal.

I consider emotion to be different from feeling. Feeling is connected with the higher Self or awareness while emotion is connected with the ego or lower self . Hatred, lust, greed are also emotions. I am trying to reduce all personal emotions in myself by being impersonal and objective, and cultivate conscious feelings of total love and compassion instead.

Leo talks about the Mastery of awareness in his latest talk. Castenada wrote about the Mastery of Awareness in his book Power of Silence. Just below, I've taken some excerpts from Power Of Silence. Just add salt,, The guide in the lives of sorcerers is called "the nagual." The nagual is a man or a woman with extraordinary energy, a teacher who has sobriety, endurance, stability; someone seers see as a luminous sphere having four compartments, as if four luminous balls have been compressed together. Naguals are responsible for supplying what sorcerers call "the minimal chance": the awareness of one's connection with intent. Naguals school their apprentices toward three areas of expertise: the mastery of awareness, the art of stalking, and the mastery of intent. These three areas of expertise are the three riddles sorcerers encounter in their search for knowledge. The mastery of awareness is the riddle of the mind; the perplexity sorcerers experience when they recognize the astounding mystery and scope of awareness and perception. The art of stalking is the riddle of the heart; the puzzlement sorcerers feel upon becoming aware of two things: first that the world appears to us to be unalterably objective and factual, because of peculiarities of our awareness and perception; second, that if different peculiarities of perception come into play, the very things about the world that seem so unalterably objective and factual change. The mastery of intent is the riddle of the spirit, or the paradox of the abstract--sorcerers' thoughts and actions projected beyond our human condition. Warriors are incapable of feeling compassion because they no longer feel sorry for themselves. Without the driving force of self-pity, compassion is meaningless. For a warrior everything begins and ends with himself. However, his contact with the abstract causes him to overcome his feeling of self-importance. Then the self becomes abstract and impersonal. There is a threshold that once crossed permits no retreat. Every sorcerer should have a clear memory of crossing that threshold so he can remind himself of the new state of his perceptual potential. One does not have to be an apprentice of sorcery to reach this threshold, and the only difference between an average man and a sorcerer, in such cases, is what each emphasizes. A sorcerer emphasizes crossing this threshold and uses the memory of it as a point of reference. An average man does not cross the threshold and does his best to forget all about it. Sorcerers say that the fourth abstract core happens when the spirit cuts our chains of self-reflection. Cutting our chains is marvelous, but also very undesirable, for nobody wants to be free. What a strange feeling: to realize that everything we think, everything we say depends on the position of the assemblage point. The secret of our chains is that they imprison us, but by keeping us pinned down on our comfortable spot of self-reflection, they defend us from the onslaughts of the unknown. Once our chains are cut, we are no longer bound by the concerns of the daily world. We are still in the daily world, but we don't belong there anymore. In order to belong we must share the concerns of people. And without chains we can't. What distinguishes normal people is that we share a metaphorical dagger: the concerns of our self-reflection. With this dagger, we cut ourselves and bleed; and the job of our chains of self-reflection is to give us the feeling that we are bleeding together, that we are sharing something wonderful: our humanity. But if we were to examine it, we would discover that we are bleeding alone; that we are not sharing anything; that all we are doing is toying with our manageable, unreal, man-made reflection. Sorcerers are no longer in the world of daily affairs because they are no longer prey to their self-reflection.

totally agree there, Nahm and Ananda have helped me a lot in the past, way better then books and impersonal videos that's for sure. Although you need to always keep in mind that you're your own guru because ultimately the only one who can teach you is you. IME RASA is BS, so everyone is different. I didn't feel anything from the RASA from ananda, what was super valuable from her was her perspectives about my situation. Obviously I don't represent everyone. But I certainly don't see how RASA does anything. Maybe I'm just too sceptical.

I love this video. Humans in general are so obsessed about people's personality when personality is a very impersonal aspect of someone's life. I see this here of course with people bashing Trump... it's not easy for a person with a well established personality to just go and change... it's like telling a depressed person to just "be happy" ... you aren't doing them any good. It's not that easy. People's personality is a result of upbringing, habits, culture, friends, etc. Psychopaths are very good at playing whatever role they need too in order to win people over to their side. They can be quite charming. Trump is clearly not a psychopath by this definition.. he has the maturity level of a little kid, but I try not to attack him for this because I understand he's not going to change, assuming he's even capable of doing so.

The questioner is coming from a paradigm assuming that people have bad energies that in her attempt to heal them, she takes on. Fear, separation. Those are the illusory bad energies. I think Sadhguru is just pointing beyond this, where real impersonal healing happens? I agree, but this can be profoundly powerful, like holding or being a safe space for someone to experience the expansion that they are. People can seem to provide focus, and that expansion at the same time. But how could you possibly be a safe space for healing if you were concerned about taking on other people's energies? Or if you DO seem to experience taking "other people's energies"? That's probably the reason I've spent most of my life as a hermit. Or how you you possibly heal when you expect that a healer has some power over you that you don't have? Wouldn't the healing be the shared allowance of that power?

