Life experiences represent interaction with "God"

caballero reyes said:
Hi,RflctnOfU.
In reply 56 you wrote:

"but in the case of involution, the general theme is mechanicality, while evolution is conscious. Make sense?"

But, if we think:: "But in the case of NATURE, the general theme is mechanicality, while evolution is conscious".
So, if nature is mechanical, then nature mechanical is something against which we must fight. It then makes sense, now ?
Click to expand...

This makes sense. I would only add that by saying that Nature IS involution. But I think a distinction must be made between big NATURE, and ones individual nature as brought up previously in other posts - which I understand as what G called essence...the seed of Being. Big NATURE is the complete involutionary process as it is on Terra, while individual nature/essence is the starting point - or, if you will - the note DO of an ascending/evolutionary octave...as G said, 'merde!', poop, fertilizer. As I understand things, the part of us that is part of the involutionary octave - NATURE - is the personality...all that is not our own...the 'scribbling' the world 'writes' on our 'blank sheet of paper' that is essence.

Does this make sense?

Kris
 
obyvatel said:
[quote author=Joe]
Suffering so often throws us into a state that is pretty much the opposite of being aware and self-observation, but I think that if we can 'rise above it' in terms of our understanding of WHY we are probably suffering, to give it meaning, that it can really transform the experience in terms of the physical and emotional impact.
Click to expand...

You may find this short (7 minute) video interesting. It is titled "pain is not suffering". It goes on to very briefly discuss some neuro-imaging study observations related to the topic of pain, physical and emotional.

The default mode network (DMN), referred to in the presentation, is the seat of self-referential processing which generates ruminations and chatter.

...
[/quote]

Thanks for that. It helps to confirm what I thought I had discovered during my own mindfulness practice. Whenever visceral sensation is noticed, the mind locks onto it and starts talking about it (the commentary). Allowed to continue, sensation, which has been labeled as pain or pleasure at this point, will intensify and last longer than it ordinarily would if it were simply observed and allowed to run its course. If the sensation is pain, the person is suffering.

To me, the way you handle this material and your ability to find the supporting neuroscience suggests an accomplished zen or mindfulness meditator. Thanks for posting this!
 
We have RflctnOfU to go back even always interesting topic: the ESSENCE and PERSONALITY.

As I understand it, personality is not equivalent to involution, only a situation like pointing oupensky happen: when an abnormal personality development, stops development of the essence at a level so low that the essence becomes a poor little formless thing and that nothing can be expected, so also says that to grow internally, develop personality to a certain degree it is as indispensable as a certain strength of essence.
 
In pondering this inspirational post (another good one, Joe ~ Thanks!!), during my drive into work this morning, these thoughts below came flowing through in a kind of "stream of consciousness":

If awareness for us were more open, namely to the extent that full transparency exists, with no barriers to objectivity, and full capability to not only instantaneously code/decode signals-messages-communication-information but also to know and transmit via a telepathic link (pineal?), then dancing with Universe would be much more sublime. And therefore much of what we normally experience that produces/induces our suffering would perhaps be nonexistent or more fleeting...

But, just think how grand it would be if this state of awareness is not only achievable but also awaiting us (at least at some turn of the Grand Cycle). Indeed, maybe this is what the C’s intimated regarding their message of a “level playing field” existing for those graduating into 4th Density?

With the above in mind then, maybe the role of suffering is more a function of objectivity barriers (awareness blind spots?), including the inclination to experience amnesia regarding our true history (non-remembrance of past/future lives, for instance). In other words, the less we know and see, the greater the potential for suffering.

Through our efforts (work), we suffer struggles and pains along the way, but as we apply our ever expanding knowledge base and, step by step, sometimes falling but steadfastly pushing onward, more and more awareness and creativity comes to us, trickles and flows through us (osit), and big opportunities for growth presenting as extreme challenges , first interpreted and experienced as major hurdles and stressors, can eventually be seen with hindsight as precious treasures…

But, as we move onward and upward, it may be that we are better equipped to receive and assimilate denser information loads (receivership capability increase) that in turn may prepare us for major changes in state (quantum leap to an elevated density as a function of higher awareness based on enhanced receivership)…

Likewise, as we know and see more objectively, we gain greater momentum towards more masterful free will action by way of clear seeing (perspicacity) and accurate decision-making that helps propel us in a progressive trajectory into fields of greater Being and Creativity.

