The Conditions of a Solitary Bird

[deci belle]

The Conditions of a Solitary Bird

Quote

The conditions of a solitary bird are five:
The first, that it flies to the highest point;
The second, that it does not suffer for company,
not even of its own kind;
The third, that it aims its beak to the skies;
The fourth, that it does not have a definite color;
The fifth, that it sings very softly.

these are the words of San Juan de la Cruz in his "Sayings of Light and Love" and quoted in "Tales of Power" by Carlos Castaneda.

I definitely have difficulty with the "sings very softly" part~ heehee!!

 

 

ed note: add last line

Edited October 17, 2020 by deci belle

[ajai]

@deci belle Nice one, ?

[Thestarguitarist14]

[deci belle]

Merciiiii, ajai— yes, I have been a fan of this poem for many years. Once, I wrote the poem over and over by hand, just so I would better remember the solitary bird's five conditions~ but that was a long time ago. I'm glad I posted it here on this occasion.

mr Guitarist~ you aren't the one who wears a trench-coat are you? heehee!! —just kidding mon ami. And what are your favorite amps and effects?

But more to the point of this thread…

The conditions of a solitary bird are five:
The first, that it flies to the highest point;
The second, that it does not suffer for company,
not even of its own kind;
The third, that it aims its beak to the skies;
The fourth, that it does not have a definite color;
The fifth, that it sings very softly.

This poem by San Juan de la Cruz (15th century, I believe) isn't a lament, nor does it allude to self-reifying existential issues specifically, especially those that would pertain to general malaise or else a shallow-minded, undisciplined or nonchalant approach to living one's life. A saint wrote these lines, after all. The man is radiating a perspective of audacity and un-compromised temerity with a sense of expression grounded in profound sensitivity. This is spiritual, enlightening prose, not a pity-party.

As far as the concern for "getting rid" of something or, in the case of the cartoon, a perpetually recurring state of what amounts to an ever-looming melancholy …well, this is just the whole point of Saint John of the Cross' poem for a touch-stone of solitude in an authentic foundation for one's life.  Melancholy is something ego hides behind. It's one of ego's many disguises. Melancholy is just a cynically disguised mode of self-importance. Get rid of THAT, and the more positive attributes of a healthy psychology are naturally more accessible!

As for the first condition of a solitary bird, why fly at all, if one is not willing to fly to the highest point. If only just for the hell of it?

In not suffering for company, this is de rigueur for anyone, ANYONE, with the audacity to do what is necessary to accomplish ANYTHING worthy of one's responsibility to one's own living potential. If one isn't willing to cut the social-media umbilical cord, one will never know what could have been realized by one's efforts in terms of self-actualization. If others aren't curious enough or otherwise willing to expend even relative effort to know or understand what you are willing to give up to accomplish anything worthy of note— those people aren't worthy of your attention anyway. As for not suffering the company of one's own kind, well that directly addresses the fourth condition of a solitary bird, which is that such a one does not have a definite color. In that case, what, pray tell, would be one's own kind, hmmmm? The answer, of course, is that one does not have one's own kind.

We are inconceivable beings, after all.

To tell the truth, I have always had a problem with San Juan's third condition, because I've not actually stopped to note how it could be different than the first condition, which is that one flies to the highest point.

Let's see …perhaps it is just that one's unbending intent must be always subtly concentrated on having the tendency, the proclivity, the inclination and the wonder to always look higher— without harboring vestiges of opportunistic or grim striving simply to reach the highest point one is aware of in an acquisitive, mercenary or spiritually materialistic fashion. Rather, one's perspective is optimally to be planetary; encompassing and resting on a sensitive acquiescence and grace in virtuous receptivity. This receptive perspective is a result of open sincerity, of just resting in sincere openness as a matter of course. In that the solitary bird aims its beak to he skies, it obviously doesn't refer to a manic neurosis that some people suffer in terms of blind careerist ambitions, because San Juan de la Cruz seems to have been a profound contemplative as evidenced by the obvious beauty and sensitivity borne by the writing style and deeply considerate content his published works have exhibited for some five hundred years. 

