The Lying

[Eongar]

Well Lucas, as Talleriand said, the man was given the language to disguise his thoughts. And it is largely true. That phrase is a good way to define the concept of lying. People in general we lie to ourselves so that life more comfortable. If you lie to us from outside ourselves about what reality is like, imagine what is lying to oneself. Also, to loop the loop, we have "caps" automated so that this contradictory lie that is itself the ego take its course. "The world is ruled by lies."

The essential thing is honesty, humility, of course. We recognize the failure that initially is essential. Pull everything we thought until now to make the house back is the most important things we can do to start down. The vanity of the ego is what makes it tricky. All of these mental structures, those family, social, etc. are pushing us to nowhere.We must have the will and commit oneself to work.


Bueno Lucas, como dijo Talleriand, al hombre le fue dado el lenguaje para disimular los pensamientos. Y en gran medida es cierto. Ésa frase es una buena forma de definir el concepto de la mentira. Las personas en general nos mentimos a nosotros mismos para que la vida nos resulte más cómoda. Si ya nos mienten desde fuera de nosotros mismos sobre cómo es la realidad, imagínese lo que es mentirse a uno mismo. Y además, para rizar el rizo, tenemos "topes" automatizados para que esta contradictoria mentira que es de por sí el ego siga su curso. "El mundo está regido por la mentira".

Lo esencial es la honestidad, la humildad, por supuesto. Reconocer el fracaso que somos en un inicio es esencial. Tirar todo lo que creíamos hasta ahora para poder hacer la casa de nuevo es de las cosas más importantes que podemos hacer para comenzar a andar. Es la vanidad del ego lo que lo convierte en algo complicado. Todas esas estructuras mentales, esos condicionamientos familiares, sociales, etc. son los que nos empujan hacia ningún sitio. Hay que tener voluntad y comprometerse con uno mismo para trabajar.

 

[luke wilson]

I want to know, how does one not make assumptions about others??

Luke, I have a problem in being too simplistic. Perhaps to begin with is to not concern yourself about others until you know yourself. My experience is as I learn of myself, I am able recognize others. Do you know when you lie? Maybe start there. I was taught to think before I speak. This took and still takes practice.

Thanks for the reply. I think I know when I lie, atleast to other people. This is easy to spot because most of the time it's conscious, sometimes I can see it coming and sometimes I only notice after the fact and then usually I ask myself, "why did I just lie? Surely the truth would have sufficed." I havent been able to stop this yet. I have done abit of thinking about this and I think the main reason I lie to other people when I do lie, this lies that I like to call 'automatic lies,' that just happen without thought almost as a reaction is because I am afraid of letting people know me so I hide behind lies or false impressions. I suppose the 1st thing to deal with is, why am I afraid to let people know me?? why does one feel the need to hide behind false impressions?? In this respect atleast I am not lying to myself and I am starting to deal with the issue atleast by acknowledging it exists which is progress.

Interms of deep seated lies to oneself, well I dont really know what they are and how to discover what they are. You say that the 1st order of business is to discover myself. Well the only aspect of 'myself' that I know is what I have known since birth and has evolved through the different experiences I have had until this point in my life. The essay 'first initiation' says that one should tell themselves that they lie to themselves constantly always. Ok, this is hard to fathom and even if I am prepared to agree with it, how do I go about seeking the truth about myself that lies within myself underneath all the lies I tell myself constantly ie. how do I start to know myself? and how do I know that I am not lying to myself about myself when I start to think that I am beginning to know myself?

EDIT:Removed unnecessary portion.

 

[Buddy]

Interms of deep seated lies to oneself, well I dont really know what they are and how to discover what they are. You say that the 1st order of business is to discover myself. Well the only aspect of 'myself' that I know is what I have known since birth and has evolved through the different experiences I have had until this point in my life. The essay 'first initiation' says that one should tell themselves that they lie to themselves constantly always. Ok, this is hard to fathom and even if I am prepared to agree with it, how do I go about seeking the truth about myself that lies within myself underneath all the lies I tell myself constantly ie. how do I start to know myself? and how do I know that I am not lying to myself about myself when I start to think that I am beginning to know myself?