Having Schizoid tendencies This is from the Mayo Clinic website. Overview Schizoid personality disorder is an uncommon condition in which people avoid social activities and consistently shy away from interaction with others. They also have a limited range of emotional expression. If you have schizoid personality disorder, you may be seen as a loner or dismissive of others, and you may lack the desire or skill to form close personal relationships. Because you don't tend to show emotion, you may appear as though you don't care about others or what's going on around you. The cause of schizoid personality disorder is unknown. Talk therapy, and in some cases medications, can help. This describes me to an extent for a good part of my life. More so in the category of Schizoid splitting off as a coping mechanism. It's that- lets Pretend what just happened never happened kind of thing. That should ring a bell with a lot of you because it's pretty common. The experts don't know anything except for just a few in developmental and depth psychology and those who go into Transpersonal psychology. The rest are just knotheads who get treated to lunch fairly often by pharmaceutical representatives. If you get serious about shadow work, all that stuff has to get processed. Defending Against Personal Contact When we are confronted with impersonality in the course of letting go of ego identifications, if we neither posit it as the ultimate reality, nor reject it, but genuinely investigate the truth, we will ultimately come upon the personal element. The absence of the personal element, which is felt as impersonality, can be seen at such times either as an emptiness in the chest, or the presence of a hard impersonal shield over it. The emptiness is felt as almost physical, as an empty hole or cavity in the chest. The emptiness affects the individual by making him feel that it doesn't have what it takes for him to relate in a personal way. He is impersonal because he lacks the personal element. He feels the emptiness as a deficiency, a lack in who he is. This deficient emptiness is simply the state of the absence of the Personal Essence. The rigid shield is a defense against this deficiency, which gives the individual a sense of being a person that is not personal. In fact, it is what is usually referred to in depth psychology as a schizoid defense. It is a defense against personal contact, because of the vulnerability that it might expose. So the individual employs this impersonal defense of isolation and emotional detachment so that he does not feel either the vulnerability of personal involvement, or the sadness about the lack of it. This condition is much more common than is normally acknowledged, for it is usually hidden by the ego’s sense of being personal. Pearl Beyond Price, pg. 75 - A.H. Almaas Ive also had grandiose coping mechanisms in the past but I won't go into that for now. I think the saying goes- Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean someone is not out to get me. It almost seems that getting these security cameras put in have aggravated my condition. There's at least 3 categories of 'hallucination' that I've been experiencing. The most faint is like my iPad has been hacked into and someone is overlaying images of people doing absurd things. Another kind is where the wind is moving the branches of trees and my imagination turns them into people who act like their creeping on me. The third kind is images of people so real like that I'll sometimes run out and try to catch them. This happens most when the light is dim. I mentioned in an earlier post about nearly catching up to someone only to have them go translucent. That really messed with me,,,, Well, last night I did catch-up to someone who was appearantly creeping on me. Actually I suspect a small group who are doing this. For sport, I guess,, go figure. I don't know. It was a young lady. I really think I would have had a good chance of tackling her but, I don't know. She had a fast walk down to an art and was smart enough to keep a tree right in front of her so she couldn't be silloqueted. Also, with a bad knee I really try to avoid extreme movements that could twist it badly. But I got close enough that I'm sure of this one. Both occasions have happened in really dim light. My eyes are getting worse every year. Maybe the guy who went translucent was real in physicality and between craftiness and my worsening eyesight my imagination interpreted him going translucent. I guess it's possible that their are Warlocks like on that old sitcom -Bewitched- Slim chance, though. I actually wanted to be a Warlock in the worst way growing up watching that show. Life can be strange. I know that much.

Money (Income, Salary) Skill (Strength, Caliber, Capabilities, Ability, Experience) Aptitude (Potential, Talent, Strengths) Impact (Altruism, Contribution) Interest (Passion, "Enjoyment", Creativity, Exploration, Adventure) Meaning (Challenge, Growth, Flow, Fun) Opportunities (Entrepreneurship, Business, Invention, Innovation, Impact) Flexibility (Ability to switch into different fields, pivotability, pivot ability) Value (Scarcity, High Value, Low Availability, No/Low Abundance, Unique, Rarity) High Demand, Popularity (Popular enough that it is a valid field but not popular enough that it is mediocore, unrare, overly abundant and unscarce, low value) Exclusivity (Lack of ability to self-learn, hardness in breaking into the field with no credentials) Difficulty (ROI, Return on Investment, ROE, Return on effort) This seems to be a solid list of criteria. However there could be more not considered here. As you can see, it can be argued there are impersonal / "objective" criterias aswell as personal / "subjective" criterias What you love --> Interest, Passion What the world needs --> Impact, Meaning What you can be paid for ---> Money What you are good at ---> Aptitude, Skill Related to Japanese concept of Ikigai So you could take all the majors (the ones you are interested in or even every single major) and assess them based on this (and any other) criteria. Research and significant thinking / contemplation will be required for alot of them (like demand, money, even impact, etc.) I might edit this later as not finished and cant do shit on the phone. Why are you going to college? This may be (and probably is) the best choice for you but more information would be needed.

I've found these 4 divisions of suffering helpful in my Work on self. The first is Unnecessary Suffering. This would be the type of suffering that we incur because of our unreasonable attitudes and expectations towards others, from our ill-will, hatred and rejection of others, from doubt, possessiveness, arrogance and self pity. In other words, suffering arising from our self-importance. The second is Unavoidable Suffering. This would be the type of suffering that comes to us by accident or from events beyond our control, such as interpersonal conflicts, war, disaster, disease or death. Third, we have Voluntary Suffering. This would be the type of suffering that we take upon ourselves in order to accomplish a personal aim, such as an athlete who disciplines himself to win a race, or a student who labours to get good grades. And finally we have Intentional Suffering. According to Bennett, this would be the kind of suffering that we take upon ourselves in order to accomplish an impersonal or altruistic goal, one that is directed more towards service to others or to the Work, and not for any personal gain. Bennett assumes that this is what Gurdjieff meant by Intentional Suffering. from: https://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/philo_is_talk_ae2005.htm I take Intentional suffering to be synonymous with Conscious suffering

It seems a stage blue frame. Guilt is a psychological thing that carries the original sin thing i think. It's cultural, not impersonal.