The Warrior's Predicament

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Angela

I'm sorry, I don't understand. How does the concept of karma explain a lot that accentuates the dispassionate, indifferent, impersonal nature of existence? Why are those ways not easy to accept for you?

No, I said that karma explains a lot, but in a way that accentuates the impersonal nature of existence. To me it is bad enough that I am born into some random family, in some random socio-economic milieu, into some random belief system. But that I am also saddled with garbage from 'past lives' just gives me all the more to sort out, and without even the courtesy of knowing WTF it is I'm sorting. That is what I find difficult. I find it unkind and disrespectful of me. I have never understood why reincarnation or karma is appealing to people. To me, it's its own built-in hell. It increases, rather than decreases, the "unfairness" of life. It just doesn't seem helpful. I mean, thank god I at least was born into a halfway reasonable family and a rather excellent socio-economic situation, or I don't know WHAT I would have done.

To me, the absolute genius of Christianity is the hope of a cohesive, linear afterlife. It's a pity I don't buy that story anymore. It's the only part of that particular story that I really miss.

Originally Posted by Angela

What is it exactly that has you feeling like you're acting out a script written by someone else and being annoyed by that? Do you mean that you feel like your choices are being made for you? Or is it something else?

Mostly the fact that I have only uncertain and conflicting information about WTF is going on. Secondarily, that my present situation and many of the experiences that formed it were not at all of my choosing. In some areas of my life -- relatively unimportant ones to me -- I am enjoying abundance beyond my wildest dreams or ambitions. In others, the ones I deeply cared about, it's been one clusterf_ck after another. So no, I theoretically maintain my free agency in all things, but I have just grown weary of ramming my head into brick walls that I didn't construct and never suspected should even be there.

Originally Posted by Angela

I think that one of the most profound aspects of my Dopamine Superpower is that the more I let go of having fundamental, non-negotiable, absolutely-has-to-be-this-way conditions before I'm willing to be happy (peaceful, joyful, free), the more easily and quickly those qualities bubble up and flow into my life. I would say my feeling good has a lot more to do with letting go of stuff I don't need than trying to be something I'm not. The more I let go, the more room for feeling good. Once again, simple, but not necessarily easy!

So you are saying you simply will yourself to "be" happy independent of circumstances? Well I can at least manage (just barely at times) not to be pissed or resigned independent of circumstances. Perhaps that is progress of a sort.

I actually could agree with your statement if you would say that letting go of your hopes, dreams and aspirations removed most suffering. It's the absence of a negative, to be sure. But I wouldn't call it a source of happiness.

I will say this, I am doing exactly and precisely what I prefer to do with my free time for the first time in my life. No compromises. And I choose to focus on What Works. My hobbies, avocations, and experimenting (successfully so far) with re-establishing some extended family relationships that have had to be neglected in recent years. Stuff like that. Right now it feels good not to have most of my life force expended on exercises in soul-crushing futility, even if what I spend my time on is less compelling than I might want it to be. From here, who knows, I may be able to branch out into actual joy-joy feelings somehow. Stay tuned.

--Bob

[Angela]

Bob, regarding karma and the random, impersonal nature of existence, I'm lost as to why you would be holding both beliefs -- I mean, it seems like karma is a system of meaning, so it just doesn't fit into a random impersonal world view, and vice-versa. If you believe in karma, then you don't believe things are random, right?

Personally, I think the concept of karma is a lot like astrology -- it's fun, but it's hooey baloney. Except in this way: in this physical human life we're living, it seems to me that the same lesson keeps coming back until you learn it, and each time you don't learn it, the consequences become more dire. That does feel to me like "order" of some sort, but I can't (and don't need to) explain it. I reckon some people would attribute it to god or karma, or a universal law of some sort. I just don't know.

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

Mostly the fact that I have only uncertain and conflicting information about WTF is going on.

Yeah, I gotcha. Careening; operating blind. It definitely feels different when your perspective is that it's a fun, wild game (that sometimes hurts) than when you view it as out-of-control danger and pain. (Just two of an infinite number of ways to view it.)

So you are saying you simply will yourself to "be" happy independent of circumstances?

Yes, but not the way people normally say "will" -- like a hero in an action movie; you know, force and insistence. Rather, I mean "being dynamically willing" -- which means: noticing where I'm getting in my own way, being willing to let go of that, and noticing what's missing that would make a difference, and being willing to generate it.

Very often if I think I am unhappy and I dynamically will myself to deliberately guide my emotions, it doesn't end up at "happy" but rather something that inspires me even more. I could give you a couple of examples if you're interested but I won't jump into that in this post.

