The Warrior's Predicament

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by angela

"I see you or war or this or that and I am finding delight inside myself."

Ok it's your right to choose how to feel regardless of the situation.

[Angela]

To Mato Kinze:

oh. never mind. (where's the little embarassment smilie because this one doesn't look embarassed enough. )

(sometimes my humor doesn't go over so well.... )

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Maguru

Ok it's your right to choose how to feel regardless of the situation.

Thanks, I appreciate that! And I totally grant you the freedom to believe that you can't choose your way of being and being is not choice.

I'm so glad we've reached accord!

(and I *got* your little barbed insult, too, in case you'd like to have that satisfaction! )

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

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

Actually there are many more permutations, such as still in X way, AND in Y and Z way, leading to still other possibilities. Out of deference to Maguru's sensibilities I will refer to the original cause as simply "A".

But the fact is, every action has a reaction. X is a response to A. Y and Z will be responses to A, and/or to X, etc.

Let us focus just on X, the response to A. Is X a choice? Or simply the effect of a cause? I would assert, it's the latter.

Now ... it is possible for the impact of the original cause to fade, and X with it. It's also possible for it to get stuck in the hippocampus and orbit around there forever and become magnified, thus strengthening X and/or bringing about worse effects X2 or X3, etc.

You assert, if I'm not mistaken, that there are other effects of A that could be focused on. Call them F, G and H. They might be, "I am stronger", "I have an opportunity to help others who have experienced A", etc.

One could focus on F, G and H and this might (or might not -- who knows?) cause X to weaken or disappear altogether. And I would agree, that would be a generally Good Thing to do. Probably nothing to be lost in trying.

But, it's far from a done deal that F, G and/or H will gain strength and X will weaken. It depends on many things external to the will of the person who has experienced A. And my concern with LOA is that since it's a "law", this is the way the thinking of its adherents tend to run. Pull lever F on the candy machine and you get some result than cancels unwanted result X.

Often, I think that LOA has little sensitivity, mercy and understanding to offer those who are hurting the worst, especially coming from LOA practitioners who have not struggled with A or anything in its league. I don't blame people for feeling minimized or disrespected by the assertion that something horrific is a happy thought away from being neutralized.

(In)actions have consequences. Some of them are very bad. Some people will struggle longer and harder with those consequences than do others, and the variables are myriad and not limited to (for example) one's proclivities toward optimism or pessimism, or the level of intellectual or emotional rigor / discipline the person is capable of.

That brings me to my other concern about LOA. If everything is attracted to you by your thoughts, then why have any distaste or loathing for A or any other evil? Why seek justice, why guard against it, why have compassion, if it's truly generated by the victim?

Like Maguru, my "A" experience has completely changed me and has also at least temporarily diminished and degraded me. It's not all for the good. There are things broken inside me that may or may not ever be made "good as new". I'm not even sure that they should be fixed, or that there is any point in doing so. I have spent 14 months processing my "A" and some aspects of it are resolved and some are not, and some may end up being too big to be digested in my natural lifetime for all I know.

It's just the way it is. ♥♥♥♥ happens. It is true that some responses to A are better than others, and I have some choice in the matter. Emphasizing those choices is intended to help, but it needs to be tempered with compassion and understanding.

I'm not saying you're not compassionate or understanding. I actually think that you are. But I'm just pointing it out. LOA walks a fine line and can be a very elitist, inconsiderate or even mean-spirited tool in unwise hands.

Best,

--Bob

[Angela]

The Law of Attraction? When did that come up -- did I miss something?

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Angela

The Law of Attraction? When did that come up -- did I miss something?

Are we not talking about a willingness to change our thoughts? It's all in the same league in my opinion. But if you want to leave LOA out of it and substitute "the ability to choose one's feelings", feel free.

I am simply advocating balance and perspective in suggesting how people should deal with challenges that cause them existential pain. Suggesting they should or need not feel the pain is a tricky business. It is even possible in some cases that feeling what they feel is a necessary part of the healing process.

--Bob

[Angela]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

Are we not talking about a willingness to change our thoughts? It's all in the same league in my opinion. But if you want to leave LOA out of it and substitute "the ability to choose one's feelings", feel free.

I am simply advocating balance and perspective in suggesting how people should deal with challenges that cause them existential pain. Suggesting they should or need not feel the pain is a tricky business. It is even possible in some cases that feeling what they feel is a necessary part of the healing process.

