Life experiences represent interaction with "God"

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Shared Joy said:
from Session 12 August 1995:

A: Especially when the mind says there is. Remember, most all power necessary for altering reality and physicality is contained within the belief center of the mind. This is something you will understand more closely when you reach 4th density reality where physicality is no longer a prison, but is instead, your home, for you to alter as you please. In your current state, you have the misinterpretation of believing that reality is finite and therein lies your difficulty with finite physical existence. We are surprised that you are still not able to completely grasp this concept.

.........

A: All difficulties in personal life are karmic in one way or another. Especially those involving interactions with other souled beings. And the closer the interactions, the more karmic they are. This you already know.

Q: (L) Well, the difficult thing is to know what is the best thing to do.

A: Learning images is the process that is ongoing throughout all existence, and is achieved by one action or another. Any and all actions, any and all possible actions, any and all directions of actions facilitate continued learning. Therefore, it is not possible in the ultimate sense, to make mistakes. But, one must experience whatever is karmic to its full extent. The choices made reflect choices made prior to entering the physical plane of third density, combined with the opportunities that present themselves with the variability of reality in its fluid state. Therefore, the decisions to be made will present themselves when they are to be made, and it is only one's ability to accept interpretation objectively that determines whether the learning process will deliver greater or lesser degrees of pain.

Q: (L) Why does learning have to be painful?

A: It doesn't.


Q: (L) Well, it seems that it invariably is for me.

A: That is according to the perceptions of the experience, not according to any absolute criteria.

Well,when one has the opportunity to make choices according to previous agreements, but also can use the variability of reality in its fluid state. Tall order, I think.

Learning can be painful or not according to the awareness of a person.

Given the Cs response of "it doesn't" to the question "why does learning have to be painful", maybe a question that gets to the real problem is "why do we have a painful perception of the learning experience?" Because we lack a fuller awareness that would allow us to see learning as joyous? If so, then the next question is "why do we lack fuller awareness?"
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
luc said:
This leads to the thought: if it's true that "he who learns must suffer", which I think it is, then the suffering doesn't stop as long as we are learning?

This is something of a puzzle to me, the idea that learning must involve suffering, at any level of experience. Sometimes I think that we have been 'engineered' that way, and that it is not, in fact, necessary. You can understand why many people come to see the suffering they experience as some kind of punishment from "god".

If you think about a child learning to walk, it will often fall down, hurt itself, cry and suffer. Sure, the child learns to walk, and the suffering may help that process by providing a motivation to learn more quickly and NOT fall down, but there is also the mechanism whereby the body and mind can assimilate new information that facilitates the walking. Like I can learn something through reading how to do it and then practicing it, without any suffering per se.

So why is the suffering "necessary" in the walking - and many other - examples? To speed up the learning? And is that then the purpose of the suffering aspect of learning? To speed it up? As the Cs mentioned somewhere, it's like the "fast track" to learning?
 

Carl

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
alkhemst said:
An apt point came up, I cant remember exactly where it was in the recent radio show (objective reality in a subjective world). It was about how our relationship with reality is subject to suffering when we're out of aligniment with the truth. One example was a false belief on diet eventually leads to physical illness. Could it be the same with feelings we have about ourselves from early trauma (e.g. I am defective) being out-of-step with who we really are is the reason for emotional suffering that goes along with it?

If so, it suggests to me there's an intrinsic purpose in creation to bring us to truth both externally and internally. If this is a purpose of creation then we have a reliable barometer for when we're out-of-step with truth - pain.

Even though it's reliable it does seem indirect. I know as a dad I'd like to tell my daughter about dangers to avoid. I know there's merit to her figuring things out for herself, but if that was the only way she could learn, then there'd be no point me even being around. Clearly its not the only way we can learn so there is a point.

So I wonder if coming to truth is an intrinsic purpose guiding creation and we can also innately learn by direct guidance, would that direct guidance to truth be what people for thousands of years considered the personality of God accessed via prayer?

That's a good point and something that I often forget, but which I think is super important to remember: "God" of the DCM is with us always, although most of us are only able to recognise and make use of that connection while going through some powerful emotional suffering - at least at first.

Speaking for myself, the one phenomenon that I can point to as direct evidence for this is that thing where you have a question in your head and then stumble upon something which answers it. It can be a burning question or just a strong curiosity, but it is answered. Sometimes in the very next moment (which was how I found this forum), sometimes at the end of the day, sometimes maybe a week later. It's hard to think of any specific basic examples now, but it has happened to me over and over and over again. Like "that's so uncanny, this piece of text literally provides an answer to the question I have been pondering".