I actually could agree with your statement if you would say that letting go of your hopes, dreams and aspirations removed most suffering. It's the absence of a negative, to be sure. But I wouldn't call it a source of happiness.

Nahhh, too bad you won't be agreeing with me. I don't tend to let go of hopes, dreams, or aspirations, because I find those things a ton of fun. I do often find myself letting go of attachment to a particular outcome regarding hopes, dreams and aspirations. That is, I let go of thoughts that "I will feel bad if this doesn't go exactly as I envision it." There are just way too many possible outcomes that might be so much cooler than my puny little imagination can currently come up with, and I don't want to kill off possibilities just so's I can have my ducks line up the way I want 'em.

In this way, the absence of that negative opens up an infinite space where something positive can live and flourish.

From here, who knows, I may be able to branch out into actual joy-joy feelings somehow. Stay tuned.

--Bob

I am totally pulling for you!

Lots of love,
Angela

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I was wondering how much authenticity there is in taking possibility as reality?

That's a great question, Maguru! Would you like me to answer it, or was it a rhetorical jab?

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Angela

Bob, regarding karma and the random, impersonal nature of existence, I'm lost as to why you would be holding both beliefs -- I mean, it seems like karma is a system of meaning, so it just doesn't fit into a random impersonal world view, and vice-versa. If you believe in karma, then you don't believe things are random, right?

Karma is a system of imposed meaning. It is a set of "givens" from some unknown previous existence. Since you have no memory of your past lives then your karma might as well be someone else's. You can't take responsibility for something you aren't even aware of, just because some belief system says you must.

To me, Karma is just another contortion used to explain the inexplicable. We don't know why some people struggle under a cloud of doom and some people don't even understand what the problem is for that person. We don't know why life isn't fair, in other words. So Karma is a way to rationalize it. Another way to rationalize it is to displace the resolution of all such questions into some future life or heavenly existence.

Originally Posted by Angela

Personally, I think the concept of karma is a lot like astrology -- it's fun, but it's hooey baloney. Except in this way: in this physical human life we're living, it seems to me that the same lesson keeps coming back until you learn it, and each time you don't learn it, the consequences become more dire. That does feel to me like "order" of some sort, but I can't (and don't need to) explain it. I reckon some people would attribute it to god or karma, or a universal law of some sort. I just don't know.

That is the other aspect of such teachings. They are mythologizing a general observation about life and attempting to explain that which we have no business explaining until we have actual data to develop an explanation from. I can however agree with your general observation that there appears to be something about life that is inexorable and purposeful and seems to be sending some sort of message. In my experience, to oppose it is to get in the way of a steam roller that has no compunctions about running you down.

Originally Posted by Angela

Yeah, I gotcha. Careening; operating blind. It definitely feels different when your perspective is that it's a fun, wild game (that sometimes hurts) than when you view it as out-of-control danger and pain. (Just two of an infinite number of ways to view it.)

Did you ever see the movie Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? If so, the scene with the fly swatters chasing the protagonists across the desert is a pretty good metaphor for how I react to life. Some things I just can't rationalize as "fun" or "wild". I guess I just can't take a joke.

Originally Posted by Angela

... Rather, I mean "being dynamically willing" -- which means: noticing where I'm getting in my own way, being willing to let go of that, and noticing what's missing that would make a difference, and being willing to generate it.

I don't suppose that is much different from my approach of asking what works and what doesn't, and letting go of attachments to what in my view "should" work.

Originally Posted by Angela

Very often if I think I am unhappy and I dynamically will myself to deliberately guide my emotions, it doesn't end up at "happy" but rather something that inspires me even more. I could give you a couple of examples if you're interested but I won't jump into that in this post.

Sure, I would be open to hear of your experiences.

Originally Posted by Angela

Nahhh, too bad you won't be agreeing with me. I don't tend to let go of hopes, dreams, or aspirations, because I find those things a ton of fun. I do often find myself letting go of attachment to a particular outcome regarding hopes, dreams and aspirations. That is, I let go of thoughts that "I will feel bad if this doesn't go exactly as I envision it." There are just way too many possible outcomes that might be so much cooler than my puny little imagination can currently come up with, and I don't want to kill off possibilities just so's I can have my ducks line up the way I want 'em.

I have always struggled with how you can possibly hope in something without envisioning an outcome, or how you could desire an outcome with no attachment developing. My hopes dreams and aspirations ARE the things I am attempting to accomplish and the outcomes I expect, and OF COURSE I'm invested in them. How could it be otherwise?

I can't figure out how to care about anything and not care about it.

