How do you Define Spirituality??

[Frisky]

Originally Posted by inri

Actually Frisky, I don't think the line of dialogue is off topic at all.

For many it seems, the idea of 'spirituality' involves a delving within...an inquiry into mind and self to honestly assess and question all that we hold to be 'true' about self and reality.

Some it seems are very adept at spotting delusion in others and there is no doubt that if/when one is stuck, this can indeed be a helpful 'spiritual' offering

Delusion of what?? And stuck in what exactly??

I really have no clue what you guys mean by all that though

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by inri

And you know this with absolute certainty, how?

Can you see that if you are seeing certain unconscious motivations on the part of another, that you are engaging your own thoughts/beliefs, machinations of mind in order to arrive at the assessment...and as such, you 'could' be wrong?

Can you see that some of us it also appears as though YOU still remain unconscious to some extent...can you even consider the possibility that this might actually be so?

This is the mirror game, and it's another way to make people wrong.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Frisky

Delusion of what?? And stuck in what exactly??

I really have no clue what you guys mean by all that though

I would suggest you start a new thread and ask your question again.

From past experience and based on who's posting here, I can foresee that this thread will easily run for another five pages essentially repeating the previous three.

[inri]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Look at the conversation yourself, without your need to make me wrong for calling you insincere months ago, and you'll see what's actually happening. As you imply, a great deal of our spiritual work is about becoming conscious, and this work can't be bypassed.

I clearly see what's going on here Arc and I'm more than willing to accept my part in it, are you?


Why is it that you consider yourself to be beyond the unconscious machinations that you so readily see in others? Doesn't it require certain machinations of mind to see fault in others? Are the machinations of mind/perceptions required in order to assess the behaviors (in this case, the written words) of another always completely accurate? Doesn't the very nature of perception to some extent dictate an inability to be complete certain of that which we are seeing?

From my vantage point, I see you as someone who takes his self ascribed role of 'spiritual teacher' very seriously. You enjoy perceiving yourself as holding knowledge that might help others to become more conscious. However, in adhering to this rigid perception of self as being personally 'above' reproach in terms of your own propensity for delusion, you demonstrate a certain attachment to your perception of self as a teacher.

The moment this perception of yourself becomes threatened, you immediately deflect the suggestion by pointing to the delusion in the one doing the pointing.

I think its pretty safe to say that the fact that all of us here continue to have an avid interest in discussing these things, none of us have reached any kind of a definitive 'end point' in terms of seeing clearly.

There is a great freedom in simply being able to admit that perhaps my lens is not as clear as It might currently seem...that so long as we remain human, clarity/awareness is an ongoing thing with no finite point where we can declare with certainty, "I'm done....All of my perceptions are absolutely clear and without prejudice."

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Frisky

Delusion of what?? And stuck in what exactly??

I really have no clue what you guys mean by all that though

Sorry if it looks like your thread was hijacked, but I agree with Inri. When peeps begin to struggle, they tend to go unconscious and see things that aren't there. This is the process by which we create the vast majority of our human suffering, and so it becomes very important to explore this. It's quite difficult to do this work by ourselves, and so typically it's done in relationship with others and it's not particularly pretty, and by definition unconsciousness is not consciously worked on, so there is resistance.

If, after considering this, you want me to stop, I will.

[inri]

Originally Posted by Frisky

Delusion of what?? And stuck in what exactly??

I really have no clue what you guys mean by all that though

Well...your originally asked the question "How do you define Spirituality"?

For me, spirituality is directly tied to our ability to delve within...to observe and assess all of those things that we 'believe' to be true....to become clear on the source of ALL beliefs that may currently be operating....to get to the source of belief itself.

I very much have come to see the role that beliefs play in my experience of reality...the seeing through of beliefs then, is very much part of parcel of what 'spirituality' means to me.

When we're stuck in terms of not being able to see that a particular belief we are holding is merely a grouping of thoughts that we've resonated with for one reason or another, it can sometimes be helpful to have this pointed out...this is really what I was attempting to 'get at' in my last post.

Do you see spirituality as having anything to do with self inquiry?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by inri

I clearly see what's going on here Arc and I'm more than willing to accept my part in it, are you?


Why is it that you consider yourself to be beyond the unconscious machinations that you so readily see in others? Doesn't it require certain machinations of mind to see fault in others? Are the machinations of mind/perceptions required in order to assess the behaviors (in this case, the written words) of another always completely accurate? Doesn't the very nature of perception to some extent dictate an inability to be complete certain of that which we are seeing?

From my vantage point, I see you as someone who takes his self ascribed role of 'spiritual teacher' very seriously. You enjoy perceiving yourself as holding knowledge that might help others to become more conscious. However, in adhering to this rigid perception of self as being personally 'above' reproach in terms of your own propensity for delusion, you demonstrate a certain attachment to your perception of self as a teacher.

The moment this perception of yourself becomes threatened, you immediately deflect the suggestion by pointing to the delusion in the one doing the pointing.

I think its pretty safe to say that the fact that all of us here continue to have an avid interest in discussing these things, none of us have reached any kind of a definitive 'end point' in terms of seeing clearly.

