Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

A place for anything that doesn't fit into the existing forums
User avatar
Rob X
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by Rob X » Thu May 01, 2014 3:33 pm

peas wrote:In the state of consciousness we call presence, roles are no longer created at all in the mind. Roles are non-existent.
In his talks and writings ET tells us "…and then I became a spiritual teacher." In the strictly first-person, present moment by moment perspective there is no teacher. But ET is speaking from an objective perspective, engaging in a narrative - as we do on forums.

In spirituality the first-person, moment by moment perspective is, of course, central. But on its own it can be misleading. Imagine that someone with the early onset of cancer visits a spiritual teacher. They are told, right now in this moment to moment present awareness there is no cancer. Is that accurate or helpful? Roles or identities may not always be perceived as such in present awareness - it doesn't necessarily mean they are not there, it means that they are not detected. To not know the difference is a poor grasp of epistemology.

Anyway, don't get hung up on the word 'role', I can see that it has connotations that might mislead. This is not about the conscious adoption of roles its more to do with how secondary identities are subtle and pervasive in the world of everyday transactions.

Even now as you read this you have a subtle (and probably largely unconscious) identification with a point of view - without it you wouldn't be able to disagree or make your point.

Phil2
Posts: 1379
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by Phil2 » Thu May 01, 2014 9:42 pm

Rob X wrote:
Phil2 wrote:
Rob X wrote: We can further think of ET's commitment to a New Earth. The Dalai Lama's commitment to peace. The charity of Mother Teresa. Ghandi's commitment to non-violence. The compassion of Buddhists and so on.
Well I think there is a big difference between the commitment of a football player for his score, and the commitment of Dalai Lama or Buddha for peace and compassion.

The football player commits himself to a 'result' and he must act for it, 'do' something with many efforts ...

While committing yourself to peace and compassion requires no action and no effort ... just quietness ...
Yes, good point Phil, there is a difference. The commonality is that they are both committed to a preferred outcome.
Well I would not even say that, a genuine sage is not 'committed' to any result ... he just does what is right in the moment, he does not act out of thought ... he does not project a future result, he remains in the now ... hence it can not even be said that the sage 'does' something, because there is no 'doer', things just happen rightly, without thought ... without creating any 'expectation' or 'intention' ...
"What irritates us about others is an opportunity to learn on ourselves"
(Carl Jung)

User avatar
smiileyjen101
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by smiileyjen101 » Fri May 02, 2014 4:48 am

While committing yourself to peace and compassion requires no action and no effort ... just quietness ...
Phil2
Maybe in 'committing yourself' to peace and compassion - but not if one is enacting it in relative experience.

And yes, I get that it flows on a power source, but it is not always quiet, actionless or effortless, even in holding your commitment in the unfolding of it. It is often tumultuous, and wherein thinking you have your commitment may lay on a bed of peace and no action in meditations and theory, the actions flowing from it in practice (practical application) are not without thought and neither would it be wise.

In recent times think Ghandi, think Mandela and Desmond Tutu, think the Dalai Lama, think the young man that stood in front of the tank in Tiananmen Square, think East Timor's independence leader Xanana Gusmão and Bishop Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo and José Ramos-Horta, the latter two leading East Timorese activists for peace and independence, received the Nobel Peace Prize for ""their work towards a just and peaceful solution to the conflict in East Timor" while the former served his time in prison.

A commitment to peace and compassion isn't just a head-space thing, it's a way of being, often willingly, awarely and capably being an instrument of them.

such as the Dalai Lama recognises, such as Jesus is reported to have recognised, and just as anyone who has the commitment to choose love and compassion over fear it's not enough to say or think a commitment, one traverses being it, allowing it, choosing it and applying it.

The practice of compassion then is practical application of it ----
"My message is the practice of compassion, love and kindness. These things are very useful in our daily life, and also for the whole of human society these practices can be very important.

"Basically, universal responsibility is the feeling for other people's suffering just as we feel our own. It is the realization that even our own enemy is motivated by the quest for happiness. We must recognize that all beings want the same thing we want. This is the way to achieve a true understanding, unfettered by artificial consideration.

"At the heart of Buddhist philosophy is the notion of compassion for others. It should be noted that the compassion encouraged by Mahayana Buddhism is not the usual love one has for friends or family. The love being advocated here is the kind one can have even for another who has done one harm. Developing a kind heart does not always involve any of the sentimental religiosity normally associated with it. It is not just for people who believe in religions; it is for everyone who considers himself or herself to be a member of the human family, and thus sees things in accordingly large terms.


"The rationale for universal compassion is based on the same principle of spiritual democracy. It is the recognition of the fact that every living being has an equal right to and desire for happiness. The true acceptance of the principle of democracy requires that we think and act in terms of the common good. Compassion and universal responsibility require a commitment to personal sacrifice and the neglect of egotistical desires.

"I believe our every-day experience confirms that a self-centred attitude towards problems can be destructive not only towards society, but to the individual as well. Selfishness does not solve problems for us, it multiplies them. Accepting responsibility and maintaining respect for other will leave all concerned at peace.