--Bob

Oh, okay; in that case you might have been talking about me -- that you advocate ME having balance and perspective in suggesting how people should deal with challenges that cause them existential pain. Yes?

Except that I have no *shoulds* at all about how people deal with challenges that cause them existential pain, or anything else for that matter. I so agree with you that whatever someone is feeling is necessary, whether it's a healing process or not, because that's what they're feeling.

I do suggest that suffering (not pain) is unnecessary -- "not required" -- in response to the question that was originally asked of me regarding {if it's so easy, why don't people let go of it?} (and the answer was "it may not be easy, but it is simple").

I felt some pain when my friends and family didn't buy into my crap around my suffering ("men are pigs!" "I'll never fall in love again." etc.). I thought it was cruel of them not to be in agreement with me in my suffering (voila! more suffering!) They trusted me to do what I would with what they had to say, and I'm very glad they did, because if they had pandered to my crappy thoughts, I would have found it much easier to feel bad for a long time. They were supporting me.

Do you think maybe that the pain of rape or losing your wife is "worse" somehow than the pain I or others have experienced? I tend to think probably not. We've all experienced suffering, and it does feel terrible. ("Mugged" was a euphemism -- did you catch that one?) The question is: what are you going to do with it now? As ALG wisely asked, are you willing to feel that same pain 20 years from now, or 10, or a month, or a day, or even one more minute? There is no wrong answer, of course, but I just don't buy into the idea that you "can't" make a difference in how you feel -- that you're just stuck with what you've got. "Won't" is a word I would buy -- and it's a perfectly acceptable alternative, as far as I'm concerned.

In ordinary conversations with people I'm not intimate with, I might not be so blunt about thoughts of being powerless and ineffective. But this is a personal development board, and I absolutely trust anyone who is here and up for personal development to do their right thing with what I say, whether it is to take it under consideration, to reject it outright, ignore it, be hurt by it, have their buttons be pushed, go batsh*t, have a breakthrough, insult me personally, or whatever is their right action or feeling.

And in my trust for people who are interested in personal development, I will not pander to thoughts of having no power to be the source in your life. You may not agree with me, and I don't think you should , but I'm a stand for the infinite power, joy and abundance that is who we really are, and I won't pussyfoot around about it. (well, maybe I'll pussyfoot a little bit here and there.) If that is too much to bear, there is an "ignore" function here on the boards so you will not be forced to bear me. And if you ever feel like I'm breaking the rules of the forum, use the "report post" function and the moderators will investigate.

I just hope you don't miss one of my puns, or how much I love you.

All that said, though, I reckon I've pretty much said my peace on the subject, at least here in this thread.

But, oops, maybe you weren't referring to me! If not, well, then, carry on, never mind!

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Angela

Oh, okay; in that case you might have been talking about me -- that you advocate ME having balance and perspective in suggesting how people should deal with challenges that cause them existential pain. Yes?

No, I didn't have you specifically in mind, but if the shoe fits ...

Originally Posted by Angela

I so agree with you that whatever someone is feeling is necessary, whether it's a healing process or not, because that's what they're feeling.

I do suggest that suffering (not pain) is unnecessary -- "not required"

I understand the distinction you are making between pain and suffering, but also the overlap. It is difficult to feel chronic pain and not call that suffering. Perhaps the English language lacks sufficient nuance, and thus frames the discussion too fuzzily.

Perhaps it's fair to say that some life events bring about profound changes, changes which are more ... challenging to think of as gifts. If a person's spinal cord is severed in an accident, permanently disconnecting their legs from their brain, they will be in a sense forever diminished and hindered. You and I would agree, in principle, that this need have no impact on their happiness; indeed, even science, apart from philosophy, alleges that they will within a year return to their personal "happiness baseline" pretty much regardless. I think we would agree that a person's happiness baseline can be moved, although we may not agree about how much and how sustainably.

Fourteen months out from my wife's death it would be tempting for me to think that the somewhat monochromatic world that I now inhabit is a result of my loss. I have just enough understanding to realize that I have always inhabited this world, and that my relationship with my wife, and with god, with my children, and with other relationships and things I no longer have in my life (or at least not on a daily basis), simply served all along to distract me from the fundamental fact that I have never found existence terribly compelling or exciting. I don't think this is that unusual. It explains the spectacle of people (especially men) desperately seeking to replace the "missing" spouse, even to the point on hitting on women at their wife's funeral (it happens).