I think the analog of what you're describing, I would relate because of my background in Christianity, to Jesus' prayer, "not my will, but thine [god's] be done". I did not fine much congruence between some outcomes and anything recognizable to me as god's will either, though. I think what you are saying is essentially, "don't be disappointed at this suffering or death or loss or effort spent to no discernible purpose, because the universe has something even better in mind." Well yes, I've experienced that, although on such a limited basis that I couldn't separate it from random happenstance. As for the rest of it, well, I'm essentially still waiting. What else can I do. But I'm not holding my breath either.

--Bob

[Angela]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

To me, Karma is just another contortion used to explain the inexplicable.

I guess I'm asking: why are you even bothering with karma? Are you opening yourself up to the possibility of something other than randomness, and just trying on karma to see how it feels? It doesn't sound like it works well for you. I'm just surprised you don't lay it aside, as you would astrology or tea-reading.

Did you ever see the movie Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? If so, the scene with the fly swatters chasing the protagonists across the desert is a pretty good metaphor for how I react to life.

That's twice you've made me laugh out loud today.

I can't figure out how to care about anything and not care about it.

I can see where it might be challenging to wrap one's head around. But I think that's probably because we've been taught that desire and attachment are the same thing, the way we were with sex and intimacy.

It's not so much caring about it without caring about it, but more like feeling pure, clean anticipation about what you want without placing any meaning on reaching or not reaching it. Like: you'd really like to be in a relationship, and it feels good to hone yourself as the right person for the relationship of your dreams, by taking care of yourself and being the qualities you'd like her to have. You date for fun, you enjoy getting to know women and enjoying their admiration of you, you have a great time feeling sensual and connected with all kinds of different people. You make your friends laugh with stories of your blind dates gone awry. And if your LLTMBR partner doesn't show up as quickly as you'd like her to, or she has blonde hair instead of red, or she's perfect except for that extra 15 pounds, or she rejects you outright, it doesn't mean anything about you -- it doesn't mean you are less, or not good enough, or unloveable, or doomed to be single, etc. etc.... It just means you get to keep purely, cleanly anticipating, if you want to. Or not. You really CARE about being in an LLTMBR, it's important and you are focused and passionate about it, but your feeling good is not dependent on it. You are dynamically willing to be joyful or content or peaceful or whatever, regardless of who she is and what she does and when she shows up. Interestingly enough, it's that very autonomy in feeling good that draws her to you. (Or if you are attached to an outcome, usually you end up drawing a woman who has a complementary attachment, and you both end up wondering why things are less than completely satisfying and fulfilling in your relationship.) It's not that you don't care about it -- you care very much! -- it's that the outcome, whether it matches your vision or not, doesn't mean anything about you.

Does that make sense to you?

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Angela

That's a great question, Maguru! Would you like me to answer it, or was it a rhetorical jab?

Originally Posted by Angela
By the way, Bob and Maguru, I'm not interested in changing, saving, or fixing anyone; there's no one out there who is wrong, floundering, or broken. I'm interested in being what's possible for the world, not just for myself.

In case you were wondering.

Angela, I know I have been broken, so I dispute your perception. Maybe in another realm everything is ok but I only know this one.

Yes I would like to know more of the 'being what's possible' and why?

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Angela

I guess I'm asking: why are you even bothering with karma? Are you opening yourself up to the possibility of something other than randomness, and just trying on karma to see how it feels? It doesn't sound like it works well for you. I'm just surprised you don't lay it aside, as you would astrology or tea-reading.

I'm not particularly bothering with karma, for exactly those reasons, but I find its wild popularity inexplicable, and simply trying to understand that out of curiosity. Perhaps I am missing something. I don't think so, though.

Originally Posted by Angela

That's twice you've made me laugh out loud today.

Ah, very good. Then my work for today is done.

Originally Posted by Angela

I can see where it might be challenging to wrap one's head around. But I think that's probably because we've been taught that desire and attachment are the same thing, the way we were with sex and intimacy.

I understand the semantic distinction but about some things I have difficulty separating desire, attachment, and caring in practice. I can avoid attachment by not caring or by sublimating desire, but what is the point of that? Besides, desire and attachment, while not the same thing, cannot be said to have no interdependencies. One breeds the other. To use your parallel, even though sex is not equal to intimacy, it takes concerted effort to engage in meaningful sex without becoming intimate, assuming that's even really possible. And it is damn hard to be intimate without being attached. Intimacy: good. Grog want more. Grog not want lose that!

