How to translate the world of thoughts, emotions or feelings into written words? In my case, it is difficult to articulate thoughts and I make a great effort every time I organize a text to be read by others.
I am very grateful to all those who posted in the thread, since they managed to translate this abstract world of experiences into beautiful weavings of words, into beautiful texts. Thank you for opening your hearts to this experience we are living together.
Well, I am reading from the beginning of the project, and I want to update the information. As time goes by I glimpse new internal movements.
Laura said that "part of the work here is not just getting into the head of a character that you can identify with, we need much more BEING." She mentioned that Gurdjieff talked about the disparity between knowing and being or personality vs essence....
BEING. How great this word feels!
Heidegger here:
"Being" We limit ourselves for now to that grammatical form which constitutes the transition in the formation of the real noun, i.e. the infinitive (to walk, to sing, to hope, to be, etc).
What does the infinitive mean? The label is the abbreviated form of the full expression: MODUS INFINITIVUS, the mode of unlimitedness...
... "Basically "BEING" means PRESENCE for the Greeks...
This time of reading is giving me the opportunity to do a life review, as if I were in 5D contemplation, so to speak. My consciousness frequently visits the past, and I review stories. I am amazed at that ability of consciousness to travel back in time to timely events, where one needs to observe to understand. It is something like a journey of accessing emotional knots to be understood and thus letting go of the past. We cannot change the past, at least physically, but somehow the energy of that event is transformed by the understanding we have of it.
Clearly there is a change on a spiritual level. Perhaps that is what letting go of the past is all about, in the light of understanding. By understanding, we free ourselves and we free others. If we don't, it is like being tied and entangled in twisted ropes, full of knots.
This exercise of being in so many different shoes is an excellent way to know true empathy and get out of this emotional entanglement. Forgiveness develops with empathy. Reading is teaching me what empathy is, what love is and how we can help others, these books are working as mirrors for us, showing us how we can become.
Laura said :
"And here, many of you have the opportunity to develop your SELF. It is quite simple as an exercise, but in fact, it takes time and application. You must flood your sensory apparatus again and again and again, taking in many different points of view, stirring the cauldron until it boils. If you are lucky, you will accomplish something".
From a publication by Chu, p.117:
Laura said:
"It may be helpful for some to reread chapter 12 of Ouspensky's "In Search of the Miraculous" on this subject, especially the second half of that chapter. However, the whole chapter is revealing ; there is much to think about".
"There are," he said, "two lines along which man's development proceeds,
of being develop simultaneously, parallel to, and helping one another. But if the line ofknowledge gets too far ahead of the line of being, or if the line of being gets ahead of
the line of knowledge, man's development goes wrong, and sooner or later it mustcome to a standstill.
"People understand what 'knowledge' means. And they understand the possibility of
different levels of knowledge. They understand that knowledge may be lesser or
greater, that is to say, of one quality or of another quality. But they do not understand
this in relation to 'being.' 'Being,' for them, means simply 'existence' to which is
opposed just 'non-existence.' They do not understand that being or existence may be of
very different levels and categories.
[...]
And they do not understand that knowledge depends on being.
Not only do they not understand this latter but they
definitely do not wish to understand it. And especially in Western culture it is
considered that a man may possess great knowledge, for example he may be an able
scientist, make discoveries, advance science, and at the same time he may be, and has
the right to be, a petty, egoistic, caviling, mean, envious, vain, naive, and absent
minded man. It seems to be considered here that a professor must always forget his
umbrella everywhere.
"And yet it is his being. And people think that his knowledge does not depend on
his being. People of Western culture put great value on the level of a man's knowledge
but they do not value the level of a man's being and are not ashamed of the low level
of their own being. They do not even understand what it means. And they do not
understand that a man's knowledge depends on the level of his being.
"If knowledge gets far ahead of being, it becomes theoretical and abstract and
inapplicable to life, or actually harmful, because instead of serving life and helping
people the better to struggle with the difficulties they meet, it begins to complicate
man's life, brings new difficulties into it, new troubles and calamities which were not
there before.
