Life experiences represent interaction with "God"

[ankhepiphan]

"Life experiences reflect how one interacts with God."

Hello All,

This statement indicates to me that we must follow Universal Law if we seek the cooperation of God and alleviate suffering. But i have also wondered if the strict adherence to Universal Law places us in a Third Density paradise of sorts - True freedom at last, but not Ascension. What more would be needed (if anything) other than the strict adherence to Universal Law?

 

[Joe]

This recent photograph seems a good depiction of the rest of the quote from the start of this topic:

Some people think that the world 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. They will become merely a dream in the 'past.'

 

[Carl]

This recent photograph seems a good depiction of the rest of the quote from the start of this topic:

Some people think that the world 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. They will become merely a dream in the 'past.'

LOL!

I do wonder about the "overcome" part of that statement though. I guess it means overcoming as in the STS idea of dominating and controlling others, rather than overcoming struggle for a positive goal?

 

[Joe]

This recent photograph seems a good depiction of the rest of the quote from the start of this topic:

Some people think that the world 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. They will become merely a dream in the 'past.'

LOL!

I do wonder about the "overcome" part of that statement though. I guess it means overcoming as in the STS idea of dominating and controlling others, rather than overcoming struggle for a positive goal?

Yeah, it seems to mean reduce it down to their subjective level.

 

[Chad]

This recent photograph seems a good depiction of the rest of the quote from the start of this topic:

Some people think that the world 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. They will become merely a dream in the 'past.'

Seriously, all they're missing is the amniotic sacks.

 

[Starshine]

Gurdjieff also made a distinction between the suffering we are unwilling to let go of and the conscience suffering required to stop pandering to our desires and fantasies in order to stoke our Inner Fire and transform ourselves:

"Another thing that people must sacrifice is their suffering. It is very difficult also to sacrifice one's suffering. A man will renounce any pleasures you like but he will not give up his suffering. Man is made in such a way that he is never so much attached to anything as he is to his suffering. And it is necessary to be free from suffering. No one who is not free from suffering, who has not sacrificed his suffering, can work. 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."

I just started reading "Personality-Shaping through Positive Disintegration" which is the book that will be discussed at an up-coming FOTCM meeting, and in the introduction the process of "positive disintegration" is described as being initiated through feelings of guilt, regret, depression, and sadness, which typically have to do with seeing our rash behaviors and not living up to our own mortal standards of what we really want to be - the moral standards of our true selves and our community (given that our community is a healthy one to live up to). When this guilt and depression holds us back and incapacitates us, when we flee into drugs, thoughts of suicide, and other forms of dissociation, that's our unwillingness to sacrifice our suffering - of being addicted to it. We wallow in it. But when those feelings enable us to take action, to seek therapy, to make an effort to change things about ourselves and reconstruct our personality anew, it is positive disintegration - it is suffering that is conducive to growth.

[/quote]

I've had trouble totally understanding this quote from Gurdjieff so I appreciate the way you put it and all the inputs that have been shared here.
The quotes from High Strangeness and Castaneda are great insights too.

Some people gladly say they are victims of genetics to not make a single change in their life, the term suffering seems to equally apply.

Still, I don't fully grasp what the Cs means by you don't have to suffer.
Does it mean as you said Joe that once a certain level of suffering is reached, you don't have to suffer anymore, or is it possible to learn without suffering at all ?
If it is just a question of perception, then you still have to know what suffering is to then change your perception about it.

 

[ankhepiphan]

I think to KNOW the fundamental difference between Right and Wrong in any situation and then APPLY it is the definition of Wisdom. Wisdom alleviates suffering.

 

[Joe]

Still, I don't fully grasp what the Cs means by you don't have to suffer.
Does it mean as you said Joe that once a certain level of suffering is reached, you don't have to suffer anymore, or is it possible to learn without suffering at all ?
If it is just a question of perception, then you still have to know what suffering is to then change your perception about it.

I think it's a question of perception, but to achieve that level of perception, it seems you likely have to suffer to get there. Maybe what they meant was that you don't have to continually suffer, that, as you experience suffering, you learn, grow and change your perception to the point where you both avoid most suffering (because you have already learned the lessons that most suffering is designed to teach you) and what suffering you do experience you understand it fully as a learning experience and view it in the widest possible terms thereby removing the "woe is me!" suffering aspect.

I think the bottom line is, while the Cs may say "you don't have to suffer" and while that is *theoretically* possible to achieve in an instant if we could just adopt the right perception, practically-speaking we will continue to suffer as part of the process of getting there. The good news is that, as we progress, the suffering part probably diminishes, at least to a certain extent.

 

[Skyfarmr]

Whether we are on the receiving end of suffering or the alleviating side of suffering, it is empathy, the feeling of knowing or imagining what it's like to walk in those shoes, that guides us to connect with another through our creativity and experiences to act. Suffering and dire situations present opportunities for us to learn and grow, in a reconnecting way.