It also works the same way with life experiences, but these are much harder to decode. I imagine these were more simple and easier to decode "back in the day".

Now times are different because a lot of us spend literally most of our lives at "work" in a 9-5 job, or commuting to/from work, or sitting in front of a computer screen at home, and generally living a life worthy of a robot. The Universe doesn't have a lot of opportunities to actually teach us anything when we are stuck in such a routine, but as compensation oh boy does it introduce you to a lot of things through the internet!

That's my little theory anyway.
 

Chu

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
This quote from High Strangeness comes to mind. I think Laura indirectly expanded on that quote from the Cs beautifully:

As self-aware “transducing units”, the human being has the potential to go either way—toward intensified being, or toward intensified non-being. In this sense, humans also function very much like a lens that can be “adjusted” like a telescope. It can be dialed to select the viewing range, which can be distant and inclusive of more “space/time”, or it can be shortened to only see what is up close and evident in the material world. In other words, our first and most fundamental choice is to choose what we see.

When we choose what we see—and here we do not mean with the physical eyes or even psychically, but rather a more inclusive term that suggests whether or not we are capable of objectivity or subjectivity—we are receiving impressions. Impressions can become knowledge if assimilated. Knowledge leads to awareness. Knowledge and awareness then direct emotions, which then energize actions in the organic world. This is the transducing of energies of cosmic thought centers. Whether or not the impressions are assimilated objectively will determine with which of the thought centers, being or non-being, we are in alignment.

Ibn al-’Arabi tells us that Goodness is Being; to which all positive and beautiful attributes or Names of God belong. Evil is the lack of good, so it is “nonexistence”. In other words, at the root, Being dwells in “non-existence” which is evil. Here is the sticking point, the item that is generally omitted from most “systems of ascension”. ”: Human beings at our level of reality exist at the crossroads of the thoughts of Being and Non-Being—Good and Evil. Mankind is made in the form of all the Names of God—those of Being and Non-Being. Assuming the traits of the Names is synonymous with manifesting their properties. The search for the Grail is to obtain deep knowledge of all the Names and their true properties, the high and the low, the pleasant and the loathsome, the light and the darkness, in differentiated detail, so as to be able to choose which traits will be assumed. It is only with a full field of vision that a man can discover if what he subjectively thinks is good actually is good and leads to Being, or if it is a deception that induces to Non-Being by pretense.

God is the root of all Names, noble and base. The task of the seeker is to bring the Noble traits from latency into actuality and to discover the positive applications of the base traits—even if that application is to “overcome” or transmute. The Shaykh tells us “noble character traits are only those connected to interaction with others”. In other words: DOing. If you see the illusion of separation, that is certainly the first thing. The lie is smuggled in by suggesting that this is all that is necessary, that if you just “see it”, everything will “change” for you.

God creates the good and the evil, the ugly and the beautiful, the straight and the crooked, the moral and the immoral. Between these traits lie the manifold dangers of the path of the seeker of Truth. Many modern day “teachers” and “gurus” tell us “Since there is only One Being which permeates all things, all we have to do is see everything as only light”, and that will transmute the darkness, and we will “create our own reality of light”. Such a statement ignores the fact that the statement “God is One” describes a reality that is a higher level from which our own “mixed being” manifests. The man who assumes that he can become like God at this level just by thinking it, ignores the facts of Being vs. Non-Being which outrays from “God is One” at a level of existence that is clearly several levels above our own.

Evil is real on its own level, and the task of man is to navigate the cosmic maze without being defiled by the Evil therein. This is the root of Free Will. Man faces a predicament as real as himself: he is forced to choose—to utilize his knowledge by applying it—between the straight path which leads to Being, and the crooked paths which lead to Non-Being. Human beings are required to discern between good and evil—consciousness energy directors—at every stage of their existence in this reality. Because, in fact, they must understand that God is consciousness and God is matter. God is good, and God is evil. The Creation assumes all the different properties of the many “Names of God”. The Cosmos is full of Life-Giving and Slaying, Forgiveness and Vengeance, Exaltation and Abasement, Guidance and Deception. To attempt to assume God’s point of view and “mix everything” at this level, results only in staying at this level. Therefore, human beings must always separate God’s point of view from their own point of view and the fact that all creation assumes the divine Names and Traits.

Thus, the first Divine Command is BE! And that includes Being and Non-Being instantaneously. Therefore, the second law is “follow Being or Non-Being according to your choice and your inherent nature”. All creation is a result of the engendering command. So, in this respect, there is no Evil. But the second, prescriptive law determines to which Face of God one will return: Life or Death. [...]