I have to say though that I have always been clear that it's not about me, even in those times when my partner hasn't been clear on what is their junk and what is mine. I have never looked at how well the relationship was going at the moment as a referendum on my worthiness as a human being. The attachment for me is rather the desire to experience the whole story arc from boy-meets-girl to walking hand in hand into our dotage together. To have a sizable time span over which to amortize all the worries, cares, heartaches and missteps and compromises of a normal shared life. To have what every couple understandably wants to end up with -- a rich and gratifying and transcendent history together. I had already modified that story very significantly to remarry in my late 30's. I am simply not willing to modify it again at this late date, and I'm quite comfortable with that choice.

So the question is relevant in my particular case to dealing with my wife's suffering and death and the meaning of that whole messy debacle. Without mandating the minute details of how it would play out, and actually expecting and allowing for some difficulties since she was not well when I met her, I did nevertheless hope that both of us would be able to look back on the total experience with fondness. But it became a total joke in that department, ending as horribly and agonizingly as possible, in the most over the top way conceivable -- no, beyond conception. People romanticize these things and imagine tearful bittersweet goodbyes with a string quartet playing in the background, but the truth is that grinding chronic illness turns life in to a daily slog of survival and a fight against madness. It's no way for a relationship to end.

So my wife is minus a life that she embraced with gusto but which did not return her kind regard, and I'm sitting here with my last memory of her a gray face and a fixed stare, and the last remotely carefree happy times together at least 6 years ago.

And I am supposed to in effect say, "oh, well! better luck next time! The universe has better things in mind than my silly idea"?

Frankly, I don't think it was a silly or unrealistic idea. So yeah, I'm not pleased with the outcome. I don't think that I should be.

I could rationalize all this if I could understand it. But it is beyond understanding. It was just our pathetic little life, but it's all we had. Sheesh.

So I let it be as it is, but coming from such an experience it is very difficult to trust life and just "choose" joy. Even if it'd work, I can't figure out a way to do it without symbolically capitulating to what I think of as an obscenity that should never have happened in a sane universe.

At the bottom of this whole thing I suppose that is nevertheless what I am supposed to do, but it is still too fresh and still feels to much like eat-sh_t-and-like-it.

No, it's not a referendum on me at all. But it is to me a question of what I can reasonably expect from life for a given effort, what the risk vs reward ratios are, what basis I have going forward to do all the manly things like tell your wife It's Going To Be All Right when she's afraid, that sort of thing. I don't claim to have ever been Mr. Sunshine but I was much closer to your worldview before than I am now.

That is why I understand Maguru's point of view ... we can to an extent chose or stir up certain emotional responses and at times successfully jump-start our moods, but emotions are also a perfectly normal and legitimate response to experience, and some experiences are very big indeed.

--Bob

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I was wondering how much authenticity there is in taking possibility as reality?

In my opinion, a huge amount of authenticity.

Firstly, you must understand that reality is very impermanent. Things are changing all the time. Thus when one focuses on possibility, one is merely acknowledging the nature of reality - it is something that is constantly shifting into new forms.

Let me offer you an example. What might your personal situation become, in 20 years time? I'll list just three:

1. Maguru is dead.

2. Maguru is still in pain over her rape incident.

3. Maguru has healed. The effects of the rape incident have disappeared over time.

Those are three possibilities. None of them are far-fetched. In 20 years time, you COULD be dead. Or you COULD be alive, and still hurting from the incident. Or you COULD be alive, and NOT hurting from the incident.

What could happen in 20 years time, could also happen in 18 years time. The 18-year possibility might also materialise in 12 years time, or 10 years' time, or 5 years' time.

Or 1 year's time, or six months' time. Or next month, or tomorrow. Theoretically, even today.

Which of the possibilities do you prefer? How soon would you like it to happen? What might the process entail? Is there really no control you have over the process?

I don't think so. A solution today, tomorrow, next month, seems unlikely in your case. What timeline do YOU think is "realistic" then?

That's "possibility". Is it not "reality"? Is it not authentic to think about such matters?

[Mato Kinze]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I've only just seen this. I hope I'm doing you proud?

Absolutely. I'm as delighted with you as Angela.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Mato Kinze

Absolutely. I'm as delighted with you as Angela.

Hee hee! That's one of those "I shot an elephant in my pajamas" kind of sentences, Mato.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

No, I said that karma explains a lot, but in a way that accentuates the impersonal nature of existence. To me it is bad enough that I am born into some random family, in some random socio-economic milieu, into some random belief system. But that I am also saddled with garbage from 'past lives' just gives me all the more to sort out, and without even the courtesy of knowing WTF it is I'm sorting. That is what I find difficult. I find it unkind and disrespectful of me. I have never understood why reincarnation or karma is appealing to people. To me, it's its own built-in hell. It increases, rather than decreases, the "unfairness" of life. It just doesn't seem helpful. I mean, thank god I at least was born into a halfway reasonable family and a rather excellent socio-economic situation, or I don't know WHAT I would have done.

