What Is, Is

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Maybe that's what at issue (in my own mind, admittedly)--maybe you're simply devoid of emotion (which is one of the things that make people real to me).

I can never help but wonder if someone who is so utterly stoic isn't or hasn't been trapped in the Buddhist "void".

The difficulty is that you likely believe Arcanum has attained or found something. He has attained nothing. He has merely stopped believing he is something other than what he already is and so the obvious truth became apparent. This truth is not reserved for him. You too already are eternally free and the calm by which all emotions rise and fall. They are not yours to own nor are they even a problem. You want him to come back into delusion with you and identify with these emotions so the mind can be put to ease but this will not happen. The courage is already there for you, just go with it.

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

So much dualistic language in one who professes that all that exists is Being.

So in your peculiar universe, how does 'Being' preclude dualistic reasoning/language exactly?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by VinceG

This happens when people fail to put the proper effort in. There is always a way to communicate clearly, effectively, and tactfully. If you look at guys like Gandhi, Ramana, Osho, UG, they always managed to make the most world-shattering statements to people in ways that made them look at the truth of the words rather than the personality of the one uttering.

Every one of those icons would have gone over like a lead balloon as an anonymous poster on this forum. Trust is very powerful but it requires a depth of relationship that rarely happens on the internet. I do have that trust relationship with many, and I suggest it doesn't come about by blowing sunshine up anybody's skirt, but by simply telling it like it is, relentlessly and non judgmentally; by standing shoulder to shoulder and looking out at the horizon and pointing at what's actually there rather than what they would like to see.

As for you, I find that I trust you about as far as I can throw you, assuming I can't throw you beyond my line of sight.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Maybe that's what at issue (in my own mind, admittedly)--maybe you're simply devoid of emotion (which is one of the things that make people real to me).

I can never help but wonder if someone who is so utterly stoic isn't or hasn't been trapped in the Buddhist "void".

So essentially, I'm damned if I do (react) and damned if I don't?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by raykilleen

Hearsay but, I’ve heard several elderly persons of the spiritual nature claim it was the slap in the face, not tactfulness, which woke them up, perhaps they were senile.

Indeed, there's a little 'happy game' that spiritual folks play in which there is virtually no movement at all. I've played that game with folks and it's remarkable how still nothing is seen that one does not want to see. The only difference is that one walks away smiling instead of frowning.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

To see Arcanum as a soulless, snot-nosed, sociopathic, hypocritical, evasive a**hole robot is an illusion because he's not what he appears to be.

Yes, at my core (my "Beingness", if you will), I know this (I even laugh inwardly at your description).

The question I have is, okay, of course, you're none of that, but what the hell are you, then? This is what is at the source of my reaction. (The completely emotionless psychologist image is a closer visual, really). Once I realize the name you've chosen, then it seems as though your entire intent is to not be found out--to remain obscure and arcane to everyone, for some purpose.

All I've ever seen from you is dry, esoteric, if not cryptic analysis of people, and it's like, hey, when the heck are you gonna let someone analyze you, for once?

Otherwise, folks, I'll be back this evening... got work to do.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by VinceG

There's a way to slap people tactfully as well. You can't just go around slapping people expecting them to wake up!

It's not even tact, really. That's just one manifestation of a broader skill, the capability of getting outside of your own head and outside of your own thought processes to actually contemplate someone else and how they think and what they live for. Sometimes they need a slap. Much more often, they need tact. It's a lot of work, but if you want to play this game you need to have it.

You're just making this stuff up as you go along, aren't you?

[VinceG]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Every one of those icons would have gone over like a lead balloon as an anonymous poster on this forum.

How do you figure?

Trust is very powerful but it requires a depth of relationship that rarely happens on the internet. I do have that trust relationship with many, and I suggest it doesn't come about by blowing sunshine up anybody's skirt, but by simply telling it like it is, relentlessly and non judgmentally; by standing shoulder to shoulder and looking out at the horizon and pointing at what's actually there rather than what they would like to see.

As for you, I find that I trust you about as far as I can throw you, assuming I can't throw you beyond my line of sight.