With an awareness increasingly unencumbered by coding/decoding impediments and encountered deceptions more easily cognizable and known, our courses are therefore more easily directed/corrected, and therefore our heightened navigation skills permit greater latitude in minimizing or averting other dangers…

But regardless, some suffering still remains by way of our empathetic link to others still ensconced in sleepiness, mechanization, denial, limited knowledge and awareness, etc … in other words, as our brothers and sisters suffer, since, at our sacred roots we are all connected in Universal Being , we as compassionate relations, suffer with them…
 
caballero reyes said:
We have RflctnOfU to go back even always interesting topic: the ESSENCE and PERSONALITY.

As I understand it, personality is not equivalent to involution, only a situation like pointing oupensky happen: when an abnormal personality development, stops development of the essence at a level so low that the essence becomes a poor little formless thing and that nothing can be expected, so also says that to grow internally, develop personality to a certain degree it is as indispensable as a certain strength of essence.
Click to expand...

If I understand you correctly the gist of what you are saying is that personality and essence are of equal value. Is this correct? If so, I agree with this, and my statement in no way contradicts this. The center of gravity of my argument equating personality with involution is mechanicality.

Kris
 
Hi,

Chu said:
Joe said:
On the above; the question could still be asked, why would anyone do something that is not in alignment with their intrinsic nature? Why would someone not know what their intrinsic nature is and align with it? What's the point in having an intrinsic nature to begin with if you don't naturally follow it? Maybe the point is to strengthen it? Like it's an 'embryo' of a certain nature and needs to be 'grown'? But why is suffering a part of that process of growing, or why is suffering involved in unwittingly choosing something not in alignment with our nature? Couldn't we just say "oops! wrong bar!"
Click to expand...

Argh... No idea. Maybe God has a funny sense of humor! ;D But seriously, perhaps "God" figured out that when things are given easily, not much is learned? Or maybe because it's like everything else in the Universe, chaos/order, positive/negative, etc., and "God" knows you have to "taste" a bit of everything in order to know what to choose? Maybe some interference from Entropic forces, like what Laura talked about on the Wave regarding "wonderers", who are basically often crushed so that they cannot fulfill their mission, unless they can surmount the obstacles? After all, this is the nature of the planet we live in, and it is STS oriented, as much beauty and wonders as our planet also houses. Finally, maybe because if there was no suffering involved, and people weren't made to choose via a struggle/friction, then there would be no Free Will? Well, I suppose there would be, if you were able to say: my essence is Being, and I choose Being, for example. But still, how could one know for sure unless one had "tasted" both, so to say? For that, we would need to know for sure what our intrinsic nature says, and this reality doesn't seem to allow for that.

That said.... WHY??? :headbash: :wow:

I think, as others have said, that suffering is just a term that we use to describe the experience of not being in alignment with what is natural for us at a deep level (as the quote from Laura you posted also makes clear). I suppose I could just as well ask the question, "why does a fish suffer when it is out of water?" Or better, "why do we suffer when we have no air to breathe?" Well, because that's the way we are made! I think at that point continuing to ask "why are we made that way?" might be getting into solipsism, which is probably against all our natures! :D
Click to expand...

:lol:

I suppose what I've been trying to get at here (unbeknownst to myself), and I think all of your responses have helped, is a different conception of the idea of suffering, and maybe with that different conception, a different experience of suffering itself. Suffering so often throws us into a state that is pretty much the opposite of being aware and self-observation, but I think that if we can 'rise above it' in terms of our understanding of WHY we are probably suffering, to give it meaning, that it can really transform the experience in terms of the physical and emotional impact. This is, after all, one of the things that the Cs have said on more than one occasion in more than one way, that learning can be fun! that we can have only positive emotions, if we choose! That suffering is just our perception.
Click to expand...

I think you nailed it there. If we don't "rise above it", basically it comes down to identifying with our "suffering", making it all about ourselves, or simply wallowing in it without taking any action, or seeing it as "unfair" while it is just what it is.

Funny, this whole thread reminds me of this joke:

A very religious man was once caught in rising floodwaters. He climbed onto the roof of his house and trusted God to rescue him. A neighbour came by in a canoe and said, “The waters will soon be above your house. Hop in and we’ll paddle to safety.”

“No thanks” replied the religious man. “I’ve prayed to God and I’m sure he will save me”

A short time later the police came by in a boat. “The waters will soon be above your house. Hop in and we’ll take you to safety.”

“No thanks” replied the religious man. “I’ve prayed to God and I’m sure he will save me”

A little time later a rescue services helicopter hovered overhead, let down a rope ladder and said. “The waters will soon be above your house. Climb the ladder and we’ll fly you to safety.”