It now makes more sense to me to sit with that and engage it than to run from it.

Part of the human condition is to ask the question, "is this all there is?" and much of human endeavor is bound up in avoiding a "yes" answer that no one wants to hear.

I would however be loathe to characterize, for example, Maguru's personal violation as exposing a preexisting condition. Even in my case, that's not the entire story. In her case, I doubt it's much, if any, of the story. If instead of losing my wife I had been beaten to within an inch of my life with a tire iron by a gang of thugs in front of my own house while my neighbors looked on indifferently, that would transform my mental landscape in very unpleasant ways for some time to come. By way of contrast, my present situation is, for all its baroque horror to me, essentially a case of crying over spilt milk compared to being beaten, raped, or otherwise humiliated and deprived of basic human dignity and safety that should be the right of any sentient being. It's much more arguable that every sentient being is entitled to a particular kind of relationship with a mate that ends only in particular ways. That is a more distinctly Western, romantic ideal that has not always even been on people's radar in other times and societies, even some societies that have been fairly far up the hierarchy of needs.

The truth is I was vulnerable to that romantic illusion because it was the only thing that made an intimate relationship worthwhile to me, given how my personality is constructed.

As for reporting or ignoring you, no, I don't find anything you've said offensive enough to mount a crusade or build a Chinese wall over. I recognize where you are coming from, and if I have inspired you even in a small way to nuance your remarks a bit here and there, I'm happy. And if I haven't, that's okay too. I am no longer trying to make the world be as I wish it to be. I have learned pretty well to let it be as it is.

--Bob

[Mato Kinze]

Originally Posted by Angela

oh. never mind. (where's the little embarassment smilie because this one doesn't look embarassed enough. )

(sometimes my humor doesn't go over so well.... )

Don't be embarrassed. Your humor went over fine. I think mine did too...right up to the point where we both started trying to explain it.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Mato Kinze

Don't be embarrassed. Your humor went over fine. I think mine did too...right up to the point where we both started trying to explain it.

So much for trust, huh? I promise never to explain another joke to you, Mato Kinze; that is my pledge to you.

[wolfgang]

Maybe it's not so much about if someone can shift their feelings with choosing thoughts and direct them toward joy, but rather if one believes they are going to feel a certain way no matter what or not.

That what you guys are debating is more about believing exact fate or believing your thoughts create what you are getting.

One person will say nothing is fate, everything is up to you, such that if you guide your thoughts you can get into any state of feeling and this feels like you get to choose all your feelings.

Another will say feelings are part of nature and in response to what fate/life is giving me.

Now, which belief is victim hood? And which is delusional? And which is accurate and natural? And which generates more frustration? And which makes you think you are in complete control? And which would bring more peace? Which is accepting? Which is fighting?

[Angela]

Yup, Wolfgang, it's a matter of perspective.

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by wolfgang

One person will say nothing is fate, everything is up to you, such that if you guide your thoughts you can get into any state of feeling and this feels like you get to choose all your feelings.

Another will say feelings are part of nature and in response to what fate/life is giving me.

Now, which belief is victim hood? And which is delusional? And which is accurate and natural? And which generates more frustration? And which makes you think you are in complete control? And which would bring more peace? Which is accepting? Which is fighting?

This feels to me like a typical false dichotomy. Any time you have two extreme positions (I'm in control of everything vs I'm in control of nothing) there is generally a middle ground where you find balance.

Some things can be changed, some cannot. Some things require courage and heart to effect change, some require courage and heart to accept What Is.

Neither Angela nor I can change our age, gender, memories, mortality, and a host of other things that just are what they are. I will not side with Kurt Vonnegut, who mocked the Serenity Prayer in Slaughterhouse Five ("among the things Billy Pilgrim could not change were the past, the present and the future") but I will say that one does need the wisdom to know the difference.

--Bob

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Sonoranbob

That brings me to my other concern about LOA. If everything is attracted to you by your thoughts, then why have any distaste or loathing for A or any other evil? Why seek justice, why guard against it, why have compassion, if it's truly generated by the victim?

This is deep thinking and is appreciated and ditto for the acknowledgement below. The brokeness has been my experience also. Eventually I felt my spirit was broken as in, I had no will left.

