| Fri, 05 Jun 2009 | #1 |
|---|---|
|
|
The purpose of being,can it be without the conditioned "I ".Pure observation will not allow the Observer to be the observed.Thought is the thinker.Being is living in relationship with man,nature and all living creatures.This is a fact,not psychological 'I'.But wholistic intelligence operating,with love and compassion.What has no place in being, it is living and dying moment to moment.Can we thing together and test it in reality now. max This post was last updated by Berthram Redwood Sat, 06 Jun 2009. |
| Back to Top |
| Fri, 05 Jun 2009 | #2 |
|---|---|
|
|
Assuming of course that there is "a purpose of being", it seems to me it is unimportant to determine what that purpose might be. Is there a purpose in ending fear or ending non-love? Are you sure "Pure observation will not allow the Observer to be the observed"? Or, is pure observation when the observer is the observed? |
| Back to Top |
| Fri, 05 Jun 2009 | #3 |
|---|---|
|
|
You are right,choiceless awareness is effortless it comes with pure observation.In this there is no doer.It is non fragmented,wholistic response. The observer does not exist.
Bert |
| Back to Top |
| Fri, 05 Jun 2009 | #4 |
|---|---|
|
|
max greene wrote: max |
| Back to Top |
| Fri, 05 Jun 2009 | #5 |
|---|---|
|
|
max greene wrote:max greene wrote: max |
| Back to Top |
| Fri, 05 Jun 2009 | #6 |
|---|---|
|
|
max greene did not write the above. It is a total misquote. How can this happen in forums of this nature? max |
| Back to Top |
| Fri, 05 Jun 2009 | #7 |
|---|---|
|
|
I wonder, is it that "the observer" does not exist at all, or that, when non-awareness ends, the observer does not exist as an entity separate from observation, but is integral to the observation, or rather, is the observation? RK |
| Back to Top |
| Sat, 06 Jun 2009 | #8 |
|---|---|
|
|
sorry there was error ,you are truely honest.your view is respected.Even if it happens please over look.Love, please respond to what was forward accidently in your name. Bert |
| Back to Top |
| Sat, 06 Jun 2009 | #9 |
|---|---|
|
|
YES IT IS THE RIGHT DECISION,WHICH IS GOODNESS,RIGHT LIVING.. Bert |
| Back to Top |
| Sat, 06 Jun 2009 | #10 |
|---|---|
|
|
YOU MUST SEE IT FOR YOURSELF,TEST IT OUT.
Bert |
| Back to Top |
| Sat, 06 Jun 2009 | #11 |
|---|---|
|
|
I meet people who understand, comprehend, this sense of a conditioned, corrupt, self, but it is all part of a view of life as a reality. This is the fragmentation. I have a view of life which I am using, organising, manipulating, to progress and succeed. When I see this full on, when there is no I, self, there is the likelihood it is treated as a shock, a frightening exposure, and after recovery from the shock I am very quickly accepting I as normal again. |
| Back to Top |
| Sat, 06 Jun 2009 | #12 |
|---|---|
|
|
Thought is the past and is limited,it is based on knowledge,experience and memory.It is seeing ,that a radical Transformation takes place.you're near, be with it,
Bert |
| Back to Top |
| Sat, 06 Jun 2009 | #13 |
|---|---|
|
|
I agree, Bert, thought is the past and the present is accessible only through seeing. Here's a little scenario to demonstrate this: Say that you are walking down a beautiful lane early in the morning, watching the birds, seeing the clouds, feeling the first warm breeze of the day. You are alert to all of this, aware of it all. Now a thought comes into your head of an unresolved business problem from yesterday. You begin to think about it, mull it over in your mind. You do this for several minutes. Now your mind comes back to your walk. I think you will find that those several minutes are actually blank, so far as being aware of what was happening on your walk. You were thinking, involved with the past, and you missed the present completely! max |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #14 |
|---|---|
|
|
Dear Max ,
Bert |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #15 |
|---|---|
|
|
Say i am a typical person with family, friends, work colleagues, etc. I am interacting with these people. So transformation is not mine alone, nor is it without affect on the normal interactions. There is a shock. I question this plan for transformation. I question the plan for a compassionate change. Far from compassionate it is a destruction. The only compassion is a care and understanding of people. |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #16 |
|---|---|
|
|
Peter Stephens wrote: A shock cannot be planned. Also, any plan must be put together by a self-interested thinker. So, that makes sense. But, is the "only" compassion of which you speak in the realm of knowledge? Maybe there is also a compassion which happens when knowledge is not operating. This post was last updated by Richard Kover Sun, 07 Jun 2009. |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #17 |