That you chose to bring up trust here is interesting. Personally, I don't waste time trying to figure out who I trust for what. People are mostly great, and I'm not attached to anything enough to care about what I entrust to whom. But I wouldn't expect you, or anyone else who knows me only on the Internet, to trust me.

I used to think that people had to trust you before they listened to you. Now I feel like all you need to do is understand them. You're right, trust is hard won and easily lost. But I've learned that people will have any conversation about anything, with someone who sufficiently understands them, regardless of any pre-existing relationship. And those relationships can be changed, for the better or worse, in instants, based on that understanding.

[VinceG]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

You're just making this stuff up as you go along, aren't you?

No. I didn't feel you were ready for the broader concept, understanding, so I thought I'd stick to it's most common manifestation until we found some common ground. That doesn't seem to be happening, though.

[Apopohis Reject]

VinceG: There's a way to slap people tactfully as well. You can't just go around slapping people expecting them to wake up!

It's not even tact, really. That's just one manifestation of a broader skill, the capability of getting outside of your own head and outside of your own thought processes to actually contemplate someone else and how they think and what they live for. Sometimes they need a slap. Much more often, they need tact. It's a lot of work, but if you want to play this game you need to have it.

Originally Posted by Arcanum

You're just making this stuff up as you go along, aren't you?

Personally, I think Vince is spot on with his perspective.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Haha. I don't mean to be insensitive here, only to say that I had the same reaction before I actually totally realized what he had been saying all along.

And if I recall, I wasn't particularly 'tactful' in the meantime. Hehe.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

I do agree with you. It highlights a problem I have: I'm nice to a fault, and fear confrontation. So it is something to reflect upon.

As such, perhaps you play an important role in conveying clarity once the Arcanums of the world have made the problems all too real.

[raykilleen]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Indeed, there's a little 'happy game' that spiritual folks play in which there is virtually no movement at all. I've played that game with folks and it's remarkable how still nothing is seen that one does not want to see. The only difference is that one walks away smiling instead of frowning.

Because it's all a finger pointing to the moon? it’s all rather confusing to me, spiritual indication from an empty head; ropes, snakes and such, knowledge of the spiritual circus.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

I do agree with you. It highlights a problem I have: I'm nice to a fault, and fear confrontation. So it is something to reflect upon.

As such, perhaps you play an important role in conveying clarity once the Arcanums of the world have made the problems all too real.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

The difficulty is that you likely believe Arcanum has attained or found something. He has attained nothing. He has merely stopped believing he is something other than what he already is and so the obvious truth became apparent. This truth is not reserved for him. You too already are eternally free and the calm by which all emotions rise and fall. They are not yours to own nor are they even a problem. You want him to come back into delusion with you and identify with these emotions so the mind can be put to ease but this will not happen. The courage is already there for you, just go with it.

Yes, though i suspect he believes I'm on the opposite extreme of that imaginary attainment, whatever that looks like.

[Apopohis Reject]

It appears to me that the dynamics on this forum are not so dissimilar to regular society, in that everyone relates to themselves as objective, yet others, especially those with whom they don't readily harmonise, as being subjective, and therefore of course; needing correction.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Yes, at my core (my "Beingness", if you will), I know this (I even laugh inwardly at your description).

The question I have is, okay, of course, you're none of that, but what the hell are you, then? This is what is at the source of my reaction. (The completely emotionless psychologist image is a closer visual, really). Once I realize the name you've chosen, then it seems as though your entire intent is to not be found out--to remain obscure and arcane to everyone, for some purpose.

All I've ever seen from you is dry, esoteric, if not cryptic analysis of people, and it's like, hey, when the heck are you gonna let someone analyze you, for once?

Otherwise, folks, I'll be back this evening... got work to do.

Yes, Marie and I live in a castle with an alligator-filled moat, and we invite anyone who feels a need to analyze us to come swim our moat and knock on the castle door.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by VinceG

That you chose to bring up trust here is interesting. Personally, I don't waste time trying to figure out who I trust for what. People are mostly great, and I'm not attached to anything enough to care about what I entrust to whom. But I wouldn't expect you, or anyone else who knows me only on the Internet, to trust me.

Yes, that was my point.