At the particular stage of existence in which man finds himself, he is equally “receptive” toward the two primary Faces of God: Being and Non-Being. The Shaykh tells us that whatever property, or trait, any human being ultimately “chooses” is what it originally possessed in its state of immutability. The task of the Seeker is to discover what is immutable within and to purify and amplify it. This is the development of Will. Will is a relationship, which follows knowledge, while knowledge follows the object of knowledge. In the process of “ascension”, the object of knowledge is you. Knowledge, in and of itself, has no effects. You, however, the seeker, can give to knowledge what you actually are, in yourself, thereby displaying yourself in knowledge by your actions in concert with your knowledge.

As noted, there are many Names of God that call to us in our present state of existence. But you are not required to answer every one that calls. The fact that human beings are, in general, ignorant of their own true “essence” gives them the illusion of freedom. And the fact is, all paths come from God, and all paths lead back to God, but again, it can be via different faces. As the Shaykh says: “Unto Allah all things come home, and he is the end of every path. However, the important thing is which divine name you will reach and to which you will come home.”

This brings us to what the Shaykh calls “perspicacity”. This is the special development of the “eye of insight”, or “seeing the unseen” that is crucial to the Seeker. Just as the physical eye, with the refraction of light from the Sun, can discern between the large and the small, the beautiful and the ugly, colors, the moving from the still, high and low, the ability to see the unseen is a property of an “inner light”. This light reveals to the seeker things about external objects that are not apparent to the five senses. It reveals to its possessor when a choice that may appear to be benevolent is a step on the path of Evil. It reveals when a choice that may appear to human estimation as negative is actually a difficult step to felicity for all involved. The Sufis tell us that some individuals have achieved such a level of “seeing” that upon seeing a person’s footprint on the ground, even if the person is not present, they are able to say whether he is following a life of felicity or wretchedness.

The light of perspicacity seems to be a gift that not everyone has, and those who do have it may not have developed it to the same degree. What is evident is that those who have it possess an immutable nature of Being which is able to “see” good and evil—they do not see “only good”. Thus, they are able to discern between the “calls” of Non-Being and Being, and therefore, are able to strengthen their Will along the path of intrinsic Being. It then follows that individuals who are not able to see—or who choose not to see—both Good and Evil, are formed in the mold of subjectivity, which is the human expression of the Call of Non-Being.

A human being whose immutable nature is that of Being can strengthen the light of perspicacity by “assuming the traits” of the Names of Being. This does not mean that a person comes to possess traits that do not already belong to him. It means that these traits are amplified and “cultivated”. The ruling property of an individual is determined by what Face of God is disclosed to him, and this is determined by his preparedness. Felicity can only be disclosed when Evil has been turned away from, rejected; which can only be achieved by a long period of “testing” or being challenged to see and then to choose Being over Non-Being in order to grow the Will or alignment to Being in a feedback loop. As the Seeker travels this path, he must not see these traits as his own, but rather he must see that he is a locus of God’s manifestation of an ontological attribute.

People imagine that they believe in God when, in fact, what they believe always takes the shape of the receptacle. The old saying is that the water takes on the color of its cup. The deeper implication of this is that a person will only be in disequilibrium if his conscious beliefs are not in conformity with his own immutable nature. In other words, a person whose intrinsic nature is aligned toward Being will experience disequilibrium, struggle, and even illness by attempting to assume those traits that do not exist in him. In this sense, careful observation of the physical state—even the physical environment—can act as a guide as to whether or not the whole being is coming into alignment.

So it is that different paths can produce different effects for different individuals according to their immutable nature within. Those whose intrinsic nature is toward Being follow the path of developing the ability to see and to choose alignment with the infinite potential of creation, thereby being conduits of Being as God chooses to manifest through them. They not only see that limitation is illusion, they consciously act—they utilize that knowledge to generate energy and light.

Those whose intrinsic nature is toward Non-Being follow the path of limitation of Infinite Being by assuming that they, in their state of ignorance and subjectivity, know better than God how Creation ought to be fixed. They pray for change, they perform rituals, they chant mantras and repeat endless visualizations of “magickal forms” that are supposed to “change” reality. They bomb others with “Love and Light”, (their subjective version of it, of course), and they seek to fix the world “out there” by projecting their subjective view of reality onto the infinite wisdom of Creation. This “consciousness energy direction” even includes the assumption that just knowing that all division is illusion will accomplish the goal of ascension, and that is the most cunning lie of all.