I might be able to help a bit, but with regard to the essay 'First Initiation', there's only so much anyone can say. I believe Mme Salzmann is trying to reach the reader's Real Self for the purposes of encouraging an inner realization. That's not something anyone can give to another. It has to be earned by paying with your own efforts.

In fact, it's probably safe to say that you did read the essay but you did not understand it, as I will explain in a moment. And the dynamic that explains how this is possible, might be the same as what Gurdjieff referred to in a conversation with Ouspensky:

[Ouspensky]:
In the course of one of our talks I asked G.:
"What, in your opinion, is the best preparation for the study of your method? For instance, is it useful to study what is called 'occult' or 'mystical' literature?"
In saying this I had in mind more particularly the "Tarot" and the literature on the "Tarot."
"Yes," said G. "A great deal can be found by reading. For instance, take yourself: you might already know a great deal if you knew how to read. I mean that, if you understood everything you have read in your life, you would already know what you are looking for now. If you understood everything you have written in your own book, what is it called?"—he made something altogether impossible out of the words "Tertium Organum"—"I should come and bow down to you and beg you to teach me. But you do not understand either what you read or what you write. You do not even understand what the word 'understand' means. Yet understanding is essential, and reading can be useful only if you understand what you read.
ISOTM, p.27

You said:

The essay 'first initiation' says that one should tell themselves that they lie to themselves constantly always.

That's not an accurate representation, is it? Is there any way you could make a more accurate statement of the essay? If your statement is true then you can dismiss the essay as contradictory nonsense, because for a person who lies continuously to tell himself that he lies does not help him much, does it? How would he know that that wasn't a lie?


In my view, the purpose of the essay is to reach you on a level where 'inner realization' can take place. For a subject matter as serious as this Work, sometimes a point cannot be made by dripping in one idea at a time or taking a very gentle manner. People will just categorize and dismiss everything said, word-by-word, and then sit back and smirk at their success. No, if you consider the subject matter of the essay you might see that with some things, 'pulling no punches' is the only way to get past the automatic denials in most people (when there is any chance at all), OSIT.

So, you read the essay but it seems you didn't understand it. Perhaps the internal dialog was running the show. Instead of realizing, feeling, comprehending deeply, you simply told yourself what she said. The chatterbox we can call the internal dialog stands in the way of the full visceral experience of "getting it" that is possible when we can understand without having to tell ourselves a story about what's going on. To "get it", sometimes we have to step out of our heads and into the space between the words so that we can 'feel' the relationship between them. This has been my experience, anyway, as weird as it may seem.

If you are at the point where you are really struggling with this issue, then you might benefit from an exercise I did at the same time I was going through this.

While you are reading this post, you are concentrating on the screen and the words and so forth. You are aware of what you are focusing on. But are you also aware that you are aware of what you are doing? Do you still have a peripheral awareness that stays with you, even when you are focused on something? An awareness of the space around you, how your body is positioned and what your purpose is at the moment? Or did it just now "turn on"?

Only since I've been studying a lot of neuro-science papers have I come to realize that some people completely lose their overview awareness when they get tightly focused (assuming they really have it to begin with). And some seem to have a hard time coming out of focused attention when they are done with their task.

When I have some heavy issues to deal with I need to take a break and get out of my head from time to time. If you need to do this too, then just immediately become aware of the boundaries, or limits, of your awareness. Notice how far you can see. See your body in it's proper relationship to the elements of the environment around you. Pay attention to all your senses.

When you walk into a store (for example), first establish your boundaries by noticing the walls, what's on the walls, the colors and patterns of the decorations, any themes that suggest themselves from the patterns you see. Then, once you're aware of the limits of your perception, see your body moving around in that space in relationship with every other element in that store, which is in relationship to the fixed walls (to whatever extent you can).