His Holiness the Dalai Lama speech on compassion.
http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlspeech.html
HHDL doesn't just think it quietly, oh no he speaks it too, and enacts it, passionately, humanly and powerfully.

In terms of the 'role' aspects I noted during the Dalai Lama's visit that there is an energetic difference in being the instrument (in a role) to thinking you are the role. I wrote while sharing my experiences about volunteering on his tour
imho (and while not a Buddhist I do have to bow my head in reverence at this)
- He takes his responsibilities very seriously, but his 'role' not at all seriously.

http://eckhart-tolle-forum.inner-growth ... Dalai+Lama
Again I don't think this is something one can understand from outside of it. One can only know when they are being it and learn to feel the resonance of the truth or untruth of it.

My relationship with my children for instance, yes I say 'my children' as a biological pointer, but I never held in truth that their reason for being and experiencing had/has anything to do with me other than I had willingly shared my body with them in their pursuit of life in human form, and that we chose or were destined or by design or by accident (who knows?) to spend time in each other's experiences. I am blessed and grateful that we did and do, and can not for the life of me feel cheated by life, or ravaged beyond my capacity and willingness by or in sharing their experiences (although absolutely it felt / feels like it at times!!)

I do notice those who resist the realities of another tend to overstep out of their own awareness, capacity and willingness in a situation, and this can happen if one takes the 'roles' more seriously than the responsibilities that come with/by/through the role.

I saw/see my responsibility in being a parent as very different, my child/ren's relationship with me does not define me, and nor does their relationship with me define them. If we truly respect that we are all on different paths of experience, then judging the experience of another becomes mute.

To do this can create suffering by attachment to the role in which one is not the primary 'player'.

In the other topic I mentioned the why? why me? why this? as being equal to 'why not?' 'why not you?' 'why not this?'
I have noticed those who take their 'roles' seriously, more seriously than the natural responsibilities of them, tend to project these notions of suffering onto their children, partners, parents, others close in relationship pertaining to their roles.

There's something very personal and fragile about this perspective, when one takes offence on behalf of another one is creating an offence against them in a way, overstepping the line between them. It shows a limited awareness, capacity and willingness to let others experience life as they would or do, rather than how we would have them do.

The constant in compassion is love - be here in love, or go with love, act in love, or don't act in love, it matters not what is chosen in love, compassion will be right there with it.
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen
http://www.balancinginfluences.com

User avatar
smiileyjen101
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by smiileyjen101 » Fri May 02, 2014 4:50 am

Jen said: Therefore you cannot be 'sure that after the fact' ... of anything in another's experience, and even what we do in response ourself is a mystery until it happens.

Rob said: This is, of course, true - and I think that I knew that as I wrote it.
ah but did you believe your self or the perspective that was flowing to support itself? :wink:
Rob said: I certainly can't begin to comprehend the magnitude of your suffering - and I apologise for my imagery if it sparked a memory.
Namaste Rob, the imagery does no harm, no thing to apologise for, it was merely an opening for this opportunity to interact at this level of acceptance in awareness. That you have not only embraced the notion that one cannot 'imagine' with any accuracy with such compassion and respect, but also displayed and enacted it - is ... yum :D

With this as the bed of understanding I can share with you that it is likely that my suffering has been both better and worse than anyone can, or indeed have need of, imagining. The gift of my son's experiences in my life gave me immense and bountiful love in absolute awareness, sharing the fruits of that in every moment since means that there are no regrets, no thing to forgive, no thing to bemoan, although yes things to endure and reconcile. Without doubt I am blessed beyond measure, in a really powerful and yet humble and yet powerful (lol) way in being love and compassion.

As with any 'endurance' activities, what doesn't kill you does make you stronger.
If we give our heart without expecting anything in return, there is no thing to suffer over.
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen
http://www.balancinginfluences.com

Phil2
Posts: 1379
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by Phil2 » Fri May 02, 2014 11:00 am

smiileyjen101 wrote: His Holiness the Dalai Lama speech on compassion.
http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlspeech.html
Yes compassion for all, not only for your 'friends' ... when there is such compassion the dichotomy 'friends/enemies' even disappears ... thanks for this beautiful excerpt :-)

smiileyjen101 wrote: In terms of the 'role' aspects I noted during the Dalai Lama's visit that there is an energetic difference in being the instrument (in a role) to thinking you are the role. I wrote while sharing my experiences about volunteering on his tour
imho (and while not a Buddhist I do have to bow my head in reverence at this)
- He takes his responsibilities very seriously, but his 'role' not at all seriously.

http://eckhart-tolle-forum.inner-growth ... Dalai+Lama
Yes, once again it is like a theatre actor : his reponsibility is to play his role correctly, but no one asks the actor to really suffer when he plays the loss of his loved one or when dying on the stage ... there is no identification with the role ... no identity in it ...
"What irritates us about others is an opportunity to learn on ourselves"
(Carl Jung)

User avatar
Rob X
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by Rob X » Fri May 02, 2014 1:16 pm

Phil2 wrote:Well I would not even say that, a genuine sage is not 'committed' to any result ... he just does what is right in the moment, he does not act out of thought ... he does not project a future result, he remains in the now ... hence it can not even be said that the sage 'does' something, because there is no 'doer', things just happen rightly, without thought ... without creating any 'expectation' or 'intention' ...
Realisation or no realisation, there never were any doers - so that's beside the point. The mechanism for (let's say) driving to a venue obviously involves some level of commitment, planning and thought. You could say that commitment, planning and thinking just happen - the impersonal play of Source.

Although so-called sages are not lost in layers of unnecessary narrative thought and they are attentive to the unfolding present - they still make space for planning, thinking over issues, making commitments to important projects etc. Many 'sages' lead 'normal' lives; they have careers, families, children, relationships (sometimes messy).

The key is that they are not lost in identification with thought forms. Even when involved with secondary projects, they never lose sight of their primary identity.

User avatar
KathleenBrugger
Posts: 604
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 5:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by KathleenBrugger » Fri May 02, 2014 8:17 pm

Phil2 wrote: Yes, once again it is like a theatre actor : his reponsibility is to play his role correctly, but no one asks the actor to really suffer when he plays the loss of his loved one or when dying on the stage ... there is no identification with the role ... no identity in it ...
I keep thinking of a Blackadder episode where the idiot Prince George doesn't understand that plays aren't real; he believes that an actor killed on stage is really dead. There's a couple of scenes that show this, in one Blackadder says about the Prince: "He loves the theater. The problem is he doesn't know it's made up. Last year when Brutus was about to kill Julius Caesar, the Prince yelled out 'Look behind you Mr. Caesar!'"
(at about 00:50 in). Watch also at 2:00 - 3:00 when the Prince is at the theater.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-5NJS0EEUU
We are ALL Innocent by Reason of Insanity
http://kathleenbrugger.blogspot.com/

User avatar
smiileyjen101
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by smiileyjen101 » Sat May 03, 2014 2:46 am

(at about 00:50 in). Watch also at 2:00 - 3:00 when the Prince is at the theater.
:lol: Oh, I say, that's very clever

- some watching it might be convinced that the Prince believed it :lol:

Holographic universe?
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen
http://www.balancinginfluences.com

peas
Posts: 389
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 3:42 pm

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by peas » Wed Jun 18, 2014 8:31 am

Rob X wrote:
peas wrote:In the state of consciousness we call presence, roles are no longer created at all in the mind. Roles are non-existent.
In his talks and writings ET tells us "…and then I became a spiritual teacher." In the strictly first-person, present moment by moment perspective there is no teacher. But ET is speaking from an objective perspective, engaging in a narrative - as we do on forums.
Quite the contrary, he is speaking from the relative, the ever moving, non-objective perspective that is the only place to speak of functions (he is not speaking of roles, but functions). In an absolute sense, there is no difference between teaching people spiritual matters (which is just pointing to the unpointable) and collecting people's trash. To even label it as spiritual teaching is to be relative.
Rob X wrote:In spirituality the first-person, moment by moment perspective is, of course, central.
What is spirituality? It is no different to cooking. In all things there is no centre. It is the mind that likes to centre itself on something secure. There is just letting go of all. As the Zen saying goes, "Don't bother seeking the truth, just drop all opinions."
Rob X wrote:Even now as you read this you have a subtle (and probably largely unconscious) identification with a point of view - without it you wouldn't be able to disagree or make your point.
I read with no thought, just awareness. That is impossible to grasp, until you experience it.

User avatar
Rob X
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by Rob X » Thu Jun 19, 2014 3:06 pm

peas wrote:I read with no thought, just awareness.


I very much doubt this. Sure, you read from the spaciousness of awareness. But in order to process what is presented in printed form, the language, syntax, meaning etc., mentation is required.

Further to that, a subtle perspective on what you have read may well arise. It obviously did in your case along the lines of "…he is suggesting that I have a point of view… well that's not true, I read with no thought…"
peas wrote:That is impossible to grasp, until you experience it.
Well… let us know if you ever do. :D

User avatar
smiileyjen101
Posts: 3757
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 3:44 am

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by smiileyjen101 » Fri Jun 20, 2014 2:02 am

Grace.
Our rights start deep within our humanity; they end where another's begin~~ SmileyJen
http://www.balancinginfluences.com

peas
Posts: 389
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2013 3:42 pm

Re: Commitment (End of Suffering PT 2)

Post by peas » Fri Jun 20, 2014 6:15 am

Rob X wrote:
peas wrote:I read with no thought, just awareness.


I very much doubt this. Sure, you read from the spaciousness of awareness. But in order to process what is presented in printed form, the language, syntax, meaning etc., mentation is required.

Further to that, a subtle perspective on what you have read may well arise. It obviously did in your case along the lines of "…he is suggesting that I have a point of view… well that's not true, I read with no thought…"
peas wrote:That is impossible to grasp, until you experience it.
Well… let us know if you ever do. :D
It's ok to doubt. Are you able to explore without an outward focus on me? That is where the heart of the matter lies - inward attention.

Post Reply