Each approach “ties a knot” in the heart of the believer and fixes him on a path, the object of his belief being the end of the path. All beliefs are equivalent in that God—of one sort or another—is their ultimate objective. But each belief is different in that it leads to a different Name of God, or Thought Center. Even materialistic skepticism is a “belief” and leads to “matterizing” of the consciousness that follows this belief. What is more difficult to discern are the many mixed up “spiritual” paths that twist and distort the concepts of Being to engage the seeker on a path to Non-Being.

Going back to the idea of the human being as a transducing unit with a “lens capacity”, what seems to be so is that the process of ascension begins with the choice of tuning the lens. If the individual chooses to “adjust the dial” to see the entire field of Thought Centers influencing creation, he can then begin to select those that enhance and enliven Creation and Being—the Thought Centers of Awakened Consciousness—then a feedback loop that selects that probable future will be established.

A human being can, by great effort, expand their “field of view” toward greater and greater objectivity. With a wider and farther field of view, the awareness of those things, which emanate from the Thought Centers come into focus. When Thought Centers are more in focus, the individual then has greater ability to discern whether impressions emanate from the Thought Centers of Being, or from the Thought Centers of Non-Being. At this stage, the individual is then able to further “shape” his emotions and direct his actions so as to become an efficient transducing unit of the cosmic energies of Being into this reality. This is knowledge utilization, which generates energy, which generates light.

As this process continues, as the feedback loop is activated between the Cosmic observer and the transducing/actions of the creature, the organic unit, the transducing organ, so to say, strengthens, and the exchange between it and the Cosmic Observer accelerates and intensifies. The transducing organ then begins to act as a “homing beacon” for greater levels of that chosen Thought Center energy—that “observer from the future”—the “eye” that is the Creator.

In the development of such a feedback loop, the human being—as a conduit of creation, a vessel—becomes an active participant of the creation of his own future in the act of choosing which observation platform and scope he accepts as “real”—objective or subjective. Furthermore, as the energy of such a being is changed and enhanced by the “flow of cosmic energy” passing through him, as he perceives more and more of the creative expressions of Infinite Potential, and chooses those he wishes to align with, he becomes collinear with those other expressions of Being—other organic units that may be quite different in make-up, but similarly aware of Infinite Potential—and is thus able to interact with them in a manner that further expands and commutates the energy of transducing.

This can then lead to exponential amplification of the transducing of the energies of Being which can then completely alter the physical nature of the organic unit. Just as a pipe that is used to channel water gets wet from the water flowing through it, so does the human being who has begun the process of aligning with Being becomes saturated with the higher energies being manifested through him or her. This process leads to permeation of the organic nature of the vessel which leads to transformation in that it “awakens” the “sleeping matter” of the organic unit and makes it a full participant in Being, rather than a weight for the soul to carry or struggle against. The energy of the organic vehicle is then available in the terms described in Einstein’s famous formula, which might give some indication of the potential of such a being.
A person who aligns himself with Non-Being will undergo the same process, only in the opposite direction.

As the reader can easily see by now, the teachings of the current spate of New Age Gurus constitute the idea that we can exert our will and voice that exists “down here” upward to change what is “above” us in order to change our reality down here. They tell us that we can change our lives, our thinking, move our brains into harmony, or aid the “heart in opening”, obtaining “harmony and balance” which is then going to “open windows in our mind, our heart, and our spirit”, etc. It is claimed that we can do this basically by assuming God’s point of view that “all is one, all is love”. It is stated, (with some truth I should add, since good disinformation is always wrapped in a warm and fuzzy truth), that, “without Divine Unity inside of us, these windows of inspiration are rarely available”. What they do not tell you is that the staircase to Divine Unity of Being requires a full field of awareness of Being and Non-Being, and that this can only be achieved by divesting oneself of the controls of Non-Being which are, indeed, part of Being, but which seek to obviate Being in a paradoxical sleep of “Unification” which often begins by believing the lie that “knowledge protects” simply by having it.

Indeed, many of the “techniques” sold in the slick packages of “ascension tools” will temporarily produce chemical changes that will feel very good, the same way a good meal satisfies hunger temporarily. It really “feels good”! But just as the steak and salad are digested and most of the matter excreted in a few hours, and another steak and salad are needed to fill the stomach again, so do such practices fail to do anything more than perpetuate the “food chain”. And, staying with the analogy, very little of the “substance” of such practices actually “stays with” the individual.