We're not talking excursions to the ceiling here. :) You're still seeing through your eyes, you are just expanding your sense of self to include everything around you.

If this is new to you, just try it. Notice whether or not you get detached from negative thought loops and feel more like your 'Real' self.

Hope this helps. :)

 

[Laura]

I've collected several of our threads about lying, lies and liars into one and it makes interesting reading.
http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=796.0

 

[truth seeker]

Interms of deep seated lies to oneself, well I dont really know what they are and how to discover what they are.

If I remember correctly, you said in one of your previous threads that others were judging you. I believe you realized at one point that you were judging others. The lie in this context is in believing that you were nonjudgmental. This is an example of the lies we tell ourselves. We subscribe to a belief about who it is that we "think" we are and place "negative" qualities on others without considering whether or not it may apply to us.

When we first begin to realize this, it can be quite shocking to see how we have hurt others.

One way to begin to discover the lies we tell ourselves is to observe that we say to or think about other people. One of the issues you have brought up concerns thoughts about women. What are the assumptions you make? Try and turn it around and say to yourself "Does this apply to me?". Do I act in ways that are superficial? Something along those lines. Start with something big/obvious. From there, you may be able to start seeing the more insidious lies. What really bugs you about people? Does that apply to you?

Hope that helps a bit. :)

 

[luke wilson]

I have tried finding the essay "First Initiation written by Mme Jeanne de Salzmann" but the link "_http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=16426.msg141216#msg141216" doesnt work anymore so I cant find it. Anyways, what I thought about that part about lies is that it meant we should start from a position where we question everything we have told ourselves because they could aswell be lies as we would have no way of really knowing what constituted a lie or a truth about oneself without self-examination which is something maybe most people dont do to the extent of questioning deep rooted assumptions they hold about themselves? Maybe I took it to literally, maybe I completely misunderstood? might explain a problem I have been experiencing which is lack of deep internal realization despite taking the time to do the reading and trying to keep an open mind. Also a reason why I had my posting privledges revocked. Well, maybe it just isnt my time yet, I think I might have to do the whole 300,000 year stint again because I keep falling short. Frustrating!

Interms of deep seated lies to oneself, well I dont really know what they are and how to discover what they are.

If I remember correctly, you said in one of your previous threads that others were judging you. I believe you realized at one point that you were judging others. The lie in this context is in believing that you were nonjudgmental. This is an example of the lies we tell ourselves. We subscribe to a belief about who it is that we "think" we are and place "negative" qualities on others without considering whether or not it may apply to us.

When we first begin to realize this, it can be quite shocking to see how we have hurt others.

One way to begin to discover the lies we tell ourselves is to observe that we say to or think about other people. One of the issues you have brought up concerns thoughts about women. What are the assumptions you make? Try and turn it around and say to yourself "Does this apply to me?". Do I act in ways that are superficial? Something along those lines. Start with something big/obvious. From there, you may be able to start seeing the more insidious lies. What really bugs you about people? Does that apply to you?

Hope that helps a bit. :)

Oh, yah so an example of discovering lies one tells oneself is to look at what you think of other people and reflect it back to oneself. I think I read this somewhere, the passage went something like, peoples opinions about other people tell us more about the person holding the opinions rather than the person getting judged.

I have tried examining what opinions I might have about people and come to think about it I dont really have that much. However, I used to make sweeping statements/judgements/assumptions about girls eg. they are superficial, they are hard to understand, they are shallow to name the big obvious ones that stand out. I am sorry, I dont want to cause any offense to any girls/women reading this. To reflect this back at me, is it possible I am the superficial one, I am the one who is hard to understand and I am shallow aswell?? Trying to work through this, I think there is some evidence that I am superficial and shallow just by the mere fact that I thought this about the vast majority of the female population. Also maybe the reason I thought and still think girls are generally harder to understand than boys is because I am infact the one who is hard to understand??

