|
|
Post by Figgles on Oct 31, 2023 23:03:37 GMT
While I get the "blameful anger" thing, as that goes hand in hand with the idea that each appearing person has his own, inherent volition to choose other than he chose, saying that continued judgments 'don't make any sense,' is pretty much the same as saying that a continued appearance of a "me character/body/mind sense," post SR, doesn't make sense.
Even after awakening to the Truth, a me character/person and 'other' persons continue to appear so long as experience continues to arise....and part and parcel of that "me character" are likes and dislikes....ideas about what is relatively not so great vs. what is highly valued.
Personal values continue to appear relative to the body/mind/me character that continues to appear.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Oct 31, 2023 23:04:50 GMT
Yup.  |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Oct 31, 2023 23:11:46 GMT
Yes, Blameful anger is an "indicator" that personal volition, a separate, existent person is in play.
|
|
farmer
Full Member
Carrys Purses
Posts: 171
|
Post by farmer on Nov 2, 2023 22:51:02 GMT
Yes, Blameful anger is an "indicator" that personal volition, a separate, existent person is in play. Hello hello  . hope all is well in your corner of the Universe The word anger doesn’t need an adjective… anger is anger, albeit in varying degrees.. But why does such an intense emotion ever arise? And to whom? I think it is an irrational personal dissatisfaction with whatever is happening manifesting into an emotional energy release |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 3, 2023 5:24:15 GMT
Yes, Blameful anger is an "indicator" that personal volition, a separate, existent person is in play. Hello hello . hope all is well in your corner of the Universe The word anger doesn’t need an adjective… anger is anger, albeit in varying degrees.. But why does such an intense emotion ever arise? And to whom? I think it is an irrational personal dissatisfaction with whatever is happening manifesting into an emotional energy release Hey, Farmer!  If we're talking 'varying degrees' of 'anger,' then as some define that, it means everything from a bit of sharp irritation/frustration all the way up to rage...& there's important differences there. Most importantly, I think we need to carefully define what we're specifically referencing when we use terms to define feelings that we are saying 'no longer have anything from which to arise upon, post SR.' For me, the "fundamental blame" adjective is of extreme importance as it denotes the involvement of an SVP who believes that each apparent person exists as a "volitional entity," who has free will to freely choose behavior/actions...and is thus, personally, fundamentally, wrong, bad, blameful/responsible/volitional, when 'choosing apparently happens. Absent the SVP, so long as a "me character" is still in play, there's going to be personal judgment...likes....dislikes and feelings arising in tandem with those surface, arising judgments. There's still caring about what happens in the dream, even though it's all seen to be appearance only. To whom does a feeling of frustration arise? Would you be asking the same question if we were talking about a relative feeling of joy/happiness? Feelings arise as part and parcel of the "personal/body/mind experience" as the story unfolds. At times, feelings arise responsive to experiential content...at others, particularly in SR/wakefulness, feelings are not so much, apparently, inextricably linked. A me character/person still appears following the seeing through of separation/SVP... and that means personal judgments to some degree, still continue to arise along with that. In SR, they no longer extend deep...are surface only...no staying power as the SVP is no longer there to anchor them in. I will say that any feeling that does not arise and then pass on through, that lingers and foments from one of light frustration into something deeper is indeed an invitation to look at whether or not a "who" has entered into the fray...it's always a 'who'(identification with personhood) that drags the locus of seeing back into the dream...seeing via the eyes of a separate dream, me character. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 6, 2023 3:09:46 GMT
But you cannot control what that wish is. Highest interest always play out in terms of what happens...and yes, that even applies to 'where' attention/focus goes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 26, 2023 22:13:44 GMT
That's Tolle making a concession to the seeking mind...to the one who still imagines himself to be a separate, volitional person. The Truth is, cooperating or not, is not actually in the hands of the person......there is no way to buck arising interests....highest interest always plays out...when it seems as though as a person you are 'choosing' to cooperate with life, that is 'interest' in play, having it's way....directing focus where it goes....and all the while the imagined separate person, along with an erroneous idea of 'doership/volition' is riding along as part and parcel of what is essentially, One, seamless movement. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 26, 2023 22:27:49 GMT
A true apprehension of the infinite reveals the folly/misconceived nature of that very question.
The idea that there is a WHAT "that" sees, hears, breathes, thinks, hinges upon imagined separation.
The Truth is, seeing, hearing, breathing, thinking, are all expressions within/to Awareness that have no object/thing/what, actually "doing" them.
The Truth is, there is no actual/existent "listener of arising sounds...no feeler....no actual breather...no thinker"....the experience of hearing sounds, of sensations....feelings....arising emotions....of breathing.....of thinking thoughts, all of that, appearance only....no existent 'thinker/experiencer/perceiver' behind any of it.
There is no existent, experiencing entity/perceiver.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 28, 2023 6:26:29 GMT
All depends from what angle you're addressing the arising feeling; From within the dream, a purely self-help, psychological approach? Yes, makes sense to focus on that idea that as a person you can 'choose' how to approach it, but if we're talking Truth, what is actually so, whatever action/reaction ensues, is whatever the highest, strongest interest IS in that moment. Highest interest always plays out and the person does not actually have control over arising 'interest.'
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Dec 6, 2023 20:48:16 GMT
That which is truly "acausal" has no condition "necessary" to it.
The quest...the seeking movement towards Truth has a delusion fueling it....the seeker 'thinks' he's interested in "The Truth" but he has no idea what that actually IS...how could he?
I would say if anything, the "ultimate surrender" happens more "in spite of" the person's seeking/craving/chasing after what he imagines to be "the Truth."
That said, even the delusional seeker cannot stand in the way of that "divine grace" of the shift in locus of seeing that is SR. It is beyond all cause.....all condition.
|
|
. hope all is well in your corner of the Universe 