A considerable period of time is required for the seeker to finally come to the realization that techniques that relieve stress or produce “good feelings” have done nothing to actually change their lives or their “vibrations”. They are still recognized by their neighbor’s dog, they still find new gray hairs on their heads, and they still get sick and have aches and pains like everyone else. The problem is, again, the “bottom up” ideas have been employed which only result in remaining in the “mixed” state, or, worse, being drawn deeper into the path of Non-Being.

Well, I should qualify that: to those for whom Non-Being is their immutable nature, this is only natural and right, and they will thrive following the path of Non-Being. But for those many, many seekers whose immutable nature is toward Being, this is a terrible trap. The gravitational effect of the Thought Center of Non-Being, which draws all of Creation into Non-Being, will act on them in ways that are crippling to their relationships and health. Human beings who go through life feeling as though they have a “hole in their hearts” are those who are not synchronized with their immutable nature. [...]

The Thought Center of Non-Being is of a certain nature—contractile subjectivity—that exerts a more or less “gravitational” pull—a desire to absorb and assimilate the soul energies of Being—so as to feed its own contracting nature. Even if it promotes a full field of awareness in principle, it can only view Being as a traitor to its own need to not exist. This results in an individual who may proclaim that all is illusion, but whose actions—or rather lack thereof—betray the deeper immutable state of Non-Being. Due to its intrinsic nature, there is a powerful exertion of Non-Being to destroy and obviate Being and Creation—all the while it is unable to achieve the awareness that it only exists by virtue of Being and Creation in action!

The powerful exertion of the Thought Center of Non-Being to absorb and assimilate all of creation, powered by its own contractile subjectivity, poses certain problems both for itself and for Being. The fundament of Non-Being is a lie—that is to say, the state of absolute Non-Being that it promotes is a paradoxical impossibility. The fundament of Being is the objective fact that Existence simply is via action or utilization of knowledge which generates light. Therefore, the essential conflict is between lies and truth. The Thought Center of Non-Being tells itself the biggest lie of all—that it does not exist—and goes to sleep in pretense. And from this essential point, we see that the nature of subjectivity is that of lies. Lies and belief in lies—whether or not the believer is aware that they are believing a lie—all partake of the same essence—subjectivity and Non-Being. This is the esoteric importance of the programming of the population that we see now all around us.

The Thought Center of Non-Being, in its expression as matter, being “impressed” by Creative consciousness in action which partially awakens it and draws it into the creation of the organic world, wraps itself around this awakened consciousness. Its intrinsic nature of pretense to Non-Being acts “gravitationally” on consciousness, and twists and distorts it into varying degrees of subjectivity. It is this interaction of the energy of all possibility, lensed through subjectivity of matter, that produces the myriad manifestations of the material universe.

In the realm of the Thought Center of Non-Being, there are many manifestations—or ways—of seeking annihilation—the “Base Names of God”. These modes act in a gravitational way to engage, enfold, and distort consciousness to their ends. This results in the formation of consciousness units of great power and depth of cunning—far beyond anything imaginable in our own reality.

These consciousness units use their wiles to assimilate weaker consciousness units so as to accrue more contractile power. Obviously, the more “dense” the consciousness units “consumed”, the more “nutritious” they are. And so they seek, by great cunning, to carefully, and with great patience, manipulate the consciousness units selected for assimilation. It is, effectively, trans-millennial stalking.


Interpreting the quote from the Cs based on the above:

'Life is religion. Life experiences reflect how one interacts with God. Those who are asleep are those of little faith in terms of their interaction with the creation. Some people think that the world exists for them to overcome or ignore or shut out. For those individuals, the world will cease [Because Non-Being is entropic by nature]. They will become exactly what they give to life. They will become merely a dream in the 'past.' People who pay strict attention to objective reality right and left, become the reality of the 'Future.' [Because Being can See objectively, and is creative, ever expanding]

The way I understand the above excerpt, a part of suffering could have to do with which "Name of God" one chooses to align him/herself with, in comparison with what his/her intrinsic nature is like. If those two are not in harmony (e.g. when our programs and buffers make us deny the Real I, or be in denial about an aspect of our reality even though deep inside we want the truth, or when we follow along, are full if wishful thinking, say yes when wanting to say no, etc.), then that leads to suffering. Until we can observe it differently and more objectively, it hurts (in our 3D perspective), but that is part of the challenges and tests we each need in order to be able to choose. Maybe that is why it could be considered a necessary step, the "fast track", Joe referred to? Like a disease or a crisis can be a "warning" that helps us accelerate the learning thanks to the shock that goes with it?

