Good Vs Evil

[The]

1 minute ago, Salaam said:

@eskwire

It's all good, I can understand the frustration. No worries.

I wish I could explain to people how there are evolutionary firewalls to expanded cognition that require increases in energetic capacitance in order for the brain to exponentiate it's processing power. But, even that sentence won't make shit sense to people. How do you get people to accept and understand split-second shifts that occur under our consciousness that are incredibly complex and interconnect many different automated systems within the body, which all effect and color your cognition and recollection within that moment? Do you know how much training and adaptation it takes to even attempt such a thing? But, who cares, in other people's minds it's not even worth the consideration because it's not a part of their reality. I understand that and I don't expect anything or blame people because of it.

Lol, whatever. It used to bother me a lot... the costs of success. 

Anyways, you can believe me or not, but I understand "enlightenment" or "non-duality" experiences. I call it undifferentiated everything and can access that space whenever I want. But, unlike other people here who seek to be in that space all the time and see that as freedom I see it as the yin to the yang of differentiation. I choose both and am both and reside in both. I superimpose them onto each other and let their interactions inform and help me evolve.

I don't dismiss it, I include it and harmonize it with everything else.

But, again who cares. Some people will just want non-duality and other people might resonate with my choice and wonder at a path where there is an opportunity for superposition and consistency with both physical reality as it is commonly understood to be, plus so much more.

Do I think mine is preferable? Sure. Superior? Yuck, I don't indulge in superiority and inferiority paradigms.

 

That's a bingo

[alyra]

3 hours ago, Salaam said:

Can you handle a scarcity of resources and the pressure of that scarcity to such a degree that you can still cooperate and not exploit others around you? Can you handle rejection from another person and not retaliate? Can you handle your desires for energy, procreation, and expansion without harming those around you? Can you give as much as you take? Are people and the world happier, healthier, and more energized around you? Can you protect those beings who are newly arrived to the physical realm and depend on the shelter of others to grow enough to contribute and care for themselves?

Can you handle the fact that human beings are still evolving and still carry "flaws" or vulnerabilities that must be balanced, developed, and harmonized?

yes I can handle all these concerns. especially since one step in transcending the belief of good v evil requires noticing how desires are illusory by nature, and not some insurmountable force we must obey.

[alyra]

16 minutes ago, Socrates said:

This is going nowhere

meditate, contemplate. it is good to look outward to the experiences of others and their discourse thereof. but don't fall for the trap of thinking that their words are a magic pill that transfers understanding from them into you. the context of an individual's paradigms and illusions change the meaning of discourse between the speaker and the listener. it takes inward work for any concerned individual to uncover wisdom for themselves. that only comes from contemplation and reflection - outer discourse only offers a chance of kick starting that process, not completely replacing it 

[Guest username]

@Socrates

Are you open to questioning your beliefs? We don't need to PM over the fact you think our discussion was pointless. If you think that, it's fine to let the whole community know you think that. I don't take it personally, but if have critques over contemplation being useful at all, then perhaps the rest of the community can learn something from you.

In PMs you told me you already did the contemplation but it didn't do anything. I'm not trying to attack you, so please don't take this as me personally faulting you, but I think you have misconceptions on how the process is done. You don't just sit down and contemplate once and say you know how everything works.

Contemplation is an on-going process that reveals insight over time. If you aren't willing to constantly examine and re-examine your beliefs, you aren't going to get anywhere. It's a process that you commit to for the rest of your life.

You have notions of what good and evil are, the point of the process is to question your own ideas and get a better understanding of your belief structures.

Edited May 12, 2017 by username

[Socrates]

@username If you want to give us your opinion that's cool, other than that there is no need for two people to do the job of one. Also i sense too much spiritual ego, sort that out and then we talk.

[alyra]

we all have ego, even Leo.

[Guest username]

@Socrates If you don't want to contemplate with me, then that is fine. I figured it would be better to have a discussion by thinking things through together systematically rather than bombarding each other with our opinions, not reaching any sort of real mutual understanding, and then going back and not having gotten anything out of our discourse. It would also help me to genuinely understand your position and thinking rather than blindly making assumptions. I assure you, I am only trying to work together.

 

Also, what about me suggest spiritual ego? I have a position and am more than open to change. Just because I am making firm statements doesn't mean I see myself as your superior. I'm not asking in a defensive way. I am interested in self-knowledge and am very curious in your criticisms.

I'm just trying to introduce you with a useful tool in contemplation and trying to work through your issues with you, which is the point of the community.

Edited May 12, 2017 by username

[Socrates]

@aryberry Not for a a long time lets hope.

[SOUL]

It's a self fulfilling expectation when someone who views things with dualism mindset will only recognize what others are doing as part of that dualism they see regardless of what it really is.