Like Maguru, my "A" experience has completely changed me and has also at least temporarily diminished and degraded me. It's not all for the good. There are things broken inside me that may or may not ever be made "good as new". I'm not even sure that they should be fixed, or that there is any point in doing so. I have spent 14 months processing my "A" and some aspects of it are resolved and some are not, and some may end up being too big to be digested in my natural lifetime for all I know.

It's just the way it is. ♥♥♥♥ happens. It is true that some responses to A are better than others, and I have some choice in the matter. Emphasizing those choices is intended to help, but it needs to be tempered with compassion and understanding.

Why do we judge responses as good or bad, better or worse? I believe responses are a natural reaction to a situation. Not chosen or contrived but natural. How else can we know the consequences of our actions?

I think you are too nice sometimes Bob and it bugs me.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Angela

Thanks, I appreciate that! And I totally grant you the freedom to believe that you can't choose your way of being and being is not choice.

I'm so glad we've reached accord!

(and I *got* your little barbed insult, too, in case you'd like to have that satisfaction! )

What insult was that? What does 'little barbed insult' mean?

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Maguru

Why do we judge responses as good or bad, better or worse? I believe responses are a natural reaction to a situation. Not chosen or contrived but natural. How else can we know the consequences of our actions?

Well ... if someone makes me angry, my most natural reaction might be to stove their head in with a crowbar, but I am comfortable admitting that might not be the best possible response, and that the consequences I would then likely know would be excessively bad for me, too. Society has rules to balance my need to honestly feel and express my anger with the right of other people to not have their heads bashed in. And I think that's mostly a Good Thing.

I am always judging my reactions but not in the sense of condemning and criticizing myself for having the reactions. Rather, I look for the most effective ways to take responsibility for what I feel and to communicate that (or sometimes not!) to others. For example, it's usually better to say to myself, "I am feeling angry" than to say to myself, "I am angry". You can validate the feeling without identifying with it. Then you can more objectively decide what to do with the feeling. I usually feel better when I handle myself skillfully under stress, even though if I don't manage that, I don't beat myself up about it, either.

Originally Posted by Maguru

I think you are too nice sometimes Bob and it bugs me.

Yes, it's a weakness of mine sometimes. There are times when people do need to be whacked upside the head to snap them out of their dream world and I'm usually a day late and a dollar short when it comes to that sort of thing. Sorry! As my wife was fond of saying, "your greatest strength is also you greatest weakness".

--Bob

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I believe responses are a natural reaction to a situation. Not chosen or contrived but natural.

That would be true, if you were an earthworm. Then you and your other earthworm friends would all react the same way every time I did something, like shine a bright light at you.

Once upon a time, I knew a big group of men.

All of them had the same food. All of them lived in the same place. All of them did the same things at the same time throughout the day. All of them wore the same clothes. All of them were allowed to have the same personal items, nothing more, nothing less. None of them had the freedom to go anywhere else.

Out of this group, there were diverse responses.

Some had a great time. They saw the whole experience as a great adventure. They found it exciting and fun.

Others had mixed views. They found it enjoyable at times, but it was very tough at other times.

Some saw it as an honour to be there.

Yet others found the experience totally repulsive. One killed himself by shooting himself in the chest.

These were people I knew, when I was in the military. As I mentioned, they were placed in identical conditions. Same food; same clothes; same number of hours of sleep; same training; same bathrooms; same haircut; beds of the same size and shape; same guns; same distance to be run at 5:30 am every morning.

Their situation is as "same" as you'll ever get. Why are the responses so different? I think it's largely got to do with what's in their heads.

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

These were people I knew, when I was in the military. As I mentioned, they were placed in identical conditions. Same food; same clothes; same number of hours of sleep; same training; same bathrooms; same haircut; beds of the same size and shape; same guns; same distance to be run at 5:30 am every morning.

Their situation is as "same" as you'll ever get. Why are the responses so different? I think it's largely got to do with what's in their heads.

I feel compelled to return to a fundamental dictum of consulting: "things are the way they are because they got that way".

If a new customer tells me that their software developers are turning out crap, the superficial response to that is, "Crappy developers. They need motivation, training, or firing". More often, though, it's crappy managers, crappy processes, crappy corporate culture, and addle-pated strategies that are to blame.