“No thanks” replied the religious man. “I’ve prayed to God and I’m sure he will save me”

All this time the floodwaters continued to rise, until soon they reached above the roof and the religious man drowned. When he arrived at heaven he demanded an audience with God. Ushered into God’s throne room he said, “Lord, why am I here in heaven? I prayed for you to save me, I trusted you to save me from that flood.”

“Yes you did my child” replied the Lord. “And I sent you a canoe, a boat and a helicopter. But you never got in.”
Click to expand...

Perhaps suffering, crises, shocks, etc. are like the boat, the helicopter, etc. We either learn to see them as opportunities to learn, gifts from God (in which case it's not "suffering" as we understand it most of the time, but more like a muscle training, a fun challenge, etc.), or we choose to think that God is unfair for not solving our problems.
Click to expand...

...more like a muscle training... - i like it :).
When I train my body with intent to do so and have some vision that it is for my health, better feeling in the future or so I will take the pain and will be happy saying: wow! that was hard and I did it and I am going to repeat this tomorrow. But when training comes unexepcted and for example I need to do some strain which I did not want to do I start to complain and look forward coming back home and rest and escape from the situation as soon as possible although in objective measure the strain could have been even lesser than one on planned training. Something like this :). Pain vs. pain. One with good intent other with not so good intent.
 
Indeed, to survive in this 3D, RflctnOfU, we have to balance Essence and Personality.

Remember that PERSONALITY derives from PERSON, and this word derives from "PERSONARE" which was the MASK worn by actors in ancient Greek to be heard from the stage.
 
Bonjour Chu,
C’est aussi de cette façon que ça fonctionne pour moi.
J’avais une question importante et quelque temps après j’ai fait ce rêve que j’ai raconté sur mon commentaire « Dream » et quand Kiriso a répondu J’étais comme poussé a l’interprété au lieu de dire tout simplement « merci » Il (mon guide) m’a mise dans l’erreur pour faire sortir ce sentiment(de souffrance) qui restait au fond de moi et en méditant sur la deuxième réponse de Kiriso j’ai compris le message qu’il m’a envoyé. Si vous lisez mon d’interprétation vous pouvez comprendre comment mon guide a fait pour me mettre dans l’erreur. Ils nous poussent parfois à dire certaine chose pour faire ressortir ce qui il y a au fond de nous et analyser la ou les réponses si elles vibrent en vous.
On est connecté et c’est à travers les autres que les réponses viennent.
J’espère que ce que je veux expliquer est compréhensible, c’est un exercice difficile pour moi, je n’ai jamais fait cela avant, ce n’est que sur ce forum que je le fais parce que je me sens en confiance ici.

Hello Chu,
It is so in this way that that works for me.
I had an important matter and some time after I made this dreamed that I told on my comment “Dream” and when Kiriso answered I were as thorough the interpreter instead of saying quite simply “thank you” It has (my guide) put to me in the error to make leave this feeling (of suffering) which remained at the bottom of me and while meditating on the second answer of Kiriso I understood the message that it sent to me. If you read my interpretation you can understand how my guide made to put to me in the error. Sometimes they push us to say certain thing to emphasize what there is at the bottom of us and to analyze the answers if they vibrate in you.
One is connected and it is through the other ones than the answers come.
I hope for that what I want to explain is comprehensible, it is a difficult exercise for me, I never did that front, it is only on this forum that I make it because I feel in confidence here.
 
Reading the new posts in this thread the last couple of days and thinking about it all, I think the problem again comes back to the human condition not being conducive to seeing above one's own level (we can't see things completely as they really are). We can only approximate objectivity, but our subjectivity is still present to one degree or another. So our suffering seems to be part and parcel of our subjectivity which is inherent to being a 3 Density Service to Self being.

Since so much interesting points were made and relevant quotes were posted, I think it might help to just repeat some previous discussions on the forum. I think there is a "muddying of the waters" that can come into play from the monotheistic nonsense that has influenced everyone. The point being that there IS no all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good "God". And being influenced by such nonsense increases suffering because it leads to totally unrealistic expectations, disappointments, and feelings/resentments about "unfairness." It all goes back to the ideas of Gurdjieff about "World Creation and World Maintenance" (even if G's teachings may be less than 100% accurate, as well) - that it all must follow certain laws, and each "World lower from the 'Absolute'" becomes more and more mechanical and subject to more and more order of laws (until "inanimate matter" where the level of consciousness is so low that everything is dictated by mechanical physical laws - the level of freedom/free will approaching nil). Much of this was covered really well in the excerpt from High Strangeness that Chu posted. But the point I wanted to add is that besides the Thought Centers of Being and Non-Being, there are very real limits to the processes of Creation in terms of what is viable. Chance and Free Will are absolutely necessary for the processes of "World Creation and World Maintenance", I think. And once these are introduced into the "process of Creation" to make possible all that is then manifested, so to speak, the limitations and suffering come into existence by necessity or by default, as well.