Ah, let me explain the bright side.

The bright side, dear Bob, is that you're not a pig. The way Buddhism explains it, you're particularly blessed, in this lifetime at least, to be a human being.

The reason is that human beings possess a certain capacity which the other forms of sentient beings lack. That capacity (which nevertheless must be cultivated and developed) is the ability to consciously choose your own thoughts and thereby alter your karma.

Animals possess this ability in very limited form. Therefore if they get reincarnated in some other higher life form, it's pretty much a random process based on those random moments when they made a breakthrough in their own consciousness.

Gods can think but their state is such that their thoughts do not produce new karma (good or bad). Therefore they enjoy bliss, until their positive karma (accumulated in the past lives) runs out. Thereafter they must reincarnate in some "lower" life form.

The hungry ghosts also can think, but they lack the ability to change their thinking, beyond certain limited scopes. That is why, in the descriptions of the Western psychics & mediums, if a place is haunted, say, by the earthbound spirit or "ghost" of an eight-year-old girl, the ghost continues to be that of an eight-year-old girl, even though many years pass. She never gets to evolve into the ghost of a 10-year-old girl or 15-year-old young lady.

Finally, don't be mistaken into thinking that karma is all about past lives etc. It isn't. It's more accurate to think of karma as your thoughts (and your words & actions, which are the results of your thoughts) attracting consequences continually.

So for instance, TODAY you are creating karma and you will experience the consequences. NEXT WEEK you will be creating new karma and you will experience the consequences. On your deathbed, you will also be creating new karma, and you will also experience the consequences. Whatever karma has not expressed itself by then, will simply carry over into your next life.

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Ah, let me explain the bright side.

The bright side, dear Bob, is that you're not a pig.

You enjoy yankin' my chain, Godot. Bad karma!

Seriously, where is the hope and inspiration in such a system? You might after some open ended number of lifetimes -- perhaps thousands for all we know -- achieve the status of a god, only to be doomed to consume all that good karma you had accumulated anyway? Yech. Talk about moving a mountain with a spoon, then putting it back.

It will be what it will be, but if that's the way it is, you are right what you said in another post, amnesia about past lives would actually be a mercy. What a hideous system. I hope that is not the way it is.

--Bob

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

I actually could agree with your statement if you would say that letting go of your hopes, dreams and aspirations removed most suffering. It's the absence of a negative, to be sure. But I wouldn't call it a source of happiness.

My dear friend Bob! I will let you in on a secret. If you haven't already discovered it for yourself, you can discover it, no, experience it through meditation.

The absence of the negatives AUTOMATICALLY lead to happiness! Deep inside your consciousness is a well of bliss, calm, peace, joy. Your most naked state is raw happiness, and it doesn't need any reason. It just IS!

If you have not experienced it, it is difficult to explain. If you have experienced it, then I need not offer you any explanation.

I believe it is what Abraham calls Source. I think that the Christians call it God. I'm of the opinion that this is what Buddha calls enlightenment.

I've been there.

The difficulty is staying there.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

Seriously, where is the hope and inspiration in such a system? You might after some open ended number of lifetimes -- perhaps thousands for all we know -- achieve the status of a god, only to be doomed to consume all that good karma you had accumulated anyway? Yech.

Exactly. That is why Buddha doesn't advise you to aspire to be a god. It advises you to attain enlightenment.

The enlightened chap escapes the reincarnation cycle altogether. Won't be a pig, human, god, ghost or animal.

If he returns as a human being, it will on a voluntary basis (as a bodhisattva). An example I've previously given is Jesus. He would be a bodhisattva - returning purely for the purpose of helping others.

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

I believe it is what Abraham calls Source. I think that the Christians call it God. I'm of the opinion that this is what Buddha calls enlightenment.

I've been there.

The difficulty is staying there.

Ah, yes. "First, enlightenment. Then, laundry."

--Bob

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

In my opinion, a huge amount of authenticity.

Firstly, you must understand that reality is very impermanent. Things are changing all the time.

I believe that is stating the obvious.

Thus when one focuses on possibility, one is merely acknowledging the nature of reality - it is something that is constantly shifting into new forms.

Let me offer you an example. What might your personal situation become, in 20 years time? I'll list just three:

1. Maguru is dead.

2. Maguru is still in pain over her rape incident.

3. Maguru has healed. The effects of the rape incident have disappeared over time.

Those are three possibilities. None of them are far-fetched. In 20 years time, you COULD be dead. Or you COULD be alive, and still hurting from the incident. Or you COULD be alive, and NOT hurting from the incident.

