Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
thenondualtankie

Complete acceptance vs complete denial

5 posts in this topic

Let's say I want to avoid the suffering of being crushed by a boulder. Then I believe there are two ways of going about doing that. Namely, complete acceptance or complete denial.

If I completely accept the possibility of being crushed by a boulder, which comes with the possibility of death, injury etc, then this possibility will no longer make me suffer.

At the same time, if I create a life where this possibility doesn't even exist, then I have avoided the suffering by avoiding the scenario altogether. The thought of being crushed by a boulder doesn't phase me, because I don't even remotely view it as a possibility. I call this scenario "complete denial". I've virtually completely avoided this "bad" scenario.

From this perspective, suffering can only happen when you're between these two cases. That is, when you haven't completely avoided the boulders, but you haven't completely accepted them either.

The reason I bring this up is because it's common spiritual wisdom to say that avoidance is what causes suffering. What I'm trying to argue here, however, is that if you can completely avoid something, then it will not cause you suffering.

In my life, I believe I misinterpreted what it means to completely accept reality. I had a trip where I would neurotically conjure up and imagine all sorts of terrible scenarios happening to me. This had been happening for a few trips before, but this one it really got unleashed. I've been doing the same for all my trips since then. My mind justifies all this by saying "You need to accept all of reality! You need to constantly think about all the worst things that could happen to someone and act as if they're happening to you!"

At the same time, in a sense I understand that this is the most direct path to happiness. Just accepting everything as a whole. So how do I reconcile these two things?

Should I first create a life where I don't need to avoid the bad, and then accept everything? But is that really the acceptance of everything? I hope I made some sense here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way to exclude anything is to think of it. It is only within thought that things appear to be separate. So, here's the irony, the only way to exclude something is to think of it. So when you think you're excluding you're actually actually including. 

The only thing we can do is give attention and thought to what we want to include. Thought is meant to be used like ordering a meal at a restaurant. You chose what you want and speak that to the waiter. If you say "I don't want the prime rib" all they will hear in their eagerness to take your order is "the prime rib". Even if they listened closely, they still cannot bring you a meal at all until you choose what you do want.  


My Youtube Channel- Light on Earth “We dance round in a ring and suppose, but the Secret sits in the middle and knows.”― Robert Frost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thenondualtankie said:

So how do I reconcile these two things?

Inspection of direct experience reveals ‘two things’ is the thought that there are two things, and there are not, ‘in’ perception, two things, any more than the stuff coming to mind on your trips is actual or ‘in’ direct experience. What you’re being shown (imo) is that psychedelics can be helpful but are not exclusively the way, and likewise that the (wandering) mind is a terrible master. Meditation & inspection of direct experience could be said to be an essential foundation prior to tripping, if orientation is truth. Perhaps all that’s being avoided, is the cushion. 


MEDITATIONS TOOLS  ActualityOfBeing.com  GUIDANCE SESSIONS

NONDUALITY LOA  My Youtube Channel  THE TRUE NATURE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@thenondualtankie What if you knew that you someday had to go under the boulder and sometimes you start thinking of going under the boulder and each time you start to feel fear about it. What then would happen if you avoid going under the boulder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, thenondualtankie said:

What I'm trying to argue here, however, is that if you can completely avoid something, then it will not cause you suffering.

That presupposes that you can avoid all the bad stuff. You can't. Acceptance is more powerful, because it means accepting that bad stuff will happen, and then confronting it directly when it does happen. But taking on suffering for the sake of it is useless, why not avoid it if you can? We all do that just to stay alive.


57% paranoid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0