If, as our working hypothesis posits, that in the multilevel Universe - the different Densities - the creative energies, so to say, come DOWN and create the material world from consciousness and the transmission of information, then it really clarifies for me G's statements about the evolutionary process becoming more and more conscious, and the involutionary process starting out consciously and becoming more and more mechanical at each step lower. So I think the suffering we experience is just inherent in all this - the more subjective and mechanical the less options of avoiding what we consider to be suffering (which is real for our level). Free will allowing all kinds of suffering to be imposed on others added to all that, just increases the potential for suffering even more.

Going back to the Law of Three. Having thought about all these kinds of things for a long time, the thing I've been stumped the most by is applying the Law of Three to different circumstances just to sharpen the sense of what actions are "evil" or "good" AKA Service to Self or Service to Others in what situations. I can do thought experiments about even very extreme situations (that I've never actually experienced in life) such as killing someone can be an act of "good"/Service to Others (rather than inherently "evil"/Service to Self, as the Law of Three states that no action is "evil" in and of itself) in our 3D STS world, never mind things like lying or stealing, etc. So I can see where even killing can be the proper thing to do, and not be considered "evil" in certain situations. But I just haven't been able to apply the Law of Three in the case of rape. Just can't think of any situation where it's the situation that determines whether rape is "evil" or "good". It seems to be the only exception for me where I can only think of it as "evil". Even having thought of Karma and planning of life lessons, etc., I just can't seem to wrap my mind around it; which only reinforces my feeling that we just can't really grasp certain things from "higher" perspectives. We see through a glass darkly, as it were. That's part of my confusion about how suffering serves a purpose, for what it's worth. I can understand and apply a philosophical outlook to some situations, but not all. Just doesn't seem to make the same amount of sense in certain circumstances, such as the example of rape. I can only say that I can't get my human mind to understand from a level where it all makes sense equally....
 
SeekinTruth said:
I think the problem again comes back to the human condition not being conducive to seeing above one's own level (we can't see things completely as they really are). We can only approximate objectivity, but our subjectivity is still present to one degree or another.
Click to expand...

It makes sense that presuming to know anything we dont have much or any awareness of is flawed. Especially when its a level of awareness above us.

For me that's why this seems to be presuming to know, what I'm not sure you can be certain of, but I could be wrong:

SeekinTruth said:
..monotheistic nonsense that has influenced everyone. The point being that there IS no all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good "God".
Click to expand...

But I do see this however happen a lot like you say:
SeekinTruth said:
And being influenced by such nonsense increases suffering because it leads to totally unrealistic expectations, disappointments, and feelings/resentments about "unfairness."
Click to expand...

However I feel it has more to do with holding on to a definition of God one way or another that isnt justified by our knowledge.
 
SeekinTruth said:
Since so much interesting points were made and relevant quotes were posted, I think it might help to just repeat some previous discussions on the forum. I think there is a "muddying of the waters" that can come into play from the monotheistic nonsense that has influenced everyone. The point being that there IS no all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good "God". And being influenced by such nonsense increases suffering because it leads to totally unrealistic expectations, disappointments, and feelings/resentments about "unfairness."
Click to expand...

Just for reference, there's this from the sessions:

3/11/95

Q: (L) OK, what other illusions?
A: Monotheism, the belief in one separate, all powerful entity.
Q: (T) Is separate the key word in regard to monotheism?
A: Yes.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with omniscience, or even 'all-goodness' (understood a certain way). But separateness and omnipotence are a problem. David Griffin's latest philosophy/theology book introduces the problems involved, and some possible solutions: Panentheism and Scientific Naturalism: Rethinking Evil, Morality, Religious Experience, Religious Pluralism, and the Academic Study of Religion (http://www.amazon.com/Panentheism-Scientific-Naturalism-Rethinking-Civilization/dp/1940447038). His description of panentheism rejects traditional monotheism's omnipotence (which denies free will) and supernaturalism/separateness.
 
SeekinTruth said:
I think there is a "muddying of the waters" that can come into play from the monotheistic nonsense that has influenced everyone. The point being that there IS no all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good "God". And being influenced by such nonsense increases suffering because it leads to totally unrealistic expectations, disappointments, and feelings/resentments about "unfairness."
Click to expand...