What is evident when a dualism mindset is expressed as good and evil is that it's difficult to not find oneself dividing up everything into two piles attributing good to one of them and the other gets called evil.

This goes on with every matter the mind sets itself upon until one comes across differing opinions, so they decide their own is considered "good" and the one that isn't like their own is called "evil".

Religions are built on this, politics are defined this way, all ideology is framed as such when the mind only views things in a dualism.

Through this means it often is used to justify behavior though it may be abusive towards others because they view their own way as right and good but that other with the different ways are evil and wrong.

They don't see their behavior for what it is because in their mind their own way has been anointed as good.

It may not rise to such dramatic characterizations in every instance but the fruit of dualism mindset can even be found when someone will portray other's differing ways in a negative light.

Positive and negative is a more polite way of exercising the dualism in someone's mind but it still is that way of interpreting things.

Healing is healing.... hurting is hurting and no effect is no effect, do we need to use overarching absolutist labels of good and evil to distinguish them from each other?

Does this mean dualism is evil? Is it wrong? A dualism mindset will likely interpret my words in such ways but to one who doesn't have it recognizes it is what it is, it's dualism.

 

 

[Scholar]

6 hours ago, Salaam said:

@Scholar

Not liking or not wanting something is a poor definition of evil in my view. Life is more dynamic then that. Just because I don't like the thought of eating brussel sprouts right now does not make them evil. It sounds like your mistaking the feeling of repulsion for evil

Also, feelings are signals and a form of communication, they have a reason for they way they act and express and can be pretty damn coherent if harmonized with. Like their really good with describing distance, contrast, intensity, and when you can read the mixtures within feelings, and the different layers and nuances, things can really get cooking.

Pressure, flow, composition, contrast, captivation, distance, direction... I read all that stuff like braille within my body. It's pretty damn peaceful within my body to be honest. But, that's because I have a great connection with my feelings and a high degree of communication and mutual cooperation with them.

 

If you know better, define evil.

[eskwire]

3 hours ago, Salaam said:

Anyways, you can believe me or not, but I understand "enlightenment" or "non-duality" experiences. I call it undifferentiated everything and can access that space whenever I want. But, unlike other people here who seek to be in that space all the time and see that as freedom I see it as the yin to the yang of differentiation. I choose both and am both and reside in both. I superimpose them onto each other and let their interactions inform and help me evolve.

This may very well be another way to discuss the same "phenomenon." Enlightenment "experiences" happen and changes integrate. To speak metaphorically, it's like waking up and falling back asleep, but the asleep part is different - even if you are not constantly living in "undifferentiated everything." I can live with that progress. I don't HAVE to live one way. 

For me, the difference is perhaps this. I am the kind of person who needs to follow a path of the extreme to end up in the middle. If I shoot for the middle, I will end up 1. not interested enough to even start or 2. pretty much right back where I started.

I need sweeping, dynamic goals to see any progress. Personally. Others don't. It seems like we are both discussing raising consciousness with different language and methodologies.

Anyway, godspeed! Thank you for understanding my frustration.

[eskwire]

15 hours ago, Socrates said:

@eskwire That's the point

Yes and it was beautiful! What a great method. 

[Nahm]

The world is perfect as is. 

[Socrates]

@Nahm Theoritically, that doesn't mean you don't do anything to improve it

[Nahm]

@Socrates yes, literally, theoretically, that is what it means. 

[Socrates]

@Nahm Justify that

[Nahm]

@Socrates something perfect can't be improved.  

[Socrates]

@Nahm Not that, the statement that the world is perfect as it is.

[Nahm]

@Socrates To me it seems perfect as it is. There are such larger forces at work. The world has been in motion for a long time.   When I see imperfections, I have seperated myself with that very judgement, and disconnected.  When I see that all is perfect, and allow myself to change if needed, to accept things, I am reconnected.  God is everything.  The worst thing you can think of, God is also that.  The infinite intelligence that is the substance underlying all atoms, is also God. It is so unconditional that when people build gas chambers with it, it still says nothing. Who am I to hold a focus of imperfection on all that is? 

[Steph1988]

@Nahm I find the idea that the world is perfect as it is quite hard to grasp as well.

do you mean that u disconnected yourself from the emotions of for example righteous anger when u see injustice and just move in to fix it so that u are pure practical and not burdened by to much worries which are inefficient, is that the whole idea? is it about being practicality and efficiency? i guess that would make sense but i would call it mental toughness i guess.

The idea that there is no good and evil is still strange to me as i think we can agree that in your example overseeing the gas chambers making sure people are being gassed would be clearly an evil action and risking your life blowing up a gas chamber and slowing down the killing would be a good action.

So with doing good actions we fight evil it seems very simple and this means that the word perfect is kinda a strange word to describe the world, maybe we could call it a work in progress then.

Amiright? maybe we are just fighting over semantics in this thread and secretly agreeing with each other.

what do u think?