How do you suggest one can begin to reconcile the differences? In this case, how can i stop being superficial, shallow and hard to understand? Infact, I am flabbergasted, if I am superficial and shallow, what the hell is deep and profound?? OMG!! I am all this negative things and what is worse is that this is how I have been all my life!! Walking around telling myself I wasnt superficial or shallow or not that particularly hard to understand!! This explains so much. Ontop of all these, I am a lie-aholic! I make judgements and assumptions all the time! I fall prey to prejudice! No wonder I have had disastrous relationships with girls all my life and generally find it hard to be-friend girls!! Maybe it's because they can easily see right through someone and notice the most obvious!

Also I have just realised that assumptions could be a form of judgement. So in this case I thought I was making progress in not making judgements but what had infact happened is the trickster that is the false personality wasnt able to connect assumptions to making judgements or maybe I am just plain stupid to not have seen it that way.

 

[Eongar]

I have tried examining what opinions I might have about people and come to think about it I dont really have that much. However, I used to make sweeping statements/judgements/assumptions about girls eg. they are superficial, they are hard to understand, they are shallow to name the big obvious ones that stand out. I am sorry, I dont want to cause any offense to any girls/women reading this. To reflect this back at me, is it possible I am the superficial one, I am the one who is hard to understand and I am shallow aswell?? Trying to work through this, I think there is some evidence that I am superficial and shallow just by the mere fact that I thought this about the vast majority of the female population. Also maybe the reason I thought and still think girls are generally harder to understand than boys is because I am infact the one who is hard to understand??

Obviously, thinking this is completely subjective and therefore, in my opinion, unrealistic. It's just a mindset, a program taught. Do not you realize this? Trials of this kind are always subjective, falsehoods, and these comments you made make clear that you are not aware of the false personality that dominates humans. This is already the subject of self-study for you.

 

[truth seeker]

There's been a bit of housekeeping being done on the forum with threads being merged. The First Initiation was one of them. It's here.

 

[obyvatel]

might explain a problem I have been experiencing which is lack of deep internal realization despite taking the time to do the reading and trying to keep an open mind. Also a reason why I had my posting privledges revocked. Well, maybe it just isnt my time yet, I think I might have to do the whole 300,000 year stint again because I keep falling short. Frustrating!

Hi Luke,
In my experience, deep internal realizations can take time to come. Reading can bring new ideas but they take time to sink in and reach a part of us which is not normally engaged in our daily activities. For this to happen one needs to be open. It is not only a matter of keeping an open mind in the sense that I accept the ideas to be possibly true. I need to apply these ideas in my life, see them in action inside me and not reject or dissociate from conclusions which are unpleasant. Without such experience which comes about with time, attention and practice, Work ideas like the ones in First Initiation would just become words touching the surface of our superficial existence.
To give an example,
[quote author=Bud]
In fact, it's probably safe to say that you did read the essay but you did not understand it
........
[quote author=ISOTM]
[Ouspensky]:
In the course of one of our talks I asked G.:
"What, in your opinion, is the best preparation for the study of your method? For instance, is it useful to study what is called 'occult' or 'mystical' literature?"
In saying this I had in mind more particularly the "Tarot" and the literature on the "Tarot."
"Yes," said G. "A great deal can be found by reading. For instance, take yourself: you might already know a great deal if you knew how to read. I mean that, if you understood everything you have read in your life, you would already know what you are looking for now. If you understood everything you have written in your own book, what is it called?"—he made something altogether impossible out of the words "Tertium Organum"—"I should come and bow down to you and beg you to teach me. But you do not understand either what you read or what you write. You do not even understand what the word 'understand' means. Yet understanding is essential, and reading can be useful only if you understand what you read.
ISOTM, p.27
[/quote]
[/quote]
To realize this, to feel this is quite disconcerting. To realize that in our present condition we do not understand what we read or write is an important step towards self knowledge. But let us look at only a couple of ways that we can deflect the force of these words. I am not implying that all these apply to you Luke - take this as a very small sample of what an internal dialogue may look like.
a) How does anybody who does not know me tell whether I understand something or not? How do I know that he/she understands what he/she is saying? The text logically implies that he/ she does not - so what is the point? It is all nonsense.
b) Ok so I do not understand - what do I do to understand right now? Can I read more books or ask what I should do?