The bolded part of the above statement is probably the big one, IMO. As I pointed out in the K & B videos, again and again and again, when doing SRT, I would find that the departed had believed certain things about life and death and those beliefs were what caused the confusion and harm for the entity and the host. So just imagine billions of souls around the planet, plus all those in the body, who believe lies about saviors "out there" and you've got a huge problem.

I tried to talk about this in a gradual way in The Wave - think about the episode where I describe the scene from the movie "Suddenly, Last Summer" - and to bring people to the understanding that "God/Universe has many faces", but those are idea/information structures. The plain truth is that we are like those baby sea turtles racing for the sea and if we don't understand that, then we have no chance of taking measures to not be eaten.

SeekinTruth said:
It all goes back to the ideas of Gurdjieff about "World Creation and World Maintenance" (even if G's teachings may be less than 100% accurate, as well) - that it all must follow certain laws, and each "World lower from the 'Absolute'" becomes more and more mechanical and subject to more and more order of laws (until "inanimate matter" where the level of consciousness is so low that everything is dictated by mechanical physical laws - the level of freedom/free will approaching nil). Much of this was covered really well in the excerpt from High Strangeness that Chu posted. But the point I wanted to add is that besides the Thought Centers of Being and Non-Being, there are very real limits to the processes of Creation in terms of what is viable. Chance and Free Will are absolutely necessary for the processes of "World Creation and World Maintenance", I think. And once these are introduced into the "process of Creation" to make possible all that is then manifested, so to speak, the limitations and suffering come into existence by necessity or by default, as well.
Click to expand...

Pretty much, in my view.

Oh, indeed, there are layers and levels, and interconnections at those layers and levels if we can become aware of them and activate them; most of it has to do with connections with others, with a networked system that makes a group greater than the sum of its parts; but even that may not be enough to avoid all suffering. The power/energy/knowledge needed to reverse some process that has been set in motion via the natural laws - most of which we may not even know about - may not be available. God knows, I've spent my life searching for the truth of the many claims about such. And in those claims, you can find something that apparently worked once or twice, but it's so inconsistent that you can't rely on it.

Heck, I've had miracles in my life... but they were the result of incredible suffering from the strictly mechanical human point of view. Obviously, if I had not been attached to my beliefs, I would not have suffered so much. All of this sort of thing runs like a thread of Ariadne through the sessions, popping up in a question here or there. I'll be working on annotating the 96 sessions soon and it is there that things really get amazing and I'm still trying to parse all of it.

I just had my 64th birthday and it could be said that, in one way or another, a good half of my life has been suffering: physical, emotional, mental. But there is the other half that was pretty good, and that always had to do with relationships, love, caring, etc. And, of course, love and caring makes one vulnerable to other's suffering. The whole thing reminds me of a few things from Castaneda:

There is no completeness without sadness and longing, for without them there is no sobriety, no kindness. Wisdom without kindness and knowledge without sobriety are useless.
Click to expand...

There are a series of truths about awareness that have been arranged in a specific sequence for purposes of comprehension. The mastery of awareness consists in internalizing the total sequence of such truths.

The first truth is that our familiarity with the world we perceive compels us to believe that we are surrounded by objects, existing by themselves and as themselves, just as we perceive them, whereas, in fact, there is no world of objects, but a universe of the Indescribable Force 's emanations.

Before I can explain the Indescribable Force 's emanations, I have to talk about the known, the unknown, and the unknowable.

The unknown is something that is veiled from man, shrouded perhaps by a terrifying context, but which, nonetheless, is within man's reach.

The unknown becomes the known at a given time. The unknowable, on the other hand, is the indescribable, the unthinkable, the unrealizable. It is something that will never be known to us, and yet it is there, dazzling and at the same time horrifying in its vastness.

There is a simple rule of thumb: in the face of the unknown, man is adventurous. It is a quality of the unknown to give us a sense of hope and happiness. Man feels robust, exhilarated. Even the apprehension that it arouses is very fulfilling. The new seers saw that man is at his best in the face of the unknown.

The unknown and the known are really on the same footing, because both are within the reach of human perception. Seers, can leave the known at a given moment and enter into the unknown.

Whatever is beyond our capacity to perceive is the unknowable. And the distinction between it and the knowable is crucial. Confusing the two would put seers in a most precarious position whenever they are confronted with the unknowable. Most of what's out there is beyond our comprehension.
Click to expand...

