|
|
Post by someNothing on Jul 10, 2019 16:48:51 GMT
So, you're standing by your idea that all this creating is happening for a "reason". You dream eerrr, think there must be a reasoned impetus to create a cause and effect. I know it certainly sounds reasonable to most conditioned thought patterns. If you can recall, in real time, some of the seeds of your conditioned thoughts and reasons, you might catch a glimpse of somenothing. Apparently, Gopal thinks he purposefully creates on the impersonal level of Consciousness. He has, conceptually, properly placed himself as this Consciousness, but has brought his ideas of personal will and purpose into his new identity. Once he fully understands the difference between personal and impersonal, he'll find he doesn't even have a new identity from which to launch a purpose. Yeah, it's very important to notice those vestiges of thought that maintain the structure of purpose. I reckon that's a common place for peeps to start really breaking down when the dominoes start to tumble. |
|
Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969 
|
Post by Enigma on Jul 10, 2019 19:41:17 GMT
Apparently, Gopal thinks he purposefully creates on the impersonal level of Consciousness. He has, conceptually, properly placed himself as this Consciousness, but has brought his ideas of personal will and purpose into his new identity. Once he fully understands the difference between personal and impersonal, he'll find he doesn't even have a new identity from which to launch a purpose. I think what many fail to see is that nonduality, realizing there is but One thingless/thing, does not preclude the possibility of an 'oversoul/entity/higher self' that has a stake/interest in the game. But even if that were the case, it's important to see that that would still be part and parcel of what is deemed 'personal' in relation to 'impersonal.' I get the sense that Gopal believes in a sort of 'soul/entity' that is inextricable from the appearing body/mind, encompasses it, but is still distinct in it's 'interests', but he is mistaking that for impersonal God/Source. The kensho crowd is doing essentially the same thing; They experience an energetic field of sorts that lies beyond what initially meets the eye, thus, they've conflated that energetic field with "________________". They've mistakingly attributed Truth to something that arises within experience. As I see it, an experienced field of energy or an experienced soul/higher self, although it could perhaps be deemed to be a 'middle layer' of sorts between personal/impersonal, between appearance and that which lies fundamental, is not actually in the 'middle' at all, rather, it's still of the realm of appearance, an 'arising within/to' that which lies fundamental. Yup, it would just be a fancier dream. |
|
Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969
|
Post by Enigma on Jul 10, 2019 19:49:39 GMT
Apparently, Gopal thinks he purposefully creates on the impersonal level of Consciousness. He has, conceptually, properly placed himself as this Consciousness, but has brought his ideas of personal will and purpose into his new identity. Once he fully understands the difference between personal and impersonal, he'll find he doesn't even have a new identity from which to launch a purpose. Yeah, it's very important to notice those vestiges of thought that maintain the structure of purpose. I reckon that's a common place for peeps to start really breaking down when the dominoes start to tumble. The whole idea of lack of purpose seems to be a hard one to get past, even on these forums. Not sure why. I'm guessing it's for the same reason 'God falls into his own dream' goes over like a lead balloon. Peeps want there to be a stable foundation somewhere, even if it isn't a personal God. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 10, 2019 20:42:33 GMT
I think what many fail to see is that nonduality, realizing there is but One thingless/thing, does not preclude the possibility of an 'oversoul/entity/higher self' that has a stake/interest in the game. But even if that were the case, it's important to see that that would still be part and parcel of what is deemed 'personal' in relation to 'impersonal.' I get the sense that Gopal believes in a sort of 'soul/entity' that is inextricable from the appearing body/mind, encompasses it, but is still distinct in it's 'interests', but he is mistaking that for impersonal God/Source. The kensho crowd is doing essentially the same thing; They experience an energetic field of sorts that lies beyond what initially meets the eye, thus, they've conflated that energetic field with "________________". They've mistakingly attributed Truth to something that arises within experience. As I see it, an experienced field of energy or an experienced soul/higher self, although it could perhaps be deemed to be a 'middle layer' of sorts between personal/impersonal, between appearance and that which lies fundamental, is not actually in the 'middle' at all, rather, it's still of the realm of appearance, an 'arising within/to' that which lies fundamental. Yup, it would just be a fancier dream. Exactly!   |
|
Enigma
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 13,969
|
Post by Enigma on Jul 11, 2019 13:18:47 GMT
Yup, it would just be a fancier dream. Exactly! |
|
|
|
Post by someNothing on Jul 11, 2019 18:26:49 GMT
Yeah, it's very important to notice those vestiges of thought that maintain the structure of purpose. I reckon that's a common place for peeps to start really breaking down when the dominoes start to tumble. The whole idea of lack of purpose seems to be a hard one to get past, even on these forums. Not sure why. I'm guessing it's for the same reason 'God falls into his own dream' goes over like a lead balloon. Peeps want there to be a stable foundation somewhere, even if it isn't a personal God. Making mommy/daddy happy likely goes way waaaaaaay back into the psyche, so yeah, personal gods, purpose, pleasing others to feel pleased, etc. Children need some sense of foundation to mature into childhood, but often peeps forget to go the next leg into actual adulthood. Furthermore, most of the foundations to children these days seem to be infused throughout with their own parents' fears, suffering, etc, which i guess is what karma stuff is all about. Pfft, adult-aged kids these days!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2019 2:32:53 GMT
There is a sharp distinction between what you say and what I say.