In that sense, it would be a progression, and at each stage of development and as we see more and more (if that's in our nature and reflected in our choices), and as we balance our choices with our essence more and more, then the amount of suffering would diminish or at least take on a different meaning, and there may even be some "joy"? And then, it would sort of explain why the Cs also said that it doesn't HAVE to be painful? I'm not sure, but FWIW.
 

BHelmet

Jedi Council Member
First off, wow Joe, you have been of fire lately with starting really great impactful threads.

I think there is a difference between pain and suffering, although each can be related to the other and be experienced simultaneously. Isn't an STO candidate going to necessarily experience some suffering in an STS world? Kind of like a 'given' of that paradigm. The 'fall' into an STS world was a choice made. Can't really blame God for that. If a person is an STO candidate, I would think that there is always going to be some suffering here, but if that suffering is embraced and endured consciously, then that would mitigate the pain which is evoked by resistance to the lessons of suffering. I also tend to think that the pain from suffering also stems from an error of conception: that the suffering is judged as too harsh, unfair or too costly to pay by the lower I's.
 

alkhemst

Dagobah Resident
Joe said:
So why is the suffering "necessary" in the walking - and many other - examples? To speed up the learning? And is that then the purpose of the suffering aspect of learning? To speed it up? As the Cs mentioned somewhere, it's like the "fast track" to learning?

For babies learning to walk, the suffering of falling isn't so great to not want to keep trying. Maybe the pain of a fall is just trumped by the desire to learn, to walk around, gain competence and / or increase their level of freedom to explore more of this new and wonderous place they find themselves in?

So when the desire for growth and all its by-products (freedom, awareness, competence, learning etc.) is higher than our resistance to pain in taking steps to get there, there's perhaps no longer any suffering. Suffering seems to imply a struggle with the process, as if this resistance to pain is almost equal to the desire for growth?

If so, it makes sense that in order to learn we don't need to suffer, its just that in the throes suffering, the alternative of growth free from suffering becomes clearer and more attractive by comparison. In which case our desire to grow, grows so-to-speak.

So you might say there's a point to suffering but it's not necessary for growth, at least that's what makes sense to me for now fwiw.
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Chu said:
The way I understand the above excerpt, a part of suffering could have to do with which "Name of God" one chooses to align him/herself with, in comparison with what his/her intrinsic nature is like. If those two are not in harmony (e.g. when our programs and buffers make us deny the Real I, or be in denial about an aspect of our reality even though deep inside we want the truth, or when we follow along, are full if wishful thinking, say yes when wanting to say no, etc.), then that leads to suffering. Until we can observe it differently and more objectively, it hurts (in our 3D perspective), but that is part of the challenges and tests we each need in order to be able to choose. Maybe that is why it could be considered a necessary step, the "fast track", Joe referred to? Like a disease or a crisis can be a "warning" that helps us accelerate the learning thanks to the shock that goes with it?

Great and pertinent excerpt from High Strangeness Chu! 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!"

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

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.

Well, step by step I suppose! (but WHY?!! :lol:)
 

caballero reyes

The Living Force
Quote:

Q: (L) Why does learning Have to be painful?
A: It does not.

-------------------- ---------------------- ----------------
It is very clear that when you are learning are taking in fact a real and effective medicine and this may not be painful but on the contrary: we should try to learn every day and that I check it every day, because life is a daily struggle and often you do not have to express it, it is understood that it happens to everyone.
 

kalibex

Dagobah Resident
Konstantin said:
And now after a lot of suffering and work to find and know his essence , he know himself and can finally interact with god without suffering.

'Growing pains'...?
 

Hesper

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Thanks for another great thread, Joe!

Chu said:
The way I understand the above excerpt, a part of suffering could have to do with which "Name of God" one chooses to align him/herself with, in comparison with what his/her intrinsic nature is like. If those two are not in harmony (e.g. when our programs and buffers make us deny the Real I, or be in denial about an aspect of our reality even though deep inside we want the truth, or when we follow along, are full if wishful thinking, say yes when wanting to say no, etc.), then that leads to suffering. Until we can observe it differently and more objectively, it hurts (in our 3D perspective), but that is part of the challenges and tests we each need in order to be able to choose. Maybe that is why it could be considered a necessary step, the "fast track", Joe referred to? Like a disease or a crisis can be a "warning" that helps us accelerate the learning thanks to the shock that goes with it?

I think that's an excellent way of putting it - it's the primary distinction between conscious and unconscious suffering, between the suffering of system 1 and the suffering of system 2.

In the end it seems as simple as chocolate cake. If it weren't for Laura's drive to learn everything that she could, out of her overriding love for her family, we would probably not be as aware as we are about the evils of chocolate cake - the sugar, the gluten, the genetically modified substances. Many of us would probably still be eating the thing because it's pleasurable - even if we were aware, on some level, of how bad it is for us. And we'd have missed out on all of the amazing lessons that have come since then.