The first truth is that the world is as it looks and yet it isn't. It's not as solid and real as our perception has been led to believe, but it isn't a mirage either. The world is not an illusion, as it has been said to be; it's real on the one hand, and unreal on the other. Pay close attention to this, for it must be understood, not just accepted. We perceive. This is a hard fact. But what we perceive is not a fact of the same kind, because we learn what to perceive.

Something out there is affecting our senses. This is the part that is real. The unreal part is what our senses tell us is there. Take a mountain, for instance. Our senses tell us that it is an object. It has size, color, form. We even have categories of mountains, and they are downright accurate. Nothing wrong with that; the flaw is simply that it has never occurred to us that our senses play only a superficial role. Our senses perceive the way they do because a specific feature of our awareness forces them to do so.
Click to expand...

The reason for the existence of all sentient beings is to enhance awareness. The old seers, risking untold dangers, actually saw the Indescribable Force which is the source of all sentient beings. They called that indescribable force the Eagle, because in the few glimpses that they could sustain, they saw it as something that resembled a black-and-white eagle of infinite size. They saw that it is the Indescribable Force that bestows awareness and creates sentient beings so that they will live and enrich the awareness it gives them with life. They also saw that it is the Indescribable Force , that devours that same enriched awareness after making sentient beings relinquish it at the moment of death. For the old seers to say that the reason for existence is to enhance awareness is not a matter of faith or deduction. They saw it.
Click to expand...

… there have certainly been attempts to imbue eagles [the ineffable unknown or faces of the Divine Cosmic Mind] with attributes they don’t have. But that always happens when impressionable people learn to perform acts that require great sobriety. Seers come in all sizes and shapes. … There are scores of imbeciles who become seers. Seers are human beings full of foibles, or rather, human beings full of foibles are capable of becoming seers. …

The Indescribable Force is as real for seers as gravity and time are for you, and just as abstract and incomprehensible. The Indescribable Force and its emanations are as corroboratable as gravity and time and the discipline of the new seers is dedicated to doing just that. The Indescribable Force 's emanations are an immutable thing-in-itself, which engulfs everything that exists, the knowable and the unknowable.

There is no way to describe in words what the Indescribable Force 's emanations really are. A seer must witness them. They are a presence, almost a mass of sorts, a pressure that creates a dazzling sensation. One can catch only a glimpse of them, as one can catch only a glimpse of the Indescribable Force itself.

There is nothing visual about the Indescribable Force . The entire body of a seer senses the Indescribable Force . There is something in all of us that can make us witness with our entire body. Seers explain the act of seeing the Indescribable Force in very simple terms: because man is composed of the Indescribable Force 's emanations, man need only revert back to his components. The problem arises with man's awareness; it is his awareness that becomes entangled and confused. At the crucial moment when it should be a simple case of the emanations acknowledging themselves, man's awareness is compelled to interpret. The result is a vision of the Eagle, and the Eagle's emanations. But there is no Eagle and no Eagle's emanations. What is out there is something that no living creature can grasp.

The characteristic of miserable seers is that they are willing to forget the wonder of the world. They become overwhelmed by the fact that they see and believe that it's their genius that counts. A seer must be a paragon in order to override the nearly invincible laxness of our human condition. More important than seeing itself is what seers do with what they see.

Seeing is to lay bare the core of everything, to witness the unknown and to glimpse into the unknowable. As such, it doesn't bring one solace. Seers ordinarily go to pieces on finding out that existence is incomprehensibly complex and that our normal awareness maligns it with its limitations.

… in the life of warriors it was extremely natural to be sad for no overt reason. … whenever the boundaries of the known are broken. A mere glimpse of the eternity outside … is enough to disrupt the coziness of our controlled inventory [i.e., awareness]. The resulting melancholy is sometimes so intense that it can bring about death. … the best way to get rid of melancholy is to make fun of it.
Click to expand...

Seers who see the Indescribable Force 's emanations often call them commands. That's what they really are, commands.

Everything is made out of the Indescribable Force 's emanations. Only a small portion of those emanations is within reach of human awareness, and that small portion is still further reduced, to a minute fraction, by the constraints of our daily lives. That minute fraction of the Indescribable Force 's emanations is the known; the small portion within possible reach of human awareness is the unknown, and the incalculable rest is the unknowable.

The new seers, being pragmatically oriented, became immediately cognizant of the compelling power of the emanations. They realized that all living creatures are forced to employ the Indescribable Force 's emanations without ever knowing what they are. They also realized that organisms are constructed to grasp a certain range of those emanations and that every species has a definite range. The emanations exert great pressure on organisms, and through that pressure organisms construct their perceivable world.