I used to think that people had to trust you before they listened to you. Now I feel like all you need to do is understand them. You're right, trust is hard won and easily lost. But I've learned that people will have any conversation about anything, with someone who sufficiently understands them, regardless of any pre-existing relationship. And those relationships can be changed, for the better or worse, in instants, based on that understanding.

Sure, folks will chat about anything, as evidenced on this forum, but they'll still see only what they want to see, which is also evidenced here.

Those who traveled to India to meet with the likes of Ramana and Niz, packed a deep trust with them, and perhaps even a devotion. This translates into the willingness to look and to see, even if there seems to be a great price to this seeing. That's where the power of the teacher lies, not in the words.

My lady Marie is able to look and to see better than anyone I've ever met, and we both agree that this is because there is a deep trust, and at the foundation of that trust is an equally deep love. I'm not so naive as to believe that's likely to happen on this forum.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

Personally, I think Vince is spot on with his perspective.

If it's intellectual understanding that you're trying to convey, as in your case, Vince is correct.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by raykilleen

Because it's all a finger pointing to the moon? it’s all rather confusing to me, spiritual indication from an empty head; ropes, snakes and such, knowledge of the spiritual circus.

I'm not sure I follow. All the pointy thingys are pointing to something very 'real' going on right now. Getting all of that out of the head and into the living Truth of THIS is the challenge, and nobody else can really do that for anybody.

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

If it's intellectual understanding that you're trying to convey, as in your case, Vince is correct.

Aren't you trying to convey an intellectual understanding, as in your case, you are correct?

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Well, no, but I have to make it into a problem, so that I can realize that I'm making it into a problem, and cease making it into a problem.

Awareness is always helpful for making peace.

Yes, I understand that. I'm just throwing stuff out there, for right now, to show everyone what's going on--that this is my ego reacting. But ego reacts to ego. I can accept responsibility for my reaction, but I'm throwing my reaction out there as a testament to what can generate a reaction. I mean, it's good that hypocrits don't cause a reaction in you, CL, but it does me, and so I'm exposing it all.

Sometimes things that bother us become what we see, as our pattern matching heads work this way.

Having a button can end up getting pushed, just because it's there, with just a little bit of similar interactions showing up, in the extreme case.

Like if being bothered by hypocritical thinking is a button, you may be looking for it in others unconsciously and have a bias that informs you and starts the emotions of there being a problem to overcome.

[raykilleen]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

I'm not sure I follow. All the pointy thingys are pointing to something very 'real' going on right now. Getting all of that out of the head and into the living Truth of THIS is the challenge, and nobody else can really do that for anybody.

Yes of course and you do it more effectively than most, although at one time you seemed to be revealing your cup was empty because it was never filled yet you seem well read in concepts of spirituality, ah it’s just my human curiosity trying to formulate sense of Arcanum, you know…a label.

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

He's showing a degree of courage and determination, which is nice to see.

yes.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

Aren't you trying to convey an intellectual understanding, as in your case, you are correct?

No, there's nothing at all mentally sophisticated about what I'm saying here. That's why it sounds a bit like children bickering.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by raykilleen

Yes of course and you do it more effectively than most, although at one time you seemed to be revealing your cup was empty because it was never filled yet you seem well read in concepts of spirituality, ah it’s just my human curiosity trying to formulate sense of Arcanum, you know…a label.

Yup, there must be a person in there somewhere. Hehe.
To me, a familiarity with spiritual concepts doesn't say anything a full or empty cup. Belief is what actually fills the cup.

[Beingist]

Okay, a little at a time, here--

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

See I don't see this. I've heard things masters have said that left me thinking that they were just cruel. They are very, very blunt in most cases I've seen. But of course they have no vested interest in how you take what they are saying, so they can say it anyway they like.

I agree with this. There's a cliche that "sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind."

Originally Posted by ChristsLight

So much dualistic language in one who professes that all that exists is Being.

I know. Ain't it a shame?

You want it to be personal, but you acknowledge, at least I think, that there are no persons. I think this is more your struggle to transition to the impersonal perspective than anything else.