"All God's creatures who respond in love to help another are God's angels" -not sure who quoted this, but had written it down cause it reminds me of our dog, Simon, and what an "angel" he was during a time of suffering.

Jack, the goat, leading Charlie, his blind horse buddy!

 

[Altair]

Still, I don't fully grasp what the Cs means by you don't have to suffer.
Does it mean as you said Joe that once a certain level of suffering is reached, you don't have to suffer anymore, or is it possible to learn without suffering at all ?
If it is just a question of perception, then you still have to know what suffering is to then change your perception about it.

I think it's a question of perception, but to achieve that level of perception, it seems you likely have to suffer to get there. Maybe what they meant was that you don't have to continually suffer, that, as you experience suffering, you learn, grow and change your perception to the point where you both avoid most suffering (because you have already learned the lessons that most suffering is designed to teach you) and what suffering you do experience you understand it fully as a learning experience and view it in the widest possible terms thereby removing the "woe is me!" suffering aspect.

I think the bottom line is, while the Cs may say "you don't have to suffer" and while that is *theoretically* possible to achieve in an instant if we could just adopt the right perception, practically-speaking we will continue to suffer as part of the process of getting there. The good news is that, as we progress, the suffering part probably diminishes, at least to a certain extent.

I agree. I think that suffering in conventional meaning is strictly dualistic ("cause" and resulted "suffering"). Applying a third, neutralizing factor, for example, "understanding" (of a lesson) mitigates/removes the negative aspect of suffering and you start to see it simply as another possibility to learn.

 

[Buddy]

Still, I don't fully grasp what the Cs means by you don't have to suffer.
Does it mean as you said Joe that once a certain level of suffering is reached, you don't have to suffer anymore, or is it possible to learn without suffering at all ?
If it is just a question of perception, then you still have to know what suffering is to then change your perception about it.

Hi Starshine. Your question and comments reminded me that, in Teaching what can't be taught: The Shaman's Strategy, David Rigoni talks about some stuff in Casteneda's books involving Don Juan's lessons on things like suffering and internal dialog and comments that some things just have to be experienced and taught by example. I personally wouldn't know how to explain those C's comments on 'suffering' that would give you my understanding, but you might get it by contemplating a couple of related ideas...

From Casteneda's Tales of Power:

The first act of a teacher is to introduce the idea that the world we think we see is only a view, a description of the world. Accepting that seems to be one of the hardest things one can do; we are complacently caught in our particular view of the world, which compels us to feel and act as if we know everything about the world.

From Peter Kosso's comments in a paper (specifically note #2) on doing science and establishing 'objectivity':

As Kosso notes, scientists may have this kind of objectivity at several points in their work: 1) observation of data, in that any given observation claim can be tested against the empirical facts of observation; 2) the independence of sensory systems as a physical kind of independence, so that what we sense through our senses need not have any impact on what we think we are hearing, tasting or smelling; and 3) epistemic independence between theories. Kosso's paper is an extended discussion of how to do science so that the results will be considered epistemically independent and hence objective.

ref:
Robert Hudson's Seeing Things: The Philosophy of Reliable Observation
_https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0199303290

and/or: Peter Kosso in the Journal of Philosophy 86 (5):245-257 (1989)

Finally, in regards to your personal suffering with respect to whatever specific thing you might suffer in relation to, you could try to increase your knowledge of that subject as it relates to what Altair said today, or at least try a method obyvatel once described as 'decoupling' sensations from your thoughts about them. From this effort, the idea may become more real for you and be a benefit to you as well.

 

[Cosmos]

Still, I don't fully grasp what the Cs means by you don't have to suffer.
Does it mean as you said Joe that once a certain level of suffering is reached, you don't have to suffer anymore, or is it possible to learn without suffering at all ?
If it is just a question of perception, then you still have to know what suffering is to then change your perception about it.

I think it's a question of perception, but to achieve that level of perception, it seems you likely have to suffer to get there. Maybe what they meant was that you don't have to continually suffer, that, as you experience suffering, you learn, grow and change your perception to the point where you both avoid most suffering (because you have already learned the lessons that most suffering is designed to teach you) and what suffering you do experience you understand it fully as a learning experience and view it in the widest possible terms thereby removing the "woe is me!" suffering aspect.

I think the bottom line is, while the Cs may say "you don't have to suffer" and while that is *theoretically* possible to achieve in an instant if we could just adopt the right perception, practically-speaking we will continue to suffer as part of the process of getting there. The good news is that, as we progress, the suffering part probably diminishes, at least to a certain extent.

Yes I think our perception of "suffering" is the key here as well. It is up to us how we choose to experience any situation in life, that we think of as suffering. In fact it seems like, at one point you start to experience anything in life, even fast changing, suprising and new circumstances, that you normally experience as a suffering stress, as fun of the process.

"The Practising Mind: Developing Focus and Discipline in Your Life" by Thomas M. Sterner, explains this process very well:

[...]