And yet how many people really think chocolate cake is good for them? How many people really believe McDonalds is good for them? How many people absolutely love politicians and think the world's a fantastic place? Not many potentially souled people do, I bet. But people live in denial, because they are drugged by subjective wishful thinking & the associated feel-good chemicals, and objectivity requires what seems at first to be superhuman efforts to awaken, to take in information, to better utilize it every day. Sobering up isn't fun, and it doesn't really pay at first! We're told we have to pay in advance. And it is a slow process - one step at a time. To paraphrase Ark, even if it takes 5 lifetimes it is what we will strive for. Heck, even if it takes 500 - it is making that choice day after day, in small ways that seems to count the most.

So some people say 'oh life is so unbearable, at least let me have my cake,' while others, like Laura, choose the exact opposite, out of a sense of responsibility, love, duty, curiosity, adventure, and probably many other more 'divine' traits. And their lives reflect the difference. So, the kind of suffering we choose fundamentally shapes our lives, and that choice seems to be a reflection of the choices we make on an even deeper soul level. That's how I currently understand the phrase that 'life experiences reflect how we interact with God'.
 

obyvatel

The Living Force
[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.
[/quote]

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.


https://youtu.be/NQ2dK18--ic
 

mkrnhr

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
obyvatel said:
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.

Thanks obyvatel for the video. I've been trying to formulate the difference between pain and suffering for the past few days with no success. Life is painful, whether we are aware of it or not. If one thinks for instance of the passing of time; We experience something, good or bad, and then.... it's gone. This fact of 3D experience is tragic. All that we do, think, feel, etc. becomes nothingness, a mere memory no more real than a dream. However, even if these experiences are retrospectively unreal from our very limited perspective, they do exist indeed in a larger context, probably beyond time as we experience it (although some action may reverberate through time and space after we're dead and gone). Then, what is it that exists in that larger context (the universe? god?) except that very experience of life and its quality? Do we experience the world with understanding, with a high quality of multilevel cognition, or do we offer the universe a low quality cognition based on rejection and disdain? Those who feel nothing are obviously dead in regard to their intended potential. What's the point of being human if one experiences the world like an animal, a plant, or even a rock? That's a waste of resources that leads eventually to recycling. For those who feel or experience things on the other hand, it is more complex of course (things become more subtle and more interesting). I don't think there are good or bad emotions per se, only good or bad processing of emotion matters from the information point of view. This latter is what leads to a constructive or a destructive path in interacting with the world. OSIT ATM
 

luc

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Thanks Joe and everyone for this interesting discussion!

Joe said:
This is something of a puzzle to me, the idea that learning must involve suffering, at any level of experience. Sometimes I think that we have been 'engineered' that way, and that it is not, in fact, necessary. You can understand why many people come to see the suffering they experience as some kind of punishment from "god".

I find this puzzling too. From the comments and quoted sessions above, it seems that at a certain level, there will be no suffering anymore. But it is clear (also from Chu's post/quote) that in order to grow, we must "make the shadow conscious", look at it, study it in order to make the right choices. After all, the STO path means that we increase our awareness, right? But how can we not suffer from this? How can we not suffer from looking at all the horrors in the world? How can we not suffer from realizing how we hurt other people out of ignorance?

Maybe at one point, after we reach a certain level of development, we will have access to all our knowledge/feelings at every moment - we won't be fragmented so much anymore. This would mean that we are not "shocked" anymore by sudden realizations, but that we are able to "hold" our feelings and knowledge permanently. So in this sense, we would still feel the horror, still feel sad, still feel compassion for all the suffering people (probably even much more so!), but we wouldn't be "shocked" anymore. Also, we would know exactly and instantaneously how to react, how to transform this negative energy into something positive - something like Theseus described in the "negative emotions" thread as follows:

Theseus said:
With awareness we know we can change the outcome of negative emotions: By acting fast and stepping in to change our reaction.

It is hard individually managing our own emotional reactions but we know when we do it does give us energy when we overcome crisis.


So at this high level, there are no contradictions anymore, we have full access to our feelings and knowledge all the time, we react instantly in a positive way to the "shadow" - and so we wouldn't suffer anymore...?

This also ties in with the "hyperkinetic sensate" aspect of the Wave: it makes us feel everything. Maybe once we have left behind us the terror that comes with these realizations, we find an equilibrium as defined above and suffering will cease?