"The reason for this is that knowledge which is not in accordance with being cannot
be large enough for, or sufficiently suited to, man's real needs. It will always be a
knowledge of one thing together with ignorance of another thing; a knowledge of the
detail without a knowledge of the whole; a knowledge of the form without a
knowledge of the essence.
"Such preponderance of knowledge over being is observed in present-day culture.
The idea of the value and importance of the level of being is completely forgotten.
And it is forgotten that the level of knowledge is determined by the level of being.
Actually at a given level of being the possibilities of knowledge are limited and finite.
Within the limits of a given being the quality of knowledge cannot be changed, and
the accumulation of information of one and the same nature, within already
known limits, alone is possible. A change in the nature of knowledge is possible only
with a change in the nature of being.
"Taken in itself, a man's being has many different sides. The most characteristic
feature of a modem man is the absence of unity in him and, further, the absence in him
of even traces of those properties which he most likes to ascribe to himself, that is,
'lucid consciousness,' 'free will,' a 'permanent ego or I,' and the 'ability to do.' It may
surprise you if I say that the chief feature of a modem man's being which explains
everything else that is lacking in him is sleep.
"A modern man lives in sleep, in sleep he is born and in sleep he dies. About sleep,
its significance and its role in life, we will speak later. But at present just think of one
thing, what knowledge can a sleeping man have? And if you think about it and at the
same time remember that sleep is the chief feature of our being, it will at once become
clear to you that if a man really wants knowledge, he must first of all think about how
to wake, that is, about how to change his being.
"Exteriorly man's being has many different sides: activity or passivity;
truthfulness or a tendency to lie; sincerity or insincerity; courage, cowardice; self
control, profligacy; irritability, egoism, readiness for self-sacrifice, pride, vanity,
conceit, industry, laziness, morality, depravity; all these and much more besides make
up the being of man.
"But all this is entirely mechanical in man. If he lies it means that he cannot help
lying. If he tells the truth it means that he cannot help telling the truth, and so it is
with everything. Everything happens, a man can do nothing either in himself or
outside himself.
"But of course there are limits and bounds. Generally speaking, the being of a
modem man is of very inferior quality. But it can be of such bad quality that no
change is possible. This must always be remembered. People whose being can still be
changed are very lucky. But there are people who are definitely diseased, broken
machines with whom nothing can be done. And such people are in the majority. If
you think of this you will understand why only few can receive real knowledge. Their
being prevents it.
"Generally speaking, the balance between knowledge and being is even more
important than a separate development of either one or the other. And a separate
development of knowledge or of being is not desirable in any way. Although it is
precisely this one-sided development that often seems particularly attractive to
people.
"If knowledge outweighs being a man knows but has no power to do. It is useless
knowledge. On the other hand if being outweighs knowledge a man has the power to
do, but does not know, that is, he can do something but does not know what to do.
The being he has acquired becomes aimless and efforts made to attain it prove to be
useless.
[...]
"In order to understand this and, in general, the nature of knowledge and the nature
of being, as well as their interrelation, it is necessary to understand the relation of
knowledge and being to 'understanding.'
"Knowledge is one thing, understanding is another thing.
"People often confuse these concepts and do not clearly grasp what is the difference
between them.
"Knowledge by itself does not give understanding. Nor is understanding increased
by an increase of knowledge alone. Understanding depends upon the relation of
knowledge to being. Understanding is the resultant of knowledge and being. And
knowledge and being must not diverge too far, otherwise understanding will prove to
be far removed from either. At the same time the relation of knowledge to being does
not change with a mere growth of knowledge. It changes only when being grows
simultaneously with knowledge. In other words, understanding grows only with the
growth of being.
"In ordinary thinking, people do not distinguish understanding from knowledge.
They think that greater understanding depends on greater knowledge. Therefore they
accumulate knowledge, or that which they call knowledge, but they do not know how
to accumulate understanding and do not bother about it.
"And yet a person accustomed to self-observation knows for certain that at different
periods of his life he has understood one and the same idea, one and the same thought,
in totally different ways. It often seems strange to him that he could have understood
so wrongly that which, in his opinion, he now understands rightly. And he realizes, at
the same time, that his knowledge has not changed, and that he knew as much about the given
subject before as he knows now. What, then, has changed? His being has changed.
And once being has changed understanding must change also.