What could happen in 20 years time, could also happen in 18 years time. The 18-year possibility might also materialise in 12 years time, or 10 years' time, or 5 years' time.

Or 1 year's time, or six months' time. Or next month, or tomorrow. Theoretically, even today.

Which of the possibilities do you prefer? How soon would you like it to happen? What might the process entail? Is there really no control you have over the process?

I don't think so. A solution today, tomorrow, next month, seems unlikely in your case. What timeline do YOU think is "realistic" then?

That's "possibility". Is it not "reality"? Is it not authentic to think about such matters?

Your possibilities for my future personal situation are not based upon my current personal situation. So in this case the only authenticity is in the 1st one and that's a possibility for all of us.

Having said that and thought it over I realized that I had offered my experience of being raped to illustrate a point. I was not looking for help, analysis or sympathy. My point was to show how the experience had affected me and my family as opposed to how Angela's experience had affected her. Nothing else.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Maguru

Your possibilities for my future personal situation are not based upon my current personal situation.

It doesn't matter. The fact is that the "current" personal situation, whatever it is, is always changing.

For example, you have mentioned something about how your rape experience has affected your daughters. Let's say that today, it has affected them in X way. Well, in 20 years time, it could affect them:

(1) still in X way
(2) in Y way
(3) in Z way
(4) not at all

You have also mentioned that how your rape experience has affected your daughters has affected you. Let's say that today, you have been affected in P way.

Well, in 20 years time, it could affect you:

(1) still in P way
(2) in Q way
(3) in R way
(4) not at all

Again, applying the same reasoning, the 20-year situation might well materialise in 15 years, or 10 years, or 5 years, or in 1 year.

Or in six months, or three months, or next month, or next week.

Then the simple question I ask you is - would you like a more positive sort of outcome; or a more negative sort of outcome.

Next, I ask you - would you like that outcome to happen sooner, or later?

After that, I ask you - what can you possibly do, to help make that outcome happen sooner (or later). I would suggest to you that the answer has something to do with changing or adjusting your own thoughts.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I believe that is stating the obvious.

Well, then it must be obvious to you that focusing on possibilities is not inauthentic. If reality is changing all the time, then focusing on possibilities is really just focusing on reality.

If a person says "I have a certain negative situation and I am unable to choose a more positive thought about it right now", I might believe him.

However, I could go on to ask him: "Okay, when will you be ready?". Tomorrow, next week, 1 year from now, 5 years from now, 10 years?

[Acting Like Godot]

Side note. I think many people don't realise how ... literal ... the phrase "choosing your own thoughts" really is.

Of course there are many ways to do it. I give you a simple example of how I do it.

Every morning I take the train to work. From where I get off, I need to walk five minutes to my office. If I am anticipating a bad day at work (eg due to the workload or whatever), I do a walking meditation as I walk to my office.

After two minutes, as my mind begins to settle into the meditation, I will give myself a simple mental task. Eg as I continue to walk slowly and steadily, I may tell myself to deliberately think 10 simple, positive thoughts, without interruption, about my upcoming day at work. As I think these thoughts, I count them off.

I don't have to strain myself and come up with ridiculously upbeat thoughts. I simply choose positive thoughts which subjectively feel "realistic" & believable to me. For example, my mental conversation with myself may go like this.

"Number One. Today is definitely not going to be the most difficult day that I've successfully survived at work. I've gone through much more difficult days.

Number Two. Actually, Project X is very interesting. It's certainly not every day that a bank like Lehman Brothers goes bankrupt. Handling a matter like this is a rare learning opportunity.

Number Three. Heck, I'm GLAD I am not working at Lehman! I'm just working at a bank that has SOME business transactions with Lehman. And now I have to manage some of those transactions, that's all.

Number Four. It's not like I'm alone in this. I have many colleagues around the world who are also dealing with the implications of the Lehman collapse. We can help each other.

Number Five. Come to think of it, it's really great that the bank where I work is one of the stable, solid ones!

Number Six. I just need to do my best. Everyone knows that this Lehman thing is a huge mess. No one expects me to clear this stuff up by tomorrow. In fact, it could take a year or more.

Number Seven. Hey ... That makes me an indispensable employee, for at least the next one year!"

Ten thoughts later, I am feeling very good. All this is done in the 5 minutes walk, from train station to office. By the time I arrive at my office, I feel very good. Really. I don't have to "make" myself feel good, or "force" myself to feel good. I just feel good. It just is so.

(And maybe this is what Angela does, on a 24/7 basis, and that's why she's always feeling good).

If you believe in the LOA and what Abraham Hicks says about the pre-paving technique, you'll also agree that I've also just created a better day for myself, at work. And possibly, a better next-one-year for myself at work.