Up until now, having  just written this, I had never assumed what the third condition might be referring to, and now I do!

 

 

ed note: tweak penultimate paragraph

Edited October 21, 2020 by deci belle

[ajai]

Well described deci, ?

It was just a coincidence the other day when you made this post my friend was feeling low, I came to know about her situation through a story on wapp, I shared these beautiful lines with her and was glad that it helped lighten up her mood, she's an outstanding athlete and so are these lines, suits her persona quite perfectly. One of the reason I loved this poem is the amazing metaphysical composition to show the optimism that one must carry in his life no matter what the situation is,

(The first, that it flies to the highest point;The second, that it does not suffer for company,not even of its own kind;The third, that it aims its beak to the skies;)

the impermanence of existence it's so fundamental to it's nature that no matter with whom you are in relationship with either you call him/her your better half or "full half" that person will not be there for eternity, no matter how much wealth you possess, whatever your health situation is, no matter how beautiful you are, how famous you are, all these maybe a function of you and play a major role in your life but they're impermanent, and if there's one thing which will always be there with you and which is permanent, is you yourself, your spirt/soul your essence of Being and that purity inside you, that blissful state that if once realised and grounded will never be dislocated no matter what the situation is, and that one should keep his/her head high to face all the challenges, the struggles and be adept to find a stable path against all odds,

(The fourth, that it does not have a definite color;The fifth, that it sings very softly.)

who knows what will be the situation tomorrow what future holds and what it may demand from you, this is the most interesting and exciting thing about existence that there is, one must be flexible enough to see things do things through all colours ( just like 7 colours constitutes one white colour ?) this helps to understand things from a meta-perspective, to have one color should never be idealized and it makes you stubborn and rigid towards outside world and narrows down your perspective towards things and existence in general, and it may look like there's only one realm of mind/perception, but there are realms unexplored and this what is the most fascinating and mystical facet of whatever and wherever we exist, and there will be unexplored realms always..., interplaying and dancing amongst all those realms coming your way or from where you pass through is where the fun and learning lies...the wise is who sharpens intellect, an intellect leading him to the doors of wisdom and where those doors open to the realms unexplored and never talked about never thought about never cared about, those realms transforms that very Being, and transforms our collective understanding of existence.....

These poets,writers of antiquity always leave me perplexed by their creativity they all had this wonderful capability to summarise it all within lines and words which is a quality I really admire and I wish I become apt to do what they were able to accomplish through their writings and inspire others like they did.

?

I still needs more clarification for the fifth and last condition, ?

[deci belle]

Ajai! I'm so glad you stepped in and covered that pesky 4th condition with such lovely diction— and that your athlete friend benefitted from seeing the poem.

We can thank mr San Juan de la Cruz!

I had already written a few paragraphs on the 4th condition and wasn't satisfied with where it was going, so I just stopped writing and deleted it all. But I like how you expressed it much better.

Yes~ as I mentioned in the OP, I don't do the sings softly part so well yet… heehee *❤︎*

Perhaps the 5th condition is an admonishment to "rein it in". In other words, to practice circumspection in all this "flying to the highest point", "going it alone", keeping one's head in the clouds (beak to the skies), and maintaining and encompassing a planetary perspective (audaciously obviating myopic, selfish world-views), so as to maintain a balance and moderation in all things, in terms of both psychological and nonpsychological (spiritual) fields of awareness and application.

Also, mr Cruz probably had benefactors and hierarchical superiors to acknowledge, no doubt, so the last line might be a reminder to himself and the reader of the necessity and advantages that humility enables in the grand scheme of things.