I always wondered how and why some people seem to be able to have fun during that rewiring. How and why that seems to work for some people, was always an alien concept for me until I read this book. This books has made it clear to me, how and why that is possible. With the Practising Mind you take everything in life, whatever it might be, even fast changing, suprising and new circumstances, with calmness and even fun! The concept he describes is actually pretty simple, but nevertheless suprising, to see it written and explained like that. I never thought of it like that. At one point the practising mind gets even to a point where it searches and even needs new efforts and challenges, becouse your mind starts to love the process istelf.
[...]

In regards to the above and the suffering that usually goes hand in hand with fast changing, suprising and new circumstances, the "Practising Mind" teaches us to see and minimize and even stop that particular suffering, in the way we are normally used to it, simply by changing your brain pathways to experience what you think as of "suffering" in any new or suprising life situation differently, which transforms it to a fun exercise that you look forward to.

The C's, as far as I know, said at some point that "you do not need to suffer", or something like that. I never really understood that, until I read that book. I couldn't find that part in the transcript though. What I found instead was this:

Q: (L) Do we just have to suffer through this one?

A: Each "suffering" will be closely followed by dramatic life changes.

Q: (L) What is that supposed to mean? I don't like the sound of that! The other day when you said 'celebrate!' all I did was suffer!

A: Stop suffering!

A: Tom, you are close, but you are missing the point.

Q: (L) What is the point?

A: The point is, there "has to be" nothing. You will do what you will do. You choose. We have told you this repeatedly, but you still suffer from self-centered perspective.

Q: Well, I have observed that whatever we resist seems to cause us to suffer.

A: This is true, but suffering comes in differing degrees.

Q: For example: there are some people who like to suffer, because they believe that the flesh is sinful. That is a big thing that the Lizzies have instituted. For centuries they have wanted people to suffer, and they have made this big deal about sex and anything that might be considered pleasant or desirable should be denied, and that a person should suffer, and revel in their suffering. And, actually, making a person...

A: If one seeks to suffer, they do so in expectation of future reward. They desire to possess something in the end.

A: Suffering activates neuro-chemicals which turn on DNA receptors.

Q: (A) I don't want to suffer if so! And to have my receptors ... (L) We'll have to invent a special suffering just for that. (A) Okay dear. [Laughter.] (L) Well we must be getting smarter with all the suffering we did back in July through January with this Vincent Bridges business. We must've really gotten smart cause we were really suffering and it culminated in incredible suffering. But I do not want anymore infections. That was not the right kind of suffering. But maybe that was evidence of neuro-chemicals being turned on! When we had our sicknesses in January I was very, very sick first, for about the same exact period of time that Ark was very, very sick. We both had massive infections that were hard to fight. We had to get major antibiotics. The pain was horrible. What was the cause of these infections?

A: Laura, Ark: First opening was stress. Second part was directed wave of negative energy. Third was bacteria activated by this frequency. End result was response from your system which did act beneficially.

So "The Practising Mind" is not really about stopping the suffering per se, but to recognize it and how you think and react to it (aka. any situation in life, that you choose to experience as "suffering", rather then an opportunity to practise/learn something new) and then choose to experience that "suffering" in a completely different way, which then makes it even fun to be confronted with it, because you realize that what you are confronted with, is just a new process to learn something now, in order to grow in the process .

Now what the C's have said; "sit back and enjoy the show" finally makes more sense to me as well, after reading that book.

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= Pashalis]because you realize that what you are confronted with, is just a new process to learn something now, in order to grow in the process.

Now what the C's have said; "sit back and enjoy the show" finally makes more sense to me as well, after reading that book.[/quote]

Excellent point. Conscious/necessary suffering is not really suffering per se. It’s more of shedding/releasing something that must die. Through understanding and figuring it out. If we could appreciate conscious/necessary suffering for what it is. The experience may not be so dreadful. More as a transition of learning.

What makes it dreadful is when unconscious suffering barges in and get mixed up. OSIT

 

[Hesper]

Excellent point. Conscious/necessary suffering is not really suffering per se. It’s more of shedding/releasing something that must die. Through understanding and figuring it out. If we could appreciate conscious/necessary suffering for what it is. The experience may not be so dreadful. More as a transition of learning.

When suffering for something, it seems that really focusing on what one is suffering for transforms it into a profoundly meaningful/re-energizing experience.

 

[3DStudent]

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.

I find it hard to imagine what life would be like without self-made or mechanical suffering. But I've been at periods in life where there is more flow and less suffering. So if you work out your programs and gain an understanding of yourself, I think you could get to that point. There will always be accidents or things external that come upon you, but you'd have eliminated your self suffering through knowledge.

But maybe it's not so hard to imagine. Without that suffering, you'd just get on with life and continue pursuing your Aim(s). And on to new and more complex things. So I kind of see this type of suffering as a sort of obstacle, that you overcome after some time and learning.