WHY did that one guy commit suicide? Because something different was in his head? If so, WHY was that thing there?

Did he invite it? Did he neglect his mental discipline until it could enter?

Or was he so constructed that the one-size-fit-all military environment handled him in ways that were inappropriate for him? Created situations that he was not capable of handling?

Maybe he would have been Singapore's next poet laureate. We'll never know now. He was just that dumb wimpy guy who couldn't hack it. Who had goofy ideas in his head that he listened to. The killjoy who didn't see it as a fun adventure.

--Bob

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

Neither Angela nor I can change our age, gender, memories, mortality, and a host of other things that just are what they are.

At least two of your examples are wrong. I'll just discuss one of them - "memories" - and I won't even go into a discussion of esoteric mind methods.

Memories change all the time. Something happened to you last month. You have a certain memory of it today.

Next week, you'll forget some of the details. Or you'll mix the details up. In 5 years' time, you won't remember this incident. Or you'll confuse it with other similar incidents.

Someone who was right there with you at the time the event occurred may not even remember it the way you do. He may recall details you don't; you may recall details he doesn't).

Even if the memory is intact, your interpretation of it will have changed. For example, certain events occurred in your life when you were 18. When you were 20, you might view those memories as exciting memories. When you were 30, you might view those memories as stupid & childish. When you are 90, you might view them with great fondness and nostalgia.

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

At least two of your examples are wrong. I'll just discuss one of them - "memories" - and I won't even go into a discussion of esoteric mind methods.

Memories change all the time. Something happened to you last month. You have a certain memory of it today.

Next week, you'll forget some of the details. Or you'll mix the details up. In 5 years' time, you won't remember this incident. Or you'll confuse it with other similar incidents.

Yes, but at any given moment what I feel is a response to the current state of my memories.

Besides, memories which are attached to strong feelings are very persistent. That is why people remember things like their first kiss so clearly. And things not so pleasant.

In any case, I see nothing wrong with my fundamental point, which is that there ARE things we can't change about our lives. And an even longer list of things which may be theoretically or somewhat malleable, but arguably not worth the effort. We can disagree about what is on the list, but there IS a list.

--Bob

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

WHY did that one guy commit suicide? Because something different was in his head? If so, WHY was that thing there?

All our heads are different. If they were the same, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Steve Pavlina's forums wouldn't exist, because if I and everyone else thought the same way, there wouldn't be anything to discuss.

Therefore there is no "natural" way to respond to a situation. Or if you prefer, there are numerous "natural" ways to respond to any situation.

In this discussion, I am highlighting the ability of an individual to choose his own thoughts. Naturally some individuals have this ability to a greater extent; some to a lesser extent; some may be more able to choose their their thoughts in particular areas of their lives or in particular kinds of situations.

So I am telling everyone now - this is a useful ability. It is something you should seek to develop and cultivate. Whatever your current level of ability is, it is a worthwhile pursuit to seek to raise the level. Among other things, it will help to alleviate your suffering (whatever your suffering is) and it will bring you more happiness.

The alternative is that you are simply, as J Krishnamurti would put it, unconscious. You're sleeping. You're just a more complex species of earthworm. You react to a wider range of stimuli than an earthworm, but your reaction is still automatic and a pure result of your past conditioning.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

In any case, I see nothing wrong with my fundamental point, which is that there ARE things we can't change about our lives. And an even longer list of things which may be theoretically or somewhat malleable, but arguably not worth the effort. We can disagree about what is on the list, but there IS a list.

Let's discuss, Bon. A person's level of happiness / suffering - do you think it is on the list or not?

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

In this discussion, I am highlighting the ability of an individual to choose his own thoughts. Naturally some individuals have this ability to a greater extent; some to a lesser extent; some may be more able to choose their their thoughts in particular areas of their lives or in particular kinds of situations.

So I am telling everyone now - this is a useful ability. It is something you should seek to develop and cultivate.

Fair enough. I don't dispute that it's useful, or that cultivating it is a Good Thing. I doubt anyone here advocates that. Most here, myself included, are cultivating it.

But we are exploring the practical boundaries of its usefulness.

I assert that choosing to think I'm Ghengis Kahn won't make me him.

I assert that the belief that you can choose all your thoughts is not an excuse to invalidate what people feel if it's negative or unpleasant, and tell them that they are lazy or wallowing in self pity or dumb worms.