 

 

ed note: add 2nd sentence about St. John of the Cross; add "with" in 3rd line; add last two paragraphs re: 5th condition

Edited October 21, 2020 by deci belle

[ajai]

2 hours ago, deci belle said:

Also, mr Cruz probably had benefactors and hierarchical superiors to acknowledge, no doubt, so the last line might be a reminder to himself and the reader of the necessity and advantages that humility enables in the grand scheme of things.

Ohh, now that 5th condition makes much more sense....

Hail ! mr San Juan de la Cruz! ?

[Origins]

@deci belle Might I suggest not to try and get rid of anything per se, but to simply move towards higher expansion. If you think of perception as a lens and our preoccupations as preoccupations merely because of the size and qualities of that lens, then if we expand the lens and therefore increase the probability that the variety of textures that become a part of that lens will also increase, then any weaknesses in the perceived psychological construct we believe ourselves to inhabit in that moment will likely diminish with equal proportion (relative to say energy levels). 

It's just that I tend to associate "getting rid of" with more of a contractive state than anything else, which may be necessary in the heat of battle but if we're not in the head [edit: heat] of battle then its probably more conducive to learning to expand towards more of a state that enhances learning than one that may cut away at the perceived beauty of existence.

Edited October 22, 2020 by Origins

[Origins]

To add on lens:

1. size
2. scope
3. perspective (i.e. from time of day to a different being the perspective of even God or an entire planet, in short, to wherever your imagination wants to go, heck even from the perspective of a film or a book or a thought experiment, and even, all, some or more of these [aspect of quantity])
4. other qualities and quantities

Sometimes we don't need to get rid of but merely include more of for greater perspective on what we're trying to get rid of. Kind of like someone we dislike we wish to remove, we wish to remove them up to the point that our perspective on their existence has not reached the point that we're comfortable having them around. Of course, there's relative instances of this and therefore veracity, like a swarm of mosquitoes for example just eating away at your arm there's little expanding your lens is going to do on the event if you want your arm for the long term but you get the point. 

Our pain points regardless are relative to the size, scope and perspective of those contractive lenses that are larger than our lenses that are more towards the expansive end. 

I recommend doing all various kinds of experiments to teach your consciousness how to handle various modes here. Imagine experiences that conjure up painful emotions then try to transmute those experiences not by trying to ignore or remove them but by simply expanding your lens of perception and experience, the same too with physical pain. For the latter right now I just banged my knuckles against the table which created a sharp pain of course, without dissociation I imagined myself being fully in that experience while at the same time in the clouds of the sky near an aeroplane which I paired the feeling of pain with. So the plane was experiencing the pain not myself [edit: which greatly reduced the pain]. These sorts of experiences, they teach consciousness all of its possibilities, understanding all of these modalities is something we're yet to master as humans. Mastering consciousness via conscious experience (inclusive of emotions and sensation) and imagination is something that would give any human not only a superficial incredible advantage but also just a comparatively pretty cool and easy breezy human experience when it comes to reaching their potential. 

Edited October 22, 2020 by Origins

[deci belle]

Thank you for the contribution and follow-up, mr Origins~ yes it is pretty cool, after all, and you are too, but…

How much did all that have in context with the OP? Free-wheeling through what you thought you read isn't cool..

However good your points may be, you completely misunderstand the context of "get rid of", so going off on tangents in terms of the aspects of conditioned perception illustrated by the conceptual aid you employed as the "lens", goes far afield. I can't believe you actually studied the poem to have come up with your long responses relative to someone else who also missed the point of the OP.

Please make note: the issue is not a question of a quality of perceptive breadth, or a need for a compensatory action, it is the evidence of The StarGuitarist's failure to grasp the point of the 500 year old and famously conveyed message— or else he was too much in a hurry to actually articulate anything at all relevant to the topic, hence the graphic throw-away. It is essentially a cheap post. He's whining. WTF.