Gurjieff has this to say:

ISOTM said:
"The concept 'conscience' has nothing in common with the concept 'morality.'" Conscience is a general and a permanent phenomenon. Conscience is the same for all men and conscience is possible only in the absence of 'buffers.' From the point of view of understanding the different categories of man we may say that there exists the conscience of a man in whom there are no contradictions. This conscience is not suffering; on the contrary it is joy of a totally new character which we are unable to understand. But even a momentary awakening of conscience in a man who has thousands of different I's is bound to involve suffering. And if these moments of conscience become longer and if a man does not fear them but on the contrary cooperates with them and tries to keep and prolong them, an element of very subtle joy, a foretaste of the future 'clear consciousness' will gradually enter into these moments.

Here are some more quotes from ISOTM that speak about suffering:

Later on a great deal must be said about suffering. Nothing can be attained without suffering but at the same time one must begin by sacrificing suffering. Now, decipher what this means."

"Sacrifice is necessary," said G. "If nothing is sacrificed nothing is obtained. And it is necessary to sacrifice something precious at the moment, to sacrifice for a long time and to sacrifice a great deal. But still, not forever. This must be understood because often it is not understood. Sacrifice is necessary only while the process of crystallization is going on. When crystallization is achieved, renunciations, privations, and sacrifices are no longer necessary. Then a man may have everything he wants. There are no longer any laws for him, he is a law unto himself."

And work consists in subjecting oneself voluntarily to temporary suffering in order to be free from eternal suffering. But people are afraid of suffering. They want pleasure now, at once and forever. They do not want to understand that pleasure is an attribute of paradise and that it must be earned. And this is necessary not by reason of any arbitrary or inner moral laws but because if man gets pleasure before he has earned it he will not be able to keep it and pleasure will be turned into suffering. But the whole point is to be able to get pleasure and be able to keep it. Whoever can do this has nothing to learn. But the way to it lies through suffering. Whoever thinks that as he is he can avail himself of pleasure is much mistaken, and if he is capable of being sincere with himself, then the moment will come when he will see this."

FWIW
 

Alada

The Living Force
Joe said:
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.

Well, step by step I suppose! (but WHY?!! :lol:)

I think in that one statement you have said a lot. Maybe we can look at it this way then, that suffering is the unresolved answer to the question "why?".

I’ve seen third force sometimes referred to as 'the answer to the question "why?"', so maybe we can also put it as 'suffering is the absence of third force'. Affirming - denying - reconciling.

Of course it may not be true to say that third force, or the answer, is absent, but often that our suffering is a refusal to accept that answer, or to acknowledge it, or to be able to recognise that it exists or even as mentioned recently, that the answer is out of alignment with our fundamental nature or we with it.

On the individual level when seeking knowledge of self, great suffering often seems to be connected with our ability or willingness to accept the answer to the question "why?". And as luc highlighted in the quote form Gurdjieff, this then relates to the problem of contradictions:

luc said:
Gurjieff has this to say:

ISOTM said:
"The concept 'conscience' has nothing in common with the concept 'morality.'" Conscience is a general and a permanent phenomenon. Conscience is the same for all men and conscience is possible only in the absence of 'buffers.' From the point of view of understanding the different categories of man we may say that there exists the conscience of a man in whom there are no contradictions. This conscience is not suffering; on the contrary it is joy of a totally new character which we are unable to understand. But even a momentary awakening of conscience in a man who has thousands of different I's is bound to involve suffering. And if these moments of conscience become longer and if a man does not fear them but on the contrary cooperates with them and tries to keep and prolong them, an element of very subtle joy, a foretaste of the future 'clear consciousness' will gradually enter into these moments.

Sometimes it seems we can suffer greatly when the answer to the question "why?" exposes and presents us with our own contradictions, that in order to truly reconcile and align with the truth of the answer, we have to face, acknowledge, and accept these contradictions as fact – the truth. The difficulty then can be in realising how far back the influence of said contradiction can stretch and what one must then shed, or moved from/to in order to reconcile it. The bigger the contradiction, the wider the gap between our illusions and reality, more difficult the transition of moving form what we thought we knew, or what we thought we were, into what would be completely uncharted waters. And that’s were we come back to faith I think.

Added: Does this work then?: Some people think that the answer to the question "why"? exists for them to overcome or ignore or shut out. For those individuals, the world will cease. They will become exactly what they give to life.
 

Joe

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
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.

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.


https://youtu.be/NQ2dK18--ic
[/quote]

So the message from the vid is "pay attention to the pain and you can diminish/avoid the suffering"?
 
Top Bottom