In our case, as human beings, we employ those emanations and interpret them as reality. But what man senses is such a small portion of the Indescribable Force 's emanations that it's ridiculous to put much stock in our perceptions, and yet it isn't possible for us to disregard our perceptions.

I want you to be very aware of what we are doing. We are discussing the mastery of awareness. The truths we're discussing are the principles of that mastery.

* * *
One of the greatest forces in the lives of warriors is fear, it spurs them to learn.
Click to expand...

The new seers placed the highest value on deep, unemotional realizations. For instance, the other day, when you understood about your self-importance, you didn't understand anything really. You had an emotional outburst, that was all. I say this because the next day you were back on your high horse of self-importance as if you never had realized anything.

The same thing happened to the old seers. They were given to emotional reactions. But when the time came for them to understand what they had seen , they couldn't do it. To understand one needs sobriety, not emotionality. Beware of those who weep with realization, for they have realized nothing.

There are untold dangers in the path of knowledge for those without sober understanding. I am outlining the order in which the new seers arranged the truths about awareness, so it will serve you as a map, a map that you have to corroborate with your seeing , but not with your eyes.

Everybody falls prey to the mistake that seeing is done with the eyes. Seeing is not a matter of the eyes.

Seeing is alignment and perception is alignment. The alignment of the Indescribable Force 's emanations used routinely is the perception of the day-to-day world, but the alignment of emanations that are never used ordinarily is seeing . When such an alignment occurs one sees . Seeing , therefore, being produced by alignment out of the ordinary, cannot be something one could merely look at. So, don't succumb to the way seeing is labeled and described.

When seers see , something explains everything as the new alignment takes place. It's a voice that tells them in their ear what's what. If that voice is not present, what the seer is engaged in isn't seeing .

It is equally fallacious to say that seeing is hearing, because it is infinitely more than that, but seers have opted for using sound as a gauge of a new alignment.

The voice of seeing is a most mysterious inexplicable thing. My personal conclusion is that the voice of seeing belongs only to man. It may happen because talking is something that no one else besides man does. The old seers believed it was the voice of an overpowering entity intimately related to mankind, a protector of man. The new seers found out that that entity, which they called the mold of man, doesn't have a voice. The voice of seeing for the new seers is something quite incomprehensible; they say it's the glow of awareness playing on the Indescribable Force 's emanations as a harpist plays on a harp.
Click to expand...


And then what I wrote about it in The Wave:

There are two positions in the study and understanding of awareness: the sorcerer vs. the warrior who sees. They both practice the same seeing, but the difference is in their intent. The sorcerer practices to control others. The warrior practices to become free. Sorcerors attempt to manipulate and interact directly with higher levels — the unknowable — and end up being manipulated in the process. Warriors act on their own level — the knowable — in harmony with higher levels. The Cassiopaeans designate these two positions as STO and STS. Those who wish to control others are serving self; those who wish to become free and help others who wish to become free are serving others. One must be aware that a desire to be of service combined with ego and false personality is a deadly mix because such an individual is so easy to manipulate and made to believe they are doing good when, in fact, they are only serving the “dark side”.
Click to expand...

I think that a lot of our concern about suffering is due to our anthropocentricity. We really are just puffs of smoke in an infinite Universe. Either we realize this and try to learn about it and align with its purposes, or we suffer without understanding.
 
SeekinTruth said:
Reading the new posts in this thread the last couple of days and thinking about it all, I think the problem again comes back to the human condition not being conducive to seeing above one's own level (we can't see things completely as they really are). We can only approximate objectivity, but our subjectivity is still present to one degree or another. So our suffering seems to be part and parcel of our subjectivity which is inherent to being a 3 Density Service to Self being.

Since so much interesting points were made and relevant quotes were posted, I think it might help to just repeat some previous discussions on the forum. I think there is a "muddying of the waters" that can come into play from the monotheistic nonsense that has influenced everyone. The point being that there IS no all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good "God". And being influenced by such nonsense increases suffering because it leads to totally unrealistic expectations, disappointments, and feelings/resentments about "unfairness." It all goes back to the ideas of Gurdjieff about "World Creation and World Maintenance" (even if G's teachings may be less than 100% accurate, as well) - that it all must follow certain laws, and each "World lower from the 'Absolute'" becomes more and more mechanical and subject to more and more order of laws (until "inanimate matter" where the level of consciousness is so low that everything is dictated by mechanical physical laws - the level of freedom/free will approaching nil). Much of this was covered really well in the excerpt from High Strangeness that Chu posted. But the point I wanted to add is that besides the Thought Centers of Being and Non-Being, there are very real limits to the processes of Creation in terms of what is viable. Chance and Free Will are absolutely necessary for the processes of "World Creation and World Maintenance", I think. And once these are introduced into the "process of Creation" to make possible all that is then manifested, so to speak, the limitations and suffering come into existence by necessity or by default, as well.

