Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2018 10:32:02 GMT
When the unhappy rollercoaster goes too down, it automatically pulls you into suffering, your judgement would come along the way. You don't have any control, you can't do value assignment differently. Story rules, what happened to you in ST is the best example of that. Story holds the control over us because we are not even for one sec left without the story. Clear seeing changes the the way story unfolds, no doubt. but what is the story now perfectly defines your feel of experience. You don't know what happened to Figs on ST. You only know what you think should have happened. (What would have happened to you) That's your assumption. I know she got offences when Reefs said conversation quality deteriorates because of Figgles too many post.
|
|
Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969
|
Post by Enigma on Nov 6, 2018 15:37:49 GMT
You don't know what happened to Figs on ST. You only know what you think should have happened. (What would have happened to you) Also, you don't know what the other person was thinking, ie. how they arrived at what they said, or even their understanding of the words which were used. All you can do is hear their quote, and then make an assumption as best you can. The more history you have with a person the better your understanding of what they probably meant, but you can't be certain. Plus how well you hear depends on how well you listen. What happens to the other persons quote after your mind starts analyzing it? It generally goes through some type of spin cycle, and who knows what it might look like when it comes out.
|
|
Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969
|
Post by Enigma on Nov 6, 2018 15:40:42 GMT
One IS at Peace because one IS free from suffering. Where you go horribly wrong is in your interpretation of what another must be experiencing given the 'objective' experience that is outwardly happening. Your theory includes the insistence that certain events MUST cause suffering. You simply don't know that from your perspective. I never said that. The event which happened 10 years ago might not cause suffering if it were to happen today. The event which causes suffering need not to cause suffering for you. Hope it makes my point clear to you. No, it's not clear. You are observing an event (fig's experience on ST) and insisting she is suffering from it.
|
|
Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969
|
Post by Enigma on Nov 6, 2018 15:46:59 GMT
You don't know what happened to Figs on ST. You only know what you think should have happened. (What would have happened to you) That's your assumption. I know she got offences when Reefs said conversation quality deteriorates because of Figgles too many post. The assumption is yours. And a bit of free advice, man to man; Don't EVER tell a woman you know better than she does what she's feeling.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 6, 2018 15:56:15 GMT
One IS at Peace because one IS free from suffering. Where you go horribly wrong is in your interpretation of what another must be experiencing given the 'objective' experience that is outwardly happening. Your theory includes the insistence that certain events MUST cause suffering. You simply don't know that from your perspective. I never said that. The event which happened 10 years ago might not cause suffering if it were to happen today. The event which causes suffering need not to cause suffering for you. Hope it makes my point clear to you. So why do you conclude that my interaction with Reefs over on ST and my decision to leave to post here, necessarily equals 'suffering' for me?
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 6, 2018 16:11:37 GMT
You don't know what happened to Figs on ST. You only know what you think should have happened. (What would have happened to you) That's your assumption. I know she got offences when Reefs said conversation quality deteriorates because of Figgles too many post. You mean 'offended'? Thing is, I don't think Reefs himself even actually believes that my input had caused a 'deterioration'...he was just saying that because he wanted the conversation to end because he knew what I was saying made sense, and he knows there are all sorts of holes and contradictions within his assertion that a special woo-woo experience results in a realization where specific qualities can be attributed with certainty, to each and every appearing thing. That's his pattern. When someone argues against him and it's not total nonsense, he stops engaging them, or in this case, tries to shut them down, which he is very much in the position to do, as mod. I wasn't offended per se, I just saw where it all was going....that he was not going to directly engage my most pertinent questions and he was playing games to get what he wanted. In short he was being manipulative and I didn't feel interested enough to play along. I've done that dance with Reefs many times. If I continued to ask my questions, he was very likely going to ban me anyway. In short, I really do believe in dealing with Reefs, we are dealing with a bona-fide narcissist. I've dealt with a few of them close up and personal, and I learned way back, not to take anything they say or do, personally. They are almost entirely motivated from a position of maintaining their standing in the eyes of others and self.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 6, 2018 16:12:49 GMT
That's your assumption. I know she got offences when Reefs said conversation quality deteriorates because of Figgles too many post. The assumption is yours. And a bit of free advice, man to man; Don't EVER tell a woman you know better than she does what she's feeling.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2018 5:45:03 GMT
I never said that. The event which happened 10 years ago might not cause suffering if it were to happen today. The event which causes suffering need not to cause suffering for you. Hope it makes my point clear to you. No, it's not clear. You are observing an event (fig's experience on ST) and insisting she is suffering from it. what I am saying, what you are replying?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2018 5:45:16 GMT
That's your assumption. I know she got offences when Reefs said conversation quality deteriorates because of Figgles too many post. The assumption is yours. And a bit of free advice, man to man; Don't EVER tell a woman you know better than she does what she's feeling.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2018 5:46:22 GMT
I never said that. The event which happened 10 years ago might not cause suffering if it were to happen today. The event which causes suffering need not to cause suffering for you. Hope it makes my point clear to you. So why do you conclude that my interaction with Reefs over on ST and my decision to leave to post here, necessarily equals 'suffering' for me? You are trying to change the course of events. Story rules your life even though you try hide yourself from it. Enigma is another cause, he is allowing you to see through this illusion. What to do!
|
|