TheStarGuitarist posted a cartoon that laments an ever present condition being loneliness. The Solitary Bird is a Master Class on the benefits of aloneness. Actually, it is a consice treatise which cuts through to the marrow on how to live one's life audaciously, in terms of accessing one's inherent potential. Obviously, in complaining about such an existential affliction, one can easily deduce that the author of the post didn't get the point of the poem in the first place, and that the complaint is obviously a priori, a persistent object of aversion. Therefore, it is beyond obvious that most people are of the mind to get rid of such afflictions. I did not bring up the idea of getting rid of even the object of aversion.

I said to get rid of the source of the aversion— which is, the TheStarGuitarist's perspective based on habit-patterned conditioned awareness. Therefore loneliness, or even working with such affliction per se, has nothing to do with the content of the subject of this thread. This thread is about the message embedded in the poem, which is a study on enlightening activity.

Please keep comments on-topic and avoid drifting off on unrelated tangents. Nothing on this thread pertains to therapeutic technique(s) nor those who need fixing. The subject is the OP.

TheStarGuitarist's post is utterly off-topic in terms of the thrust of the teaching employed by San Juan de la Cruz in his The Solitary Bird because the post's content shows a complete ignorance of the obvious enlightening, uplifting, inspirational and self-empowering knowledge embedded in its few short lines.

The purpose of the thread is to extoll the obvious enlightening, uplifting, inspirational and self-empowering knowledge embedded in its few short lines, and to provide a venue for relevant commentary on the specifics introduced in the poem. You did not even attempt that much, hence the expression of my displeasure in your off-topic post.

The source of the off-topic lament is the cartoon's insinuation by way of the the self-importance of ego-consciousness masquerading as melancholy, or existential self-consciousness. THIS is what is to be gotten rid of. There is no need to employ a lens— one must completely forget to come up with such garbage in the first place, non?

Whereas the ignorant are, for the most part, barely cognizant of the sources of such affliction in their conditioned self-conscious awareness— they only want the affliction to stay "under the radar" and are incapable of addressing the root issues involved in attaining conscious enlightening liberation. The deluded are such by virtue of their penchant for habitually responding only to the seeds of ever-recurring growths of habit-energies cloying the psychological apparatus of the being that is going to die. To be liberated, as such, would be as if stripped of one's imaginary role in life, which is attachment to appearances and following thoughts relative to ego-consciousness unawares. That's karmic bondage. Otherwise what is the point of SELF realization? To be stripped bare of such habits. Yes! Again, let's not use this thread as a point of departure relative to therapeutic fixes for the deluded. This is not a provisional teaching. Do you know?

What's my point?

There is such a thing as advance practice beyond the reach of most people on a grand scale. You did not address any aspect of that in your posts. There is nothing lacking in the way of life of a solitary bird. Period. That which is advocated in the lines of The Solitary Bird is for those who do not lament existential process. That would be those who have awakened to inherent enlightening being. Why? Because existential process is where reality is found.

The Solitary Bird is for those who carry on without bothering about such trifles as lamenting that which is, ie: existential process.

That which is worthy of minimization and refinement until it dies out completely is the conditioned human mentality that obscures the innate enlightening function of selfless spiritual adaption to WHAT IS. A lens of any manufacture or design that can render reality in terms of the viewer's perspective, regardless of its angle of view is a provisional adjunct. Why? Because ultimately, there is no inside or outside— no viewer or viewed; beyond self and other, where would there be a lens to employ? For the initiated, this is not a metaphor.

What is left when one succeeds in the (never ending) process of self-refinement (in terms of sudden enlightenment when one's spiritual potential is released for the first time) is the nonoriginated mind-ground void of self. This is the absolute. Advance practice for those who have subsequently awakened to their innate enlightening potential relative to endless self-refinement, is impersonally harmonizing the all-at-once Absolute with the incremental quality of conditioned karmic evolution, ie: the Creative. Ultimately these two are not different (for buddhas).