(b) is a valid long-term approach , but if we try to gain instant gratification (instant understanding) as we are conditioned to do, in the short term it may still deflect the force of the words. Perhaps it is worthwhile to sit with this uncomfortable realization that I do not understand. Perhaps all I can "do" at present is to understand that I cannot do much about it. I can sit and let the frustration arise and watch it without letting it carry me away in thought loops ( I can do nothing, I am doomed etc etc) or move me into some physical action. I will be carried away initially, but I will try to come back gently without beating myself up every time. Maybe pipe breathing will help.
And if it is a realization that touches a chord inside me, I may try to apply it in different situations in my life. For example, when I write something, I may try to gain a better understanding of what I am writing. I may look up word meanings from a dictionary to see whether the word really conveys my intention etc. Or I may contemplate more about some words that I use frequently. As far as I understand, deep internal realization is a process and not a "I got it or not" situation. The process is slow and not pretty or easy. To read that I may be a "machine" is one thing, to feel my mechanicalness and keep seeing it as it arises throughout the day is a different experience. That is why it is Work.
fwiw

 

[obyvatel]

Lying

I found this account from morality researcher Jonathan Haidt relevant to this topic.

[quote author=Jonathan Haidt]
On February 3, 2007, shortly before lunch, I discovered that I was a chronic liar. I was at home, writing a review article on moral psychology, when my wife, Jayne, walked by my desk. In passing, she asked me not to leave dirty dishes on the counter where she prepared our baby’s food. Her request was polite but its tone added a postscript: “As I have asked you a hundred times before.”

My mouth started moving before hers had stopped. Words came out. Those words linked themselves up to say something about the baby having woken up at the same time that our elderly dog barked to ask for a walk and I’m sorry but I just put my breakfast dishes down wherever I could. In my family, caring for a hungry baby and an incontinent dog is a surefire case, so I was acquitted.

Jayne left the room and I continued working. I was writing about the three basic principles of moral psychology. The first principle is Intuitions come first, Strategic reasoning second. That’s a six-word summary of the social intuitionist model…

So there I was at my desk, writing about how people automatically fabricate justifications of their gut feelings, when suddenly I realized that I had just done the same thing with my wife. I disliked being criticized, and I had felt a flash of negativity by the time Jayne had gotten to her third word (“Can you not…”). Even before I knew why she was criticizing me, I knew I disagreed with her (because intuitions come first). The instant I knew the content of the criticism (“…leave dirty dishes on the…”), my inner lawyer went to work searching for an excuse (strategic reasoning second). It’s true that I had eaten breakfast, given Max his first bottle, and let Andy out for his first walk, but these events had all happened at separate times. Only when my wife criticized me did I merge them into a composite image of a harried father with too few hands, and I created this fabrication by the time she had completed her one-sentence criticism (“…counter where I make baby food?”). I then lied so quickly and convincingly that my wife and I both believed me.
[/quote]

I have lied in this way in situations where I felt I was being accused . Like Haidt says, it is not a well-thought out deliberate process of creating a lie but an instantaneous fabrication composed of mostly factual contents. It is convincing because it is so spontaneous and is so filled with facts - but it is put together in a way that serves only self-interest and not truth.

 

[Palinurus]

Caught in the act! Interesting observation, almost a snapshot, very astute. Thank you for sharing this. Revealing...