|---|---|
|
|
Richard, Probably true compassion is possible only when knowledge is not operating, when thought and planning are absent. Anything else is sentiment and emotion. max |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #18 |
|---|---|
|
|
That is the beauty of self-knowledge. Even if "anything else is sentiment and emotion", we can look at that, which we can't do with compassion. |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #19 |
|---|---|
|
|
Richard, What is it that you are saying we can't look at with compassion? max |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #20 |
|---|---|
|
|
max greene wrote: Sorry for not being clear. The words were intended to convey the notion that, whereas we can talk about the nature of compassion which does flow from knowledge, we cannot talk reliably about the nature of a "compassion" which does not flow from knowledge. We can speculate and share ideas about such compassion, but those ideas are likely to reflect some wishful thinking. This post was last updated by Richard Kover Sun, 07 Jun 2009. |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #21 |
|---|---|
|
|
Richard, ". . . we cannot talk reliably about a "compassion" which does not flow from knowledge." True. Similarly,then, we cannot talk about love and understanding which does not flow from knowledge. But knowledge is the past, the known. I don't see love and understanding flowing from that. If it did, why are there such problems in the Middle East? max |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #22 |
|---|---|
|
|
Peter, Insight, understanding and self-knowledge may be disruptive to the course of one's life--but what can be done about it? Once one understands something, sees something for what it is, he simply can't go back and "unsee" it. One can find distractions (of which there are a-plenty in our pleasure-seeking society) or start drinking and taking drugs. By these means he can try to forget and try to dull his capacity to see and think--but facts are facts and they will remain so, whether he sees them or not. All one can do is to be reasonable, to act reasonably, and to give to society that which it is due. max |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #23 |
|---|---|
|
|
Don't the problems in the Middle East spring from the same root as problems everywhere on the planet, namely, the corruption that happens in the human brain? This post was last updated by Richard Kover Tue, 09 Jun 2009. |
| Back to Top |
| Sun, 07 Jun 2009 | #24 |
|---|---|
|
|
Richard, Just possibly, that corruption is knowledge and thinking. max |
| Back to Top |
| Mon, 08 Jun 2009 | #25 |
|---|---|
|
|
this makes sense when i have selected for myself a role where i fit in, get food, clothing, shelter. Basically though the role is an adjustment I have made to the world at large. It is not a deeper understanding of myself. |
| Back to Top |
| Mon, 08 Jun 2009 | #26 |
|---|---|
|
|
"It is not a deeper understanding of myself." No it isn't. You have to do that on your own time! max |
| Back to Top |
| Tue, 09 Jun 2009 | #27 |
|---|---|
|
|
Of course. |
| Back to Top |
| Wed, 10 Jun 2009 | #28 |
|---|---|
|
|
I am questioning the compassion you talk about because I am saying what is anything if not how I am relating to people? I can be getting the words clear, getting my understanding clear, and be practicing compassion, and not actually understanding the person right in front of me. So by relating I mean listening, considering, attending. I might be dishing out compassion and not understand who it is I am dishing it out to. There are compassion junkies. |
| Back to Top |
| Wed, 10 Jun 2009 | #29 |
|---|---|
|
|
max greene wrote: Right. This is the kind of understanding that doesn't work because I am doing it part time. I question the notion of two types of thought; technical thought and psychological thought. |
| Back to Top |
| Thu, 11 Jun 2009 | #30 |
|---|---|
|
|
Peter Stephens wrote:max greene wrote: Ok Peter, think of it this way. Not as mechanical thought and psychological though but rather one type of thinking that leads to disorder and the other does not. Thinking about experiences that have happened to me in the past and then acting based on pain and pleasure leads to neurotic behavior and conflict while thinking about how to get from here to there or learning how to drive does not. There is not two types of thinking there is only one thinking but since one must think because without thinking we will be a vegetable, there is one thinking that is necessary for us to function and the other not only is not necessary but is the birth place of violence
Example war between two parties based on memory of the past. Life is relationship |
| Back to Top |
Not a member yet? Create an Account