That is all.

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

The alternative is that you are simply, as J Krishnamurti would put it, unconscious. You're sleeping. You're just a more complex species of earthworm. You react to a wider range of stimuli than an earthworm, but your reaction is still automatic and a pure result of your past conditioning.

I don't see it as a zero-sum game. I am more conscious than I once was (practically speaking, a mixed blessing in my view, BTW) and less conscious than I likely will be in the future. It is not a binary choice.

You are a banker. I'm a software developer. The Dali Lama is a spiritual leader. All of us are the products of our past conditioning. Some of it doesn't need to be transcended. I don't see a need for you to transcend banking. I don't expect His Holiness to pass a software development certification before I'll listen to him. He does not sell his books strictly to his fellow monks. Not all past conditioning is troublesome.

And not all troubling past conditioning needs eradicating either. If the universe or god or whatever you choose to call it exists and has a will, unpleasant memories may have been purposely installed for a reason (or no reason). All I know is that resisting sometimes is more of a problem than what you are resisting. There are some things that will not change no matter what you think or do about them. I don't know why. I wish I did. But I know it to be true.

And not all things are caused by thoughts. Or at least, not all things in my experience are caused by my personal thoughts. I know this by the simple expedient that unexpected, unthought of things that are totally new to my experience regularly happen to me.

Suicide Guy might have had a different end to his story if he had been given (and received) encouragement to think differently. Sure. But how do we know he wasn't the most enlightened person there? What the heck, he may have had such refined sensibilities that he couldn't stand the unconsciousness around him!

--Bob

[SonoranBob]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Let's discuss, Bob. A person's level of happiness / suffering - do you think it is on the list or not?

That in my view is one of the things that is provisionally on the list. People have more influence over it than they generally think, but most people probably have less influence over it than you think.

Permit me to mangle Shakespeare: Am I not a man? Do you cut me and do I not bleed?

People who laugh at funerals are considered inappropriate jerks.

I am just trying to understand what happens when the disconnect between what is happening to you and what you are feeling becomes total.

I am also trying to understand how practical it'd be to be in a state of bliss all the time. I've heard more than one person talk about cultivating the state of bliss with some successful consistency, then getting fired from their jobs because they are space cadets.

--Bob

[amixa]

ok i've been reading a long and felt i had to respond to this:



[Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot
These were people I knew, when I was in the military. As I mentioned, they were placed in identical conditions. Same food; same clothes; same number of hours of sleep; same training; same bathrooms; same haircut; beds of the same size and shape; same guns; same distance to be run at 5:30 am every morning. Their situation is as "same" as you'll ever get. Why are the responses so different? I think it's largely got to do with what's in their heads.

yes. i agree. however its not just perspective (IMO). i feel i have to raise this as it is a valid issue. we are emotional beings and often we do not express and manage to overcome 'mental issues' due to the fact that we still have left over emotions that need to be dealt with. i know you are debating whether or not someone has the choice to lead a life of happiness and i think if everyone honestly knew how they could. not in all situations but plenty. i am getting the impression that people who do not feel it is possible to move on to a happier perspective is because of underlying emotions. if they feel trapped in their lives it may because they honestly can't, but what they may not realize is because of underlying emotions they did not know they had to deal with/afraid to deal with/how to deal with.


Did he invite it? Did he neglect his mental discipline until it could enter?

Or was he so constructed that the one-size-fit-all military environment handled him in ways that were inappropriate for him? Created situations that he was not capable of handling?

Maybe he would have been Singapore's next poet laureate. We'll never know now. He was just that dumb wimpy guy who couldn't hack it. Who had goofy ideas in his head that he listened to. The killjoy who didn't see it as a fun adventure.
--Bob

i have the upmost empathy for people who feel suicidal. after saying that i am going to say that it takes a lot of courage to actually seek help when you truly feel suicidal. i'm sure he didn't invite it but when he started noticing it he could have acted on it and chosen to get help before he sunk any lower but he didn't. and some people don't. you really have to swallow your pride to do so. its really a very strange mindset to lose hope and i wouldn't wish it upon anyone. but there are chances that people can choose to act upon and maybe they don't know how to change how they feel at that time and place, they can choose to receive help to change it before they dip down much lower then they can handle.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

I am also trying to understand how practical it'd be to be in a state of bliss all the time. I've heard more than one person talk about cultivating the state of bliss with some successful consistency, then getting fired from their jobs because they are space cadets.

Actually at those periods in my life where I am disciplined enough to meditate regularly, I become much more effective at work. These are some of the effects:

1. Basically nothing distracts me from whatever I want to focus on.

2. I have no sense of procrastination. I automatically do what's most important, without any sense of resentment, frustration or dislike.

3. My concentration is formidable. Strong, without tension.

4. I listen much more attentively to others, and pick up nuances in their words and body language that I ordinarily wouldn't. Therefore I know better what they are trying to communicate.

5. I exude calm and confidence.

The space cadets you refer to are the ones who got unbalanced in the sixth chakra. Feels nice, but spacey. There is a simple cure for that. It's called a grounding exercise. It's got to do with pushing energy down; it takes only a few minutes and you can feel it very clearly, like physical movements inside your body.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

Besides, memories which are attached to strong feelings are very persistent. That is why people remember things like their first kiss so clearly. And things not so pleasant.

Someone just posted a Bashar extract in another part of these forums. Quite interesting:

"Pick right now an idea, any idea whatsoever, of something you know that you have already done. It would be a good suggestion, shall we say, to pick something that you found enjoyable, so that you will be excited about it instead of lamenting it and bringing up the idea of guilt. We would suggest you find something in your past that represents a very enjoyable experience; remember it now, in the way that you simply, typically remember anything. Take a moment to do so.

As you are remembering this scenario, roll it around in your mind. You find yourself probably very easily identifying with it emotionally. It is a very simple thing to plug your emotions into it because, as you say in your physical linear reality, "Well yes, of course, I already experienced it that way; so all I'm actually doing is remembering the experience as fully as I can; "No big trick," as you say.

But remember, remember, remember, we have discussed with you many times the idea that memory is actually being created right now in the present. You don't actually remember the past, per se; you create an idea, you create a perception in the present, that you call a memory of the past. It is a memory, so to speak; it is a recognition; it is a cognition in the present, so to speak, of another probable you, another aspect of the total being that you are."


------------

Essentially:

if a past event is causing you to suffer,

then a memory is causing you to suffer,

and as a memory is a movement of electrical impulses in your brain

a movement of electrical impulses in your brain is causing you to suffer,

and you are able to alter your suffering state

by altering the movement of electrical impulses in your brain

that is to say, by changing your thoughts.

So there we go ..... Your suffering is the movement of a couple of little electrical impulses in your brain!

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

I am just trying to understand what happens when the disconnect between what is happening to you and what you are feeling becomes total.

LOL, you might do something silly like die happily on the cross for the sake of saving mankind.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by amixa

if they feel trapped in their lives it may because they honestly can't,

.... I do not doubt that they are honest ....

but what they may not realize is because of underlying emotions they did not know they had to deal with/afraid to deal with/how to deal with.

... I am only saying that the trap is also in their own heads. Therefore the solution is for them to do something to their own heads.

I would not say that it is easy. It really depends on a range of factors. It could be very easy for me to change my thoughts about a certain matter, but very difficult for me to change my thoughts about another kind of matter.

However, many people will never even get that far, because they do not even see that the problem usually lies in their heads, and that the solution therefore lies in their own heads.

If a person does not even see that, he won't even explore the possibility of changing his own thoughts.

By the way, Bob knows all my stories (like I know his). He also knows that this particular soldier who shot himself .... killed someone else first (a planned murder) and then killed himself immediately thereafter.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by SonoranBob

I assert that choosing to think I'm Ghengis Kahn won't make me him.

On the other hand, whoever you really believe yourself to be, well, you are that person. In your own reality.

For example, if you really think & believe yourself to be Bob Sonoran - a grieving middle-aged widower; successful software developer; owner of a clever parrot; a wealthy guy; an ex-Christian, then that's who you are. In your own reality.

As any of those thoughts and beliefs shift, so will Bob Sonoran and his reality. For example, if you start believing in Jesus again, you won't be an ex-Christian. If you change your ideas of what is career success, you might consider yourself a mediocre software developer. If you change your mind and now regard your parrot as a stupid nuisance, then in your reality, it will cease to be a clever parrot.

And on the day you regard yourself as having stopped grieving for your wife, you will have stopped grieving for your wife.