If, as our working hypothesis posits, that in the multilevel Universe - the different Densities - the creative energies, so to say, come DOWN and create the material world from consciousness and the transmission of information, then it really clarifies for me G's statements about the evolutionary process becoming more and more conscious, and the involutionary process starting out consciously and becoming more and more mechanical at each step lower. So I think the suffering we experience is just inherent in all this - the more subjective and mechanical the less options of avoiding what we consider to be suffering (which is real for our level). Free will allowing all kinds of suffering to be imposed on others added to all that, just increases the potential for suffering even more.

Going back to the Law of Three. Having thought about all these kinds of things for a long time, the thing I've been stumped the most by is applying the Law of Three to different circumstances just to sharpen the sense of what actions are "evil" or "good" AKA Service to Self or Service to Others in what situations. I can do thought experiments about even very extreme situations (that I've never actually experienced in life) such as killing someone can be an act of "good"/Service to Others (rather than inherently "evil"/Service to Self, as the Law of Three states that no action is "evil" in and of itself) in our 3D STS world, never mind things like lying or stealing, etc. So I can see where even killing can be the proper thing to do, and not be considered "evil" in certain situations. But I just haven't been able to apply the Law of Three in the case of rape. Just can't think of any situation where it's the situation that determines whether rape is "evil" or "good". It seems to be the only exception for me where I can only think of it as "evil". Even having thought of Karma and planning of life lessons, etc., I just can't seem to wrap my mind around it; which only reinforces my feeling that we just can't really grasp certain things from "higher" perspectives. We see through a glass darkly, as it were. That's part of my confusion about how suffering serves a purpose, for what it's worth. I can understand and apply a philosophical outlook to some situations, but not all. Just doesn't seem to make the same amount of sense in certain circumstances, such as the example of rape. I can only say that I can't get my human mind to understand from a level where it all makes sense equally....
Click to expand...

Wow. :clap: :thup:
 
Laura said:
I think that a lot of our concern about suffering is due to our anthropocentricity. We really are just puffs of smoke in an infinite Universe. Either we realize this and try to learn about it and align with its purposes, or we suffer without understanding.
Click to expand...

"He who learns must suffer". If we start from nothing, and are allowed (through free will) to gain false knowledge (because free will enhances creation as seekingtruth said), and that knowledge becomes a part of our DNA, then the experience of unlearning certain things and replacing them with more objective truths, appears to be what we experience as suffering, and not just on an emotional and intellectual level, because even physical pain/suffering is learning in the same way. The 'insecurity' involved in letting go of something we have become used to, and adopting something new, is likewise experienced as suffering.

Why do we suffer? The truth is we don't have to, as the Cs say. Perception appears to be everything. If someone can hypnotize themselves and undergo surgery without anesthetic and feel no pain, suffering must be a matter of perception, although totally blocking out certain types of suffering/learning is probably a bad idea because then we don't learn! It's possible, I suppose, that there is only a certain amount of suffering/learning that is necessary until the suffering part is no longer necessary, because the suffering part is a function of a lack of understanding/awareness. Once a certain level is reached, learning can proceed without the suffering, at least as we experience it at this level.

So a life of a good deal of suffering may, depending on the case, reflect a positive interaction with "the universe" as it suggests a desire to know more about objective reality and progress in that direction.
 
SeekinTruth said:
I can do thought experiments about even very extreme situations (that I've never actually experienced in life) such as killing someone can be an act of "good"/Service to Others (rather than inherently "evil"/Service to Self, as the Law of Three states that no action is "evil" in and of itself) in our 3D STS world, never mind things like lying or stealing, etc. So I can see where even killing can be the proper thing to do, and not be considered "evil" in certain situations. But I just haven't been able to apply the Law of Three in the case of rape. Just can't think of any situation where it's the situation that determines whether rape is "evil" or "good". It seems to be the only exception for me where I can only think of it as "evil".
Click to expand...

I think the idea that no act is evil in and of itself doesn't apply to us at this level. The idea that applies more directly here, I think, is that there IS good, there IS bad, and there is the specific situation which determines which is which, i.e. we have to choose. All of it is for the purpose of learning. Think of any experience or event as being displayed before a class on a projector screen, and each student being asked to pick answer A or B (or ask for more information first!).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom