Am I who you think I am?

[silent thunder]

I experience living from the center of my own awareness.  (galactic non-personality based experiences not included)

 

As such, within the mundane, my view of others can come into a kind of relative and clearish focus and I readily see the thorn in my buddie's eye, while my take on myself and the log in my own eye... is often skewed out of focus, due to the fishbowl like lensing of my perceptual conditioned framework that arises from within my own coccoon of awareness.

 

This is why I cultivate close relationships and am very open regarding my reactions to things and share often and authentically (perhaps too much) with those close to me.  It is through their reactions and through their checking in (and particularly those whom I consider 'qualified observers') that I can come to garner a more whole notion of how i appear to others.

 

It's what I loved about acting.  And why we have Directors of theater, film, dance, etc.  The Director is the outside eye that sees the process of each actor and reaches out to fine tune what is shared.  Often in my theater days, I would be experiencing something deep and profound within my own mind and body, yet what was being conveyed to the audience, what was coming 'out of my instrument' was not matching what I was experiencing internally.  The two tales did not always match.

 

The Director with their outside eye on the whole show... helps the actors to refine their sharing, so what comes out, matches what is occuring within.

 

Spiritual pursuit for me is akin to finding and crafting the Internal Director.  Master Wang talked about sitting for long enough and eventually the "Inner Teacher" would arise and appear. 

 

But my inner director is still playing second seat to my most trusted and intimate qualified observers... some of whom are on this very board.

 

Sharing has taken on more importance these last seven years in particular.  The loss of my parents and too many friends to want to count at the moment, has driven home the power of sharing.

 

When I share my grief, it lessens.  When I share my love, it expands.

When my friends share their responses to my reactions, I get a glimpse of how I appear to them.

 

This sharing often feels like a wounding, the vulnerability sensation can be overwhelming.  But having qualified observers close is the antidote to that poisonous tendency for me. 

 

 

[manitou]

I find sharing personal things liberating too.  If we are able to see an undesirable trait within ourselves, we are no longer 'that'.  The separation from the undesirable trait has begun.  And as to others seeing our shadows?  Why should it matter?  What can anyone do to harm us in an anonymous forum?  If someone else can see an undesirable trait within us, that means they have the trait as well, or they wouldn't be able to see it.  I think we really fear only one thing - what someone else will think of us.  Or...what we will find if we go into our own conditioning and personality.

  Those of us who were 12 steppers know the liberation of sharing with another our foibles.   And when we really find what we are looking for - and the realization of unity has occurred - it happens that there is nothing to fear.  The Christ Consciousness (known by lots of different names) does not fear.  It loves.  I'm not sure it can do both at the same time.

[Iskote]

Steve, you might just as well ask if reality is even close to what each individual thinks it is... 

The picture we each have in our mind regarding most anything, is likely, more often than not, to be quite significantly different than the actual reality, assuming there actually is some underlying reasonably stable reality there at all...  

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 2020 by Iskote

[Limahong]

2 hours ago, Iskote said:

The picture we each have in our mind regarding most anything, is likely, more often than not, to be quite significantly different than the actual reality, assuming there actually is some underlying reasonably stable reality there at all...

 

Good morning Iskote,

 

Reality lies in sunrise and sunset... and in between...?

 

 

 

If yes ~ where are we? 

 

Actually/reasonably/stably/... anchored to reality?

 

- Anand

 

 

Edited August 26, 2020 by Limahong
Enhancement

[Zork]

12 hours ago, steve said:

 

Curiosity has nothing to offer a Buddhist practitioner? I’ll have to disagree again. Different strokes perhaps.

Curiosity for the illusionary world is a dire form of clinging that will keep you rebirthing here for hundreds if not thousands of times. So you can disagree as much as you want, the thing is, you aren't going anywhere with this mindset.

[Zork]

12 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

 

It´s not you, it´s me.  I´m biased against a certain kind of very intellectual spiritual conversation common on the forum, especially among those who aspire towards the non-dual.  Sometimes these discussions feel overly abstracted, cut off from real life, contentious and critical.  So when someone shares some aspect of their actual lived experience and the response is that "it won´t help in achieving non-duality"...when that happens I cringe a little.

 

But perhaps others find it useful?

What is your ultimate goal then?

Achieving non-duality and realising the world is illusory is a goal for buddhist so as to eventually free themselves from rebirth. Yours may differ. Since Steve is a supposed buddhist i assume that he actively tries to achieve it.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Zork

[Cleansox]

I would guess that a practitioner who aims for nondual awareness tries to experience "reality" as simultaneously transcendent and immanent, and while in the process of understanding this it is useful to practice one without the other. 

 

And using other persons view of ones reactions instead of only introspection can be useful, and it also gives one the option of handling ones reaction to others view, which is useful if one can handle it. 

 

And, for sure, in some occasions it is a sign of not having boundaries and being a sucker for punishment. 

 

Pick one, both are valid options. 

[Zork]

35 minutes ago, Cleansox said:

And using other persons view of ones reactions instead of only introspection can be useful, and it also gives one the option of handling ones reaction to others view, which is useful if one can handle it. 

It isn't useful. Give us an example of someone doing that and reaching enlightenment.

Compassion is a different thing than trying to be in someone else's shoes.

[steve]

5 hours ago, Zork said:

Curiosity for the illusionary world is a dire form of clinging that will keep you rebirthing here for hundreds if not thousands of times. So you can disagree as much as you want, the thing is, you aren't going anywhere with this mindset.

 

Are you willing to share anything about your own practice?

And how you work with the things you experience like thoughts, emotions, ideas?

[steve]

12 hours ago, Iskote said:

Steve, you might just as well ask if reality is even close to what each individual thinks it is... 

The picture we each have in our mind regarding most anything, is likely, more often than not, to be quite significantly different than the actual reality, assuming there actually is some underlying reasonably stable reality there at all...  

 

I know the answer to that question... no.

Whatever we think reality is, it's not that.
Our thoughts are never very far from it but they are not it.

Reality or perhaps truth, is something we can't capture in words or concepts.

 

My point for starting this thread was far more mundane.

How do I interact with people when I am anonymous and using digital media as compared to how I interact in the flesh.

Can that tell me anything useful? Can it perhaps lead to clearer communication, less confrontation, less endless online bickering?

Perhaps not but it is simply something that interests me in this age of increasingly remote and digital communication.

[Cleansox]

5 hours ago, Zork said:

It isn't useful. Give us an example of someone doing that and reaching enlightenment.

Anyone with a teacher/mentor? 

[Iskote]

3 hours ago, steve said:

My point for starting this thread was far more mundane.

How do I interact with people when I am anonymous and using digital media as compared to how I interact in the flesh.

Can that tell me anything useful? Can it perhaps lead to clearer communication, less confrontation, less endless online bickering?

Perhaps not but it is simply something that interests me in this age of increasingly remote and digital communication.

 

From my perspective, you can't control how others will perceive things. People will form their own pictures in their mind no matter what, which may or may not be at all accurate to any given situation. We all have to work on improving our self in all sorts of ways, but we can't control at all if others misjudge us. As long as a person can honestly say to them self they have acted reasonably and appropriately in any given situation, that is all a person can do. How others may perceive things and react is not really much in our control. 

[forestofemptiness]

Your claims are not correct.

 

First, many Shravaka schools are realist schools, so they would not accept the proposition that the world is completely illusory. This is well-established in Abhidhamma/Abhidharma. Second, the first two of the classic seven factors of enlightenment are mindfulness (sati) and a keen investigation of dharmas (dhammavicaya) so curiosity of a part of Buddhism. In fact, I've had it expressly presented that way by several monks. 

 

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/piyadassi/wheel001.html

 

Buddhism is very broad. Please learn more about the tradition before presuming to guide practitioners (especially those who have actual living teachers). 

 

9 hours ago, Zork said:

Curiosity for the illusionary world is a dire form of clinging that will keep you rebirthing here for hundreds if not thousands of times. So you can disagree as much as you want, the thing is, you aren't going anywhere with this mindset.

 

[forestofemptiness]

Personally, I've never bought into the division between theory and practice, or thinking and experience. Thinking is an experience, isn't it? Feelings, colors, textures, and so on can all be a part of the mental landscape of thought. In addition, experience shapes thinking, and thinking shapes experience, at least from my point of view. I've never found the line or boundary between thoughts, feelings, energy, and perceptions. For me, all these this/that dichotomies tend to crumble. 

 

One thing I like about this forum is seeing the many displays of human expression. I used to want everyone to agree with me, but now I see that there is beauty in diversity. Imagine how boring rainbows, sunsets, and the autumn would be if they were one color. 

 

21 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

 

It´s not you, it´s me.  I´m biased against a certain kind of very intellectual spiritual conversation common on the forum, especially among those who aspire towards the non-dual.  Sometimes these discussions feel overly abstracted, cut off from real life, contentious and critical.  So when someone shares some aspect of their actual lived experience and the response is that "it won´t help in achieving non-duality"...when that happens I cringe a little.

 

But perhaps others find it useful?

 

[Daemon]

Although a feeling is clearly not a thought, is it?

 

☮️

 

[ilumairen]

10 hours ago, Zork said:

Curiosity for the illusionary world is a dire form of clinging that will keep you rebirthing here for hundreds if not thousands of times. So you can disagree as much as you want, the thing is, you aren't going anywhere with this mindset.

I would suggest curiosity has the potential to lead to a “lifting of the veil,” and recognition of emptiness. 

 

This side step you have taken is actually pertinent to me personally as I recently spent some time exploring my own curiosity as a form of attachment, and contemplated how it hinders the “transformation” aspect of my Dream Yoga practice.