From "In Search of the Miraculous" ch.12:
But what good is it to him if he doesn't remember either? - said one of us.
The essence remembers," said G, "the personality has forgotten. And this was necessary because otherwise the personality would have perverted everything and attributed everything to itself.
So, Knowledge and Self need to grow in Equilibrium. If the Self is underdeveloped, it cannot receive greater knowledge, because in fact, if that were to happen, the receiver of such knowledge will twist everything to fit his worldview. It is a mathematical relationship. It is a very delicate balance, and when that balance does not exist, the third element, which is Understanding, cannot occur. The relationship of both in balance generates understanding and this is an attribute of the soul. It is like an intuitive vision, seeing the interior of things, their substance. Understanding stagnates if either of these two aspects diverge. For the moment, this is what I understand.
Ennio said.
# 1,724:
4. The hero recognizes that a weak man cannot be a virtuous man.
A hero tames his inner beast, the dark force, the capacity for malevolence that lives within his heart. He does not deny it. Instead, he acknowledges it and uses it to develop his courage and strength. Think of Luke Skywalker tempted by the Dark Side; The Temptation of Christ in the wilderness. A hero is good because he chooses not to be evil. A hero who has integrated his darker nature and mastered it, becomes a formidable man.
And I found this very relevant on sott's page:
"Like cancer cells ravaging the body, disassociated autonomous complexes are like "dissident minds" that can become excessively bloated with psychic energy, and then metastasize within the psyche, consuming, devouring and cannibalizing the healthy aspects of the psyche. By extracting and drawing all the healthy parts of the psyche into itself, an autonomous complex can potentially deform and destroy the psyche of the person (or nation) thus afflicted, infecting non-locally and spreading by psychic contagion its malaise with the surrounding field in the process.
An autonomous complex cannot bear to be seen, however, in much the same way that a vampire detests the light. A demon or autonomous complex will shape-shift and do everything in its power to resist being illuminated, because once seen, its autonomy and omnipotence are withdrawn.
Anchored, connected and related to consciousness, the demon or autonomous complex can no longer vaporize back into the unconscious, i.e. it is no longer able to possess us from behind and below our consciousness in order to force us to act unconsciously by externalizing and doing its will"
Traducido de Gladys Molina del artículo original de Paul Levy; "Are We Possessed?" C.G. Jung, el gran médico del alma y uno de los psicólogos más inspirados del siglo XX, tuvo una increíble percepción en lo que se está reproduciendo actualmente,...
es.sott.net
The readings are being a signpost to direct our attention, breaking through our internal barriers. It helps us connect with wounds from the past that we don't remember, but the emotions that accompany them are still at work beneath the surface, so to speak. Through this project, I am getting to see in front of me, parts that escaped being seen.
A few days ago I experienced my worst day with this project, as far as negative emotions are concerned. I don't know how to explain it, but it could be compared to a visit to hell. Seeing and feeling that darkness is the most unpleasant thing to experience. Knowing that evil potential that dwells within me made me break down a bit physically, but I recovered. As Candice said, I saw some of its "tentacles" but not the core from which they emanated. It is not the same to detect programs, buffers or traumas, these are the masks or could be compared to the wizard of Oz style curtains, where the predator hides. I detected it, but I did not see it "full body". He resists being fully observed, he does not want to lose control. Then it happened again another day but with less intensity. I think the shock of bringing him out into the light of consciousness took some of the strength out of him, but I have to be careful, because something wounded can be dangerous. He is going to defend himself more strongly fearing for his existence. I don't plan to run away, I plan to confront it, because if I don't, I would be blocking the path of essence.
On the other hand, I experience a lot of nostalgia. I don't know to what, it's just there, therefore, dive into it to experience it. I don't resist. Another feeling that accompanies me is similar to being four or five years old again, that is, the feeling of being in that early childhood feeling. It's a warm, peaceful feeling.
From what I can appreciate, there is something like a "roller coaster of emotions" and as Chu says, it's like a fractal. We don't circle back to the same place, but it has an incremental movement, and there is always some new aspect revealing itself to our awareness. And every movement we make, is exponential growth.
Laura said:
"...stirring the pot until it boils...". If you're lucky, you will achieve something.... 
