Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2017 2:28:10 GMT
I don't believe peace that is not related to the form is a real peace. Form must be the result of your realization of peace! You say anger can arises, but anger itself is the resistance to the flow. Something should not have happened. But you agree with me that you are witnessing consciousness, If you are witnessing consciousness then your truth must be one with what you are experiencing, Reality has to be created in such a way that it has to be witnessed, it should not be created in such a way that you have to be resisting. I'm not sure I understand the bolded line. But, Yes, I agree, even a little bit of anger is evidence of a little bit of resistance. As I see it, because there will always be some degree of contrasting conditions inherent in experience, there will always be some degree of resistance. I don't see that as a problem though, nor do I see it as evidence that one is not really in peace. Peace that is tied to circumstances, is therefore, conditional, and actually a very flimsy sort of peace. Do you see a point one can arrive at, where nothing unwanted ever arises in experience?.....where every single thing that happens, is judged in form to be utterly and completely perfectly conforming to personal liking?.... Can experience ever become completely free of contrasting conditions? You are free of the opposing aspect of experience. But if you believe you are not, that will be your experience. But does that belief amount to the veiling that you are free? Sent from my SM-T210R using Tapatalk
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2017 8:01:42 GMT
I don't believe peace that is not related to the form is a real peace. Form must be the result of your realization of peace! You say anger can arises, but anger itself is the resistance to the flow. Something should not have happened. But you agree with me that you are witnessing consciousness, If you are witnessing consciousness then your truth must be one with what you are experiencing, Reality has to be created in such a way that it has to be witnessed, it should not be created in such a way that you have to be resisting. I'm not sure I understand the bolded line. If you say you have realized the truth of your witness, then creation has to support your realization, otherwise it's not realized, that's why I never believe in Satch or ZD's talk, those realizations are fake. Raise of anger is resistance to the universal creation no matter whether it leaves the impression or not. Agree? Resistance is not something you do from your conscious level, it is actually raising from subconscious level. No, I do experience rollercoaster, few months my dominant feeling would be happy and few months my dominant feelings would be unhappy, but There are plenty of illusions which I experienced in past is not here now. For an example, controlling would create lose of control and lose of control creates the control, the need of control creates everything that would create the control, So once I have seen this illusion everything else which was needed to control was collapsed as well. This illusion is no longer with me or situation doesn't force me to control. But I do experience rollercoaster which creates happy/unhappy experience, I enter into suffering mode when the unhappiness touches it's peak. So I can say clearly about what must be peace.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on May 4, 2017 15:35:15 GMT
I'm not sure I understand the bolded line. But, Yes, I agree, even a little bit of anger is evidence of a little bit of resistance. As I see it, because there will always be some degree of contrasting conditions inherent in experience, there will always be some degree of resistance. I don't see that as a problem though, nor do I see it as evidence that one is not really in peace. Peace that is tied to circumstances, is therefore, conditional, and actually a very flimsy sort of peace. Do you see a point one can arrive at, where nothing unwanted ever arises in experience?.....where every single thing that happens, is judged in form to be utterly and completely perfectly conforming to personal liking?.... Can experience ever become completely free of contrasting conditions? You are free of the opposing aspect of experience. But if you believe you are not, that will be your experience. But does that belief amount to the veiling that you are free? Sent from my SM-T210R using Tapatalk I would say one can be free of 'suffering' due to the opposing aspect of experience, but I'm not so sure that worldly experience can be completely free of all opposing aspects. I would say that the very fact of experience means that opposing aspects are in play. Re: your question; I would say no. It doesn't matter whether one believes opposing aspects are necessary facets of experience, or not, Because. One can be free, regardless of what's happening in experience. Do you believe that experience can be completely, totally free of contrasting conditions....ie; Could one's life experience be filled with nothing but 'wanted' circumstances and happenings?