Harmonizing the light of awareness to delusional self-consciousness is a thing (not really). It's buddhahood. Actually, in terms of buddhahood's application, it is called the "middle way" or, the Supreme Vehicle of Buddhas (Buddhism did not invent this. I'm just using buddhist terminology.) So even though the "middle way" has its place in terms of provisional teaching, as does your contribution— ultimately, enlightening practice (selfless spiritual adaption) is not a personal endeavor relatively based on even conventional ideals. There is no "technique" employed, simply due to the fact that one does not do it. In other words, one does not rely on one's own power. Such potential is inherent in the situation itself. It's not the person. So there is absolutely nothing cool about it. I want you to reflect on this fact. It's NOT cool. Why?

What this is, is everyday ordinary entry into inconceivability by having realized inherent enlightening being's impersonal potential as one's spiritual function in terms of adapting to endless karmic cycles of birth and death without being subject to the laws of (karmic) creation. There is no other creation. Creation, karma, eternity, endless cycles of yin and yang are all different names for the same delusional quality of existence. Those who are deluded within delusion are buddhas. Those who experience realization upon realization are the deluded. You might not understand that. If not, please feel free to PM me.

We all have our part to work out in this seamless continuum. The process of clarifying the foundation of perceptive qualities may very well include aspects of your contribution to this thread, but your point of address relative to "getting rid of…" is perhaps irrelevant (to this thread) because the comment implying there is something to get rid of (the affliction — and more to the point, the implied complaint in the first place) has no basis in fact with the point of the OP. Let's raise our game, mr Origins! Presence is automatic impersonal adaption to what is, not off-topic interjections of pet theories, however relevant they may be, or actually are, to applications of general enlightening practice.

Why? Because, for the initiated, the first four conditions epressed in the OP address fundamentals for practicing the Science of Essence, not the dual aspect of the Science of Life, which is only addressed in the last condition (singing softly). Both sciences of essence and life are specific to taoist spiritual alchemy, not unrelated to profound penetration of the teaching embedded in The Conditions of a Solitary Bird. All such study of works by prior illuminates are conducive to talismanic receptivity. This means that only those who can look back, as such, and see the sign-posts in reverse, as it were, are on the dusty path of authentic entry and penetration into the mystery. What's so cool about that? It's not cool, mr Origins, unless you see the reality, and you don't . You should see that reality isn't a matter of technique; it's just real, nothing more, nothing less.

At any rate, the point you wished to address had more to do with a quality of perception which would be well to pursue in appropriate contexts and not much at all to do with the subject of this thread which is The Conditions of a Solitary Bird.

Please try to keep comments limited to: a thorough understanding of who said what, what was said, and most importantly,  please strive to employ contextual adherence with the actual topic, however well intentioned and well expressed they may otherwise be. Please feel free to address the OP as soon as you want to, but please keep your content on-topic. Please read and reflect on the poem itself.

I welcome your good points and skillfully written content in the future— really!!❤︎

 

 

ed note: typo paragraph 9

Edited October 23, 2020 by deci belle

[Origins]

On 21/10/2020 at 3:27 PM, deci belle said:

Get rid of THAT, and the more positive attributes of a healthy psychology are naturally more accessible!

Was responding to as quoted is all  .

[deci belle]

You did not refer to any quote, dear.

Please refer to the OP, which is the poem, not THAT, which is still unstated on your part.

Join the process, don't just play from the sidelines.

[Origins]

3 hours ago, deci belle said:

THIS is what is to be gotten rid of. There is no need to employ a lens— one must completely forget to come up with such garbage in the first place, non?

There is no need for me to comment back, there is also no need to comment in any such way that I may comment for at the end of the day the persons lens on the situation will describe what will be automatically omitted, omitted by choice or omitted by the overall capacity of the lens on the perception, otherwise known as a gestalt. Lens cannot ever be non-admissible as that is the only place upon which one can begin to describe their present context, my point relative to the, albeit off-topic relative to the main topic but on-topic relative to what you've brought up so far, is that it is by inclusionary measures we can exclude automatically rather than through conscious exclusionary measures, the former is achieved via contrast (right lighting and so on) and the latter is achieved via conscious control. Think of a painting, when the painter starts out if he puts a small dot in the middle that automatically becomes the centre of attention, but as he adds layers and layers upon layers to the piece, the dot can no longer be seen as it is held in the balance of the rest of the overall gestalt (possibly more than one depending on the painting), so it is removed through expansionary rather than contractionary measures, this is the basis of my initial comments as originally stated.

Otherwise okay, I'll think about the poem and comment back accordingly later today.

[Origins]

@deci belle Have you read, “The Conditions of a Prideful Poop”?, it’s very analogous.

Written by Filippe Deleone of Tour de France-poop, in "Memories of Shouvonlu". Otherwise these and or poetry in general are great for reticular activation reconfiguration in the stereotypical right brain kind of way, opens up gateways of disidentification and reidentification of value through lateral thinking.

Quote

The conditions of a prideful poop are six
It does not aim to please so it does not get caught in any social disease
It is born from only what others saw as cheese so let them bow to their knees
It survives the coldest freeze so the highest mountain should be your only breeze
It only waits to be integrated back into the earth so it cannot be displeased
It has survived the harshest weather so it cannot cry from any tease
And its already reached its potential so it does not know how to appease 
The prideful poop
One step to a human dung beetles glory
One giant leap in universal consciousness

Thanks for sharing , as it concerns your actual poem my observation is based on the utility of the poem itself, its great for encapsulating fictional character personality design and depiction for example, its fascinating how just a change in one aspect of the poem can lead to a complete change in the overall perception of the poem. As for "sings very softly" or any of the characterisations, for me it just depends on how you personally wish to characterise the poem and what you wish to take away from it, I certainly don't entertain any identification with poetic moulds myself at least not at present though I get the utility in doing so, aesthetically for certain cultures in particular Taoist eastern like will do so as a means of aiding the formatting of their lenses, to bring it back full circle there. 

Best.

[deci belle]

Dear Origins, this ain't my first rodeo~ The fact that I want you to address the OP shouldn't be an issue of obstinate pride on your part.

You seem to be too much in a hurry to actually spell words correctly or even make sense. Let me quote just the last half of your last sentence:

Quote

certain cultures in particular Taoist eastern like will do so as a means of aiding the formatting of their lenses, to bring it back full circle there. 

Pray tell, what is this all about? You know as well as I do that this much is nonsense (simply because your concern for your own content is on par with your concern for the OP's content. You don't want to respond to the OP because the little boy doesn't want to do the work. Instead of maintaining your tack of "picking and choosing", as if you were in a smorgasbord, only taking the easy way, it should be apparent that addressing the OP is the task at hand whether you like it or not.

You have the wherewithal to do so. You have proven this in just the last bits of snarky response above. Please grow up, dear.

Perhaps the issue has a lot more to do with a cultural prejudice fomented and stemming back 500 years on the part of England, the Netherlands and what became Germany on account of the strength of the Spanish Empire, which at the time, was a considerable adversary in terms of colonial expansion and and the pre-eminent economic powerhouse in terms of establishing and plying international trade. There is a current and fashionably thin volume called The Tree of Hate, which explores the continued prejudice against anything rooted in Spanish veracity. I hope your perspective and obstinacy toward a Spanish man of knowledge isn't a product of an ancient cultural war that would be best to put to rest.

 

 

[deci belle]

I lament having to admonish an adult male. It is suuuuch a drain, and an insult to this thread. I was awake last night wondering how I might entice mr Origins into contributing authentically~ but I'm just not the mothering type.

[Origins]

I responded sincerely, I don't have any time not to. I don't see any sincere remaining questions therefore I have no need to participate any longer in discussion.

All the best deci belle.