Now of course, one could say that in the example I have given above, the "problem" I have does not compare to (1) war, (2) the death of Bob's wife, or (3) getting raped. And it's true. What I gave is merely an example, to illustrate how to choose thoughts.

It is really as simple as that. Clear your mind. Choose your thoughts. No need to reach for thoughts that are too positive & upbeat for you to regard them as "realistic". Simply reach for more-positive / less-negative thoughts that feel believable to you.

Even in a wartime scenario, there are positive thoughts to think. Like:

--> "One day, this war must come to an end."
--> "I could be among the survivors."
--> "Many of my friends and family could still be alive."
--> "They may survive the war too."
--> "It's possible that one day, we will be reunited."

Unlike Angela, I dare not say that I would find war delightful. But I really believe that in just about any situation, one can seek to choose more-positive / less-negative thoughts. And that such thoughts will alleviate the suffering.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

It doesn't matter. The fact is that the "current" personal situation, whatever it is, is always changing.

For example, you have mentioned something about how your rape experience has affected your daughters. Let's say that today, it has affected them in X way. Well, in 20 years time, it could affect them:

(1) still in X way
(2) in Y way
(3) in Z way
(4) not at all

You have also mentioned that how your rape experience has affected your daughters has affected you. Let's say that today, you have been affected in P way.

Well, in 20 years time, it could affect you:

(1) still in P way
(2) in Q way
(3) in R way
(4) not at all

Again, applying the same reasoning, the 20-year situation might well materialise in 15 years, or 10 years, or 5 years, or in 1 year.

Or in six months, or three months, or next month, or next week.

Then the simple question I ask you is - would you like a more positive sort of outcome; or a more negative sort of outcome.

Next, I ask you - would you like that outcome to happen sooner, or later?

After that, I ask you - what can you possibly do, to help make that outcome happen sooner (or later). I would suggest to you that the answer has something to do with changing or adjusting your own thoughts.

Thankyou for your efforts. I have added more to my last post that perhaps you haven't seen. Maybe this will clarify.

Having said that and thought it over I realized that I had offered my experience of being raped to illustrate a point. I was not looking for help, analysis or sympathy. My point was to show how the experience had affected me and my family as opposed to how Angela's experience had affected her. Nothing else.

The experience and the impact of it wasn't up for dispute. The experience changed who I was. It changed my view of the world. It changed my sense of survival. It changed fundamental beliefs I had about myself and the world. It changed my view of sex. It changed my view of men. It made me afraid. It made me less than. All of this was growing more and more painful and I was suffering because I had nothing to replace it with. These are the things I think and speak of, not the rape.

The point is I did not choose to suffer and I do not choose it now. I have to rebuild myself and my world. I have to find a world view that I can live with and as yet nothing has changed. Women are still being raped. People are still being mugged. Worlds are crashing, cities are burning and disillusionment remains. So "I am alright Jack' type of attitude is an exception to the rule of change. It doesn't change anything. I hope this makes for better understanding. regards

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Well, then it must be obvious to you that focusing on possibilities is not inauthentic. If reality is changing all the time, then focusing on possibilities is really just focusing on reality.

If a person says "I have a certain negative situation and I am unable to choose a more positive thought about it right now", I might believe him.

However, I could go on to ask him: "Okay, when will you be ready?". Tomorrow, next week, 1 year from now, 5 years from now, 10 years?

I am not speaking of the possibility to change your thoughts. That is not a possibility. Changing thoughts is real. Changing a perception maybe only possible for some. Changing oneself may also only be a possibility for some.

It is much more involved than letting go or thinking positive.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Maguru

The experience changed who I was. It changed my view of the world. It changed my sense of survival. It changed fundamental beliefs I had about myself and the world. It changed my view of sex. It changed my view of men. It made me afraid. It made me less than. All of this was growing more and more painful and I was suffering because I had nothing to replace it with. These are the things I think and speak of, not the rape.

What is a "view"? What is a "sense"? What is a "belief"?

Do they ever change? If so, how?

I have to find a world view that I can live with and as yet nothing has changed. Women are still being raped.

Before you were raped, women were already being raped. You probably knew that too.

Yet your "view", your "sense", your "belief" was different, before you were raped, and after you were raped.

(a) Why?

(b) Will your "view", "sense" and "belief" ever change again, in the next 50 years (assuming you live another 50 years?).

(c) If so, could it change in the next 40 years? 30 years? 10 years? 5 years? 1 year? Six months? Tomorrow?