Yes, you're probably right about the struggle to transition to the impersonal, but honestly, I don't want to transition if I end up speaking or writing in esoteric or cryptic monotones. Not that I enjoy emotions, but it's nice to really laugh once in a while. The joy that I've experienced tells me that I'll have all that and more, once I'm clear of all the junk, but as yet, I'm not entirely convinced that the arcane one is entirely impersonal, either, if he's admitting to playing the role of "hated one".

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

No, there's nothing at all mentally sophisticated about what I'm saying here. That's why it sounds a bit like children bickering.

Well I agree it does at times, yet I think it's been quite a valid, even valuable discussion overall.

Whilst this is far and away the best forum I've yet come across, I must say there has still been a little too much ego in a great many posts, which hasn't helped the process of honest sharing in an atmosphere of support and inclusion, which 'ONEness' requires as prerequisit.

[Beingist]

Okay. More necessary digestion of I-don't-know-what.

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Yes, though what I've been suggesting is that it's not an ongoing process of learning to accept 'what is' by choosing to accept and just 'get over it'. While it's a useful focus for a time, acceptance isn't actually a choice, just as surrender isn't actually a choice. The reason for this is that our experience isn't limited to an objective world 'out there' that simply is what it is, and whatever might be called an objective world (the one in which flat tires happen and that's what it is) isn't actually a problem to begin with.

Here's where you lose me, again and again. Right over my head

Surrender/acceptance isn't a choice because ... the world isn't objective? what's that mean? What's the relevance? How do you know this?

I apologize for not being as smart and articulate as you, Arcanum. But seriously, your explanations will likely continue to go over my head as long as you write the way you do.

The entire problem is the mental world of assumptions and conclusions ABOUT that 'objective' world, and nearly everyone lives predominantly in this imaginary thought/feeling world. So if we are imagining the need to accept this imaginary thought/feeling world, then we are giving reality to our own illusions by trying to accept them, and we then make them real. Looked at another way, we are imagining the unacceptable, and asking ourselves to accept that.

This makes a little more sense, except that it leaves me with the same question I've been trying to ask of you--what is real, then? (To you, I mean).

The only way out of this dilemma is to see what actually IS, on all levels. to see that the neighbor did NOT sabotage your tire, and to see that Arcanum is not really an evasive, a**hole hypocritical snot-nosed sociopathic kid. If there ever comes a time that you laugh at this idea, it will be from the other side of this clarity, and I'll be there laughing along with you.

Now, I don't understand how you can say this, after insinuating incessantly how 'what is, is' is errant. How does one actually see what is?

What is to you? Thought? Belief? Flat tires? Do you speak from experience, or did some Genie grant you a wish? Are you realized? Enlightened?

My whole problem with you (which is admittedly self-created), is that you speak as though an authority, but you have never publicized your credentials. Then you speak flatly and without emotion in what appear to me to be either disjointed logic, or riddles. You make no sense to me.

I'm sorry if I need it a little more spelled out, but again, you appear as a psychiatrist with degrees up the wazoo, trying to explain to his patient what he happened to pick up while getting his doctorate. C'mon. This isn't a dissertation. Get real.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

The masters are not perceiving who they talk to as broken, separate persons who desperately need to find hope. They are talking directly to who you are and cutting through all the semantics. Cutting through all the pleasantries and your sacred sense of self. In this way the words may register and actually be heard. The disruption of that very sense of self is critical and of course to the one who feels they need to defend themselves, it may even seem cruel.

Yeah, this nails it. One reason why I keep going back to Niz. His words made it into a book, but not all of them reach the reader, as he is speaking to a particular person at a particular moment. Hence, what you may not understand reading at one time, you might understand at another.

Of course the part that can't be seen is that there is tremendous compassion there and that compassion comes in many forms. For me, compassion no longer has anything to do with gently walking on egg shells while empathizing with people's imagination. This practice actually gives more reality to the perceived illusions one is torturing themselves over.

Agreeing with this, also, which is why I've yet to report the arcane one, nor neg rep him--not because I see compassion, but neither do I see malice. I honestly don't see anything except, perhaps a bit of very mild humor.

Not that I expect perfection, but a little humanness would be a big plus.