[ilumairen]

35 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

Personally, I've never bought into the division between theory and practice, or thinking and experience. Thinking is an experience, isn't it? Feelings, colors, textures, and so on can all be a part of the mental landscape of thought. In addition, experience shapes thinking, and thinking shapes experience, at least from my point of view. I've never found the line or boundary between thoughts, feelings, energy, and perceptions. For me, all these this/that dichotomies tend to crumble. 

 

They are all filed under “vision” - rising and falling appearances (in my practices).

 

35 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

One thing I like about this forum is seeing the many displays of human expression. I used to want everyone to agree with me, but now I see that there is beauty in diversity. Imagine how boring rainbows, sunsets, and the autumn would be if they were one color. 

 

 

[liminal_luke]

On 26/8/2020 at 5:02 AM, steve said:

 

How do I interact with people when I am anonymous and using digital media as compared to how I interact in the flesh.

Can that tell me anything useful? Can it perhaps lead to clearer communication, less confrontation, less endless online bickering?

 

 

For me there´s a stark difference between my interactions in real life and on this forum.  On the forum, I´m all about putting forth a certain view of reality and then defending it when challenged.  I recently challenged the usefulness of Zork´s statement about achieving non-duality.  He quoted my reply and I´m tempted to reply back further hashing out my thinking about why I was right. Although I try to be polite, the format for "discussion" has more in common with a medieval duel than getting to know somebody.  

 

Am I like this in "real life?"  God no. In real life, I´m all about building relationships through conversation; I´m not so focused on convincing others of the rightness of my views.  In real life I´m much more receptive, more of a listener. I ask questions hoping to get others to express themselves.  People will oftentimes say something I disagree with and I won´t even voice my disagreement.     

Edited August 26, 2020 by liminal_luke

[moment]

On 8/25/2020 at 8:35 AM, steve said:

For most people, most of the time, the “I” is very real. I’m not yet to the point where it does not arise for me. Maybe someday but I’m not holding my breath.  It does not exist in the way it appears and feels but, from a Buddhist perspective, I think it is an error of negation to say there is no such thing. 

 

I disagree. I have found it useful in many ways for me. We all need different things at different times. Perhaps it’s not at all useful for you at this point in your life. I’ll accept that. 

 

I disagree on multiple levels. To keep it simple I’ll just say it can help show us the truth of the mind being the source of our unique experience of reality.

 

If I say something not intending to hurt anyone and the other person still feels offended, would you say their feeling is negated by my lack of intent?

 

Why not?

 

 

 

"We all need different things at different times."   (edited due to wordiness)

Edited August 26, 2020 by moment

[moment]

7 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

For me there´s a stark difference between my interactions in real life and on this forum.  On the forum, I´m all about putting forth a certain view of reality and then defending it when challenged.  I recently challenged the usefulness of Zork´s statement about achieving non-duality.  He quoted my reply and I´m tempted to reply back further hashing out my thinking about why I was right. Although I try to be polite, the format for "discussion" has more in common with a medieval duel than getting to know somebody.  

 

Am I like this in "real life?"  God no. In real life, I´m all about building relationships through conversation; I´m not so focused on convincing others of the rightness of my views.  In real life I´m much more receptive, more of a listener. I ask questions hoping to get others to express themselves.  People will oftentimes say something I disagree with and I won´t even voice my disagreement.     

 

"I´m all about building relationships through conversation; I´m not so focused on convincing others of the rightness of my views."  You do well with that here too.

[ilumairen]

10 hours ago, Zork said:

What is your ultimate goal then?

Achieving non-duality and realising the world is illusory is a goal for buddhist so as to eventually free themselves from rebirth. Yours may differ. Since Steve is a supposed buddhist i assume that he actively tries to achieve it.

May I ask what the word illusory means to you?

[forestofemptiness]

I'm not sure how to even phrase my question:

 

What do you think about it? or 

How do you feel about it? or

How do you see it?

 

 

1 hour ago, Daemon said:

Although a feeling is clearly not a thought, is it?

 

☮️

 

 

[steve]

1 hour ago, Iskote said:

 

From my perspective, you can't control how others will perceive things. People will form their own pictures in their mind no matter what, which may or may not be at all accurate to any given situation. We all have to work on improving our self in all sorts of ways, but we can't control at all if others misjudge us. As long as a person can honestly say to them self they have acted reasonably and appropriately in any given situation, that is all a person can do. How others may perceive things and react is not really much in our control. 

 

I share your perspective on this.

The tricky thing is how to know whose perspective is accurate? Each of us essentially creates our own reality.

 

[rex]

Am I who you think I am?

A different version of you exists in the mind of each person that knows you.

[Not my idea, just something I picked up.]

 

 

 

 

[ilumairen]

4 minutes ago, steve said:

 

I share your perspective on this.

The tricky thing is how to know whose perspective is accurate?

 

No one’s perspective will be wholly accurate..

 

4 minutes ago, steve said:

 

 Each of us essentially creates our own reality.

 

And casts ourselves and others into limiting (and sometimes inaccurate) roles (particularly the shadow aspects we have not yet found means to integrate and/or release)...