you say that interpretation towards the situation changes. But the truth is, the situation which you are looking at is not 'happening out there', that's created by you or it's being imagined by consciousness. So You would not be creating some situation which you this time interpret differently, you would simply stop creating such a situation which would put you in suffering. Story changes along with inner conditioning, In my dictionary, there is no such a thing as inner conditioning, that's the part and parcel of the same story. Story changes, you are not in need of expressing certain aspect of you which you expressed so far. Simple.
So, you're standing by your idea that all this creating is happening for a "reason". You dream eerrr, think there must be a reasoned impetus to create a cause and effect. I know it certainly sounds reasonable to most conditioned thought patterns. If you can recall, in real time, some of the seeds of your conditioned thoughts and reasons, you might catch a glimpse of somenothing. I was not saying that this is created for a reason, If I have to assume that way, I would be falling into the speculation. I don't want to. I see how creation gets unfolded and writing here. When we see something clearly it changes the total story, you would not be witnessing the brutal story and remain calm. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2019 2:39:03 GMT
What you consider conditioning is part and parcel of the unfolding movie. Something terrible may happen but you may not piss off, something terrible may not happen at all. But both are unfolding story. Creation of thought happens via the created conditioning, which is always based on the past. What is being pointed to is prior to the conditioning and creation. But yeah, that lack of control and/or difficulty in seeing through the illusion of an apparently objective thought-based realityscape has been known to piss off a few dream characters. Conditioning or circumstance has been created accordingly until you see through the illusion. I am not controlling anything nowadays because I have seen through that illusion, situation wouldn't put me into the controlling mode. Unfolding story has the full control over you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jul 13, 2019 17:58:07 GMT
So, you're standing by your idea that all this creating is happening for a "reason". You dream eerrr, think there must be a reasoned impetus to create a cause and effect. I know it certainly sounds reasonable to most conditioned thought patterns. If you can recall, in real time, some of the seeds of your conditioned thoughts and reasons, you might catch a glimpse of somenothing. I was not saying that this is created for a reason, If I have to assume that way, I would be falling into the speculation. I don't want to. I see how creation gets unfolded and writing here. When we see something clearly it changes the total story, you would not be witnessing the brutal story and remain calm. There is a fundamental, deeper sort of 'calm,' that abides even the stormiest of times. Even in the midst of a tumultuous circumstance, where the roller-coaster is dipping low and surface chaos abounds, the hearth of "Being" continues to abide, untouched by any of it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2019 14:55:47 GMT
So, you're standing by your idea that all this creating is happening for a "reason". You dream eerrr, think there must be a reasoned impetus to create a cause and effect. I know it certainly sounds reasonable to most conditioned thought patterns. If you can recall, in real time, some of the seeds of your conditioned thoughts and reasons, you might catch a glimpse of somenothing. Apparently, Gopal thinks he purposefully creates on the impersonal level of Consciousness. He has, conceptually, properly placed himself as this Consciousness, but has brought his ideas of personal will and purpose into his new identity. Once he fully understands the difference between personal and impersonal, he'll find he doesn't even have a new identity from which to launch a purpose. How come I am bringing my personal will and purpose to my new identity? Can you explain me? |
|