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on May 4, 2017 16:02:06 GMT
If you say you have realized the truth of your witness, then creation has to support your realization, otherwise it's not realized, that's why I never believe in Satch or ZD's talk, those realizations are fake. What exactly does 'truth of your witness' mean? Is that the equivalent of realizing 'I am' as truth...and then all else that arises as an appearance? If so, & If I have realized that being is the ground, and all arises/appears to Being, I don't get how that then translates into 'creation has to support your realization.' How does the content, regardless of whether it is desired or not desired, support or not support that realization? No. I don't think mild irritation or anger is necessarily resistance to 'universal creation' itself, but rather, it's just a surface arising in response to another surface arising. One can be fundamentally in acceptance of universal creation, on the whole, and still have minor arisings of resistance on the surface of experience. In order for that to cease completely, one would have to become completely devoid of all likes/dislikes, all personal preferences and all personal aversions, and I just don't see that that should or even could happen as those are part and parcel of being human. The human aspect is always inherent in experience, even in transcendence. In transcendence, what one has transcended is seeing fundamental wrongness, but the continued presence of the human aspect in experience means that surface wrongs can still at times be seen. Resistance can happen consciously. If I like vanilla ice cream and I get served chocolate instead and I feel a moment of disappointment and then exchange my chocolate for vanilla, I can be fully aware of what's happening, through that entire experience. The 'disappointment' was a minor form of resistance to 'what is.' And really, not a problem at all. Okay. So why is this still happening when you say you have realized the Truth? This is what I continue to not understand regarding your argument that realizing results in the end of all resistance or it has not been realized. If creation has to support your realization, and you say you have realized, why do you still experience a rollercoaster?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2017 17:14:41 GMT
I'm not sure I understand the bolded line. But, Yes, I agree, even a little bit of anger is evidence of a little bit of resistance. As I see it, because there will always be some degree of contrasting conditions inherent in experience, there will always be some degree of resistance. I don't see that as a problem though, nor do I see it as evidence that one is not really in peace. Peace that is tied to circumstances, is therefore, conditional, and actually a very flimsy sort of peace. Do you see a point one can arrive at, where nothing unwanted ever arises in experience?.....where every single thing that happens, is judged in form to be utterly and completely perfectly conforming to personal liking?.... Can experience ever become completely free of contrasting conditions? You are free of the opposing aspect of experience. But if you believe you are not, that will be your experience. But does that belief amount to the veiling that you are free? Sent from my SM-T210R using Tapatalk How? What kind of logic is this?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2017 17:19:14 GMT
You are free of the opposing aspect of experience. But if you believe you are not, that will be your experience. But does that belief amount to the veiling that you are free? Sent from my SM-T210R using Tapatalk I would say one can be free of 'suffering' due to the opposing aspect of experience, but I'm not so sure that worldly experience can be completely free of all opposing aspects. I would say that the very fact of experience means that opposing aspects are in play. Re: your question; I would say no. It doesn't matter whether one believes opposing aspects are necessary facets of experience, or not, Because. One can be free, regardless of what's happening in experience.Do you believe that experience can be completely, totally free of contrasting conditions....ie; Could one's life experience be filled with nothing but 'wanted' circumstances and happenings? You would be free even if somebody gets crucified infront of your eyes? What a cruel person you are
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2017 18:33:07 GMT
What exactly does 'truth of your witness' mean? Is that the equivalent of realizing 'I am' as truth...and then all else that arises as an appearance? What do you mean by realizing I am? I don't know how it is related to the realization of being witness! You are watching a movie in a theater is the good example what's the meaning of witness.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2017 18:42:55 GMT
No. I don't think mild irritation or anger is necessarily resistance to 'universal creation' itself, but rather, it's just a surface arising in response to another surface arising. One can be fundamentally in acceptance of universal creation, on the whole, and still have minor arisings of resistance on the surface of experience. In order for that to cease completely, one would have to become completely devoid of all likes/dislikes, all personal preferences and all personal aversions, and I just don't see that that should or even could happen as those are part and parcel of being human. The human aspect is always inherent in experience, even in transcendence. In transcendence, what one has transcended is seeing fundamental wrongness, but the continued presence of the human aspect in experience means that surface wrongs can still at times be seen.
You are watching a movie, suddenly a rape scene comes along the way, we usually wish that scene to move away quickly,right? Or some kind of horrible scene comes along the way, we would quickly want that scene to move away ,right? That's resistance. If you can't watch something freely then you are experiencing the resistance. Since it's a movie, you are completely convinced that you can't do anything other than watching the movie, so you would not react rather you would wait that to pass away, but if it's reality, you would react to change the situation, right? this is what I call as resistance. If these kind of feeling still arises in you,then you are witnessing the irritation and anger, then you are not in witnessing mode. You are in actor mode.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2017 18:48:44 GMT
Okay. So why is this still happening when you say you have realized the Truth? This is what I continue to not understand regarding your argument that realizing results in the end of all resistance or it has not been realized. If creation has to support your realization, and you say you have realized, why do you still experience a rollercoaster? I did not say I am free from resistance, but I know what's resistance. I said I am free from the illusion which I have seen through. I have seen through the illusion of controlling and allowing, I have seen through the illusion achieving something. Whenever I see through the illusion, that usually falls away, that would no longer will occupy me.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on May 5, 2017 23:57:32 GMT
What exactly does 'truth of your witness' mean? Is that the equivalent of realizing 'I am' as truth...and then all else that arises as an appearance? What do you mean by realizing I am? I don't know how it is related to the realization of being witness! You are watching a movie in a theater is the good example what's the meaning of witness. I was speaking there of I am, and seeing that there is no other knowing that comes close to that which pertains to 'being,'...thus, really, the only certain knowing is just that; I am/Being. Okay...so 'the truth of your witness' references the realization that life is like a movie, and you are watching it unfold? I still don't get how that seeing means that what arises in experience has to 'support' that. And again, you say you have realized this truth, but you also say you still experience a roller-coaster. So, doesn't that mean that creation is not supporting your realization?
|
|