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I am not speaking of the possibility to change your thoughts. That is not a possibility. Changing thoughts is real. Changing a perception maybe only possible for some. Changing oneself may also only be a possibility for some.

What is a "perception"? Where does it come from? Where does it exist? Does it ever change? If so, what changes it?

What is the "self"? Are you the same person as you were, 10 years ago? Will you the same person as you are now, in 10 years time?

Can the self remain unchanging? (Recall my point about the impermanence of reality - how all of it is constantly shifting into new forms).

If the self cannot remain unchanging, can the self consciously change itself? Say, by the selection of its own thoughts?

Actually, can the self EVER change itself, OTHER than by changing its own thoughts?

Where is suffering? Is it in the kitchen? In a box? A physical sensation? In your mind?

Can minds change? Can minds remain unchanging?

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Unlike Angela, I dare not say that I would find war delightful. But I really believe that in just about any situation, one can seek to choose more-positive / less-negative thoughts. And that such thoughts will alleviate the suffering.

Did I say I would find war delightful?!?

Actually I said I find people's responses to challenging circumstances (like 9/11 and yes, war) delightful. I'm delighted because it is fun, inspiring, educational, and thought-provoking to watch people make choices from the infinite pool of possibilities.

But now that you mention it, war does exist as part of life and I do find life delightful! And I prefer peace.

Maguru was right on when she told me "Be honest and declare that you think you are delightful." It's true that when I say, "I find you or war or this or that delightful" it's a linguistic convention, and might be truer to say that "I see you or war or this or that and I am finding delight inside myself." (that's a little cumbersome in normal conversation, though. )

It's also not too difficult to see that {{you or war or this or that}} is an aspect of who I am, so whether I find delight in myself or in you or in war, I'm finding it in the same place.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

What is a "view"? What is a "sense"? What is a "belief"?

Do they ever change? If so, how?

Before you were raped, women were already being raped. You probably knew that too.

Yet your "view", your "sense", your "belief" was different, before you were raped, and after you were raped.

(a) Why?

(b) Will your "view", "sense" and "belief" ever change again, in the next 50 years (assuming you live another 50 years?).

(c) If so, could it change in the next 40 years? 30 years? 10 years? 5 years? 1 year? Six months? Tomorrow?

I truly don't understand your line of questioning as they have nothing to do with why I divulged something very personal.

Originally Posted by Maguru

The experience and the impact of it wasn't up for dispute.

Like I said I did not offer this information up for dispute. Only I can know. I don't even want to discuss it, especially now as I have had a similar reaction to when it actually happened. It's a joke albeit a bad one .

I simply used a personal experience to support that we all react/respond differently to negative experiences and it is not always through BLOODY CHOICE! warmest regards

[Ecce Homo]

ALG and Angela... What you both are saying here is perfect! That's all. Carry on.

[Mato Kinze]

Originally Posted by Angela

Hee hee! That's one of those "I shot an elephant in my pajamas" kind of sentences, Mato.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

What is a "perception"? Where does it come from? Where does it exist? Does it ever change? If so, what changes it?

What is the "self"? Are you the same person as you were, 10 years ago? Will you the same person as you are now, in 10 years time?

Can the self remain unchanging? (Recall my point about the impermanence of reality - how all of it is constantly shifting into new forms).

If the self cannot remain unchanging, can the self consciously change itself? Say, by the selection of its own thoughts?

Actually, can the self EVER change itself, OTHER than by changing its own thoughts?

Where is suffering? Is it in the kitchen? In a box? A physical sensation? In your mind?

Can minds change? Can minds remain unchanging?

I wonder if you can answer these questions yourself? I wonder why you ask them?

I was simply saying that we cannot just accept a possibility as a reality without it being challenged. Not only challenge where it is going but also where it came from. Creation is a chain of events or more a natural change/evolution. The links will join if it is authentic and only then can the possibility become a reality. It makes sense when viewed objectively or as near as damn it.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Mato Kinze

Did you never hear that old Groucho Marx joke? Who was in the pajamas when you shot him -- you or the elephant? Your sentence could have meant:

"I'm as delighted with you as Angela is." or it could have meant:
"I'm as delighted with you as I am with Angela."

Never mind.... I just took all the humor out of it.

[Mato Kinze]

Originally Posted by Angela

Did you never hear that old Groucho Marx joke? Who was in the pajamas when you shot him -- you or the elephant? Your sentence could have meant:

"I'm as delighted with you as Angela is." or it could have meant:
"I'm as delighted with you as I am with Angela."

Never mind.... I just took all the humor out of it.

...or BOTH

I got the joke. "I shot an elephant in my jajamas last night. How he got in my pajamas I'll NEVER know..."

It's why I wrote it the way I did.