There is a great freedom in simply being able to admit that perhaps my lens is not as clear as It might currently seem...that so long as we remain human, clarity/awareness is an ongoing thing with no finite point where we can declare with certainty, "I'm done....All of my perceptions are absolutely clear and without prejudice."

I'm neither attached to some teacher role, nor to being right. If Frisky says the exploration needs to stop, then I'm done with it. I didn't invite the nonsense, I'm just pointing it out.

[inri]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

This is the mirror game, and it's another way to make people wrong.

Indeed it can be a way to make others 'wrong' if that is the motivation. I don't personally see 'engaging in faulty perception' as the equivalent of 'being wrong.'

I think all of us who come at these discussions with sincerity are as much attempting to help others come to clarity as we are attempting to help ourselves. In fact, it could be said that the two are kind of one in the same.

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by inri

Can you see that to some of us it also appears as though YOU still remain unconscious to some extent...can you even consider the possibility that this might actually be so?

There's that pesky word again.

How it is that all of us consider ourselves to be seeing with a certain amount of clarity but only YOU are REALLY seeing with clarity?

I'm not going to suggest that I see with perfect clarity, but after reacting to Arc (and others), myself, in the 'What Is' thread, I understand what he's saying, which, to be clear, is not that he's 'right', or that anyone else is 'wrong', but rather he's pointing out people's tendency view themselves and others as 'right' or 'wrong'. As we've seen with a number of folks, this causes peeps (or, really, their egos) to become reactive. The reaction is the illusion, and when you can see through the illusion, when you can get over your reaction, then what he's saying makes sense. I could be mistaken, but I think CG and CL would agree with this, also.

[inri]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

I'm neither attached to some teacher role, nor to being right.

And of course, if this was 'unconscious,' you would not be aware of it.

But..if you say so.

[inri]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Beingist

There's that pesky word again.

Yes, indeed. That pesky word however very aptly describes what occurs whenever we look at the written words of another in an attempt to decipher the inner motivations behind them. We are simply responding to something that is 'appearing' to us...and as such, the moment we form an opinion, we've made a judgment that is based upon perceptions.

I'm not going to suggest that I see with perfect clarity,

And this is it in a nutshell. All of us seem willing to admit that we likely do not see with perfect clarity...all of us, except for Arcanum.

There is no emotional reaction occurring 'here'....merely a well intentioned attempt to get someone whom I perceive to be 'stuck' to see something that he is very good at pointing out in others.

All of us have been pretty good at accepting the finger pointing at us and quite good at admitting that perhaps absolute clarity is not our current point of seeing....however, Arcanum seems to resist the idea that perhaps his lens also could use some windshield wiping.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by inri

Yes, Paula, I very much understand what you're saying here, as I'm sure you're aware of, I also often get accused by Arcanum as being 'insincere' when responding to his posts.

When The fact is, we are not 'trying to make him wrong' as he suggests, but instead we are attempting to point out to him that he is engaging in the very same faulty, personal perceptions (looking at a rope and seeing a snake) that he points out in others.

I find it incredibly telling that when he points to the delusions of others he sees himself as being a 'teacher,' yet, when others attempt to point out HIS faulty perceptions, we are attempting to make him 'wrong' and thus, we are being 'insincere'.

Like you, I find it quite stunning that someone would perceive me as being 'insincere' while engaging in these conversations.....I rather feel that I approach these conversations with the utmost of sincerity.

I can certainly say as well that I've never perceived 'game playing' in any of YOUR postings here...in fact, it's always been your uncommon level of sincerity that appeals so much to me.

Thanks Inri. The feeling is mutual.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

He doesn't need any defense. I'm suggesting you took the opportunity to make him wrong and then continued to poke him about it even though it appears he was right. It's just contradiction for the sake of argument. Now you want to make it appear that I had a need to 'jump to his defense'.

So your defense is "I made him wrong, took the opportunity to continue to poke him and I am contradicting him for the sake of argument."

There's a lot of demon creating going on.

Yes there is.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

I would suggest you start a new thread and ask your question again.

From past experience and based on who's posting here, I can foresee that this thread will easily run for another five pages essentially repeating the previous three.

hehehehehe Good observation but what you don't see are the shift(s) in consciousness. To me it is spirituality in motion.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

This is the mirror game, and it's another way to make people wrong.

Yes, through your perception Arc, not through mine. The mirror is not a game but a reality of your reflection.

[Maguru]

[QUOTE=inri;1038203]

Yes, indeed. That pesky word however very aptly describes what occurs whenever we look at the written words of another in an attempt to decipher the inner motivations behind them. We are simply responding to something that is 'appearing' to us...and as such, the moment we form an opinion, we've made a judgment that is based upon perceptions.

And this is it in a nutshell. All of us seem willing to admit that we likely do not see with perfect clarity...all of us, except for Arcanum.

There is no emotional reaction occurring 'here'....merely a well intentioned attempt to get someone whom I perceive to be 'stuck' to see something that he is very good at pointing out in others.

I've only been pointing out what he points out in others but now you mention it? Hmmm. I've never seen Arc through this lens before.

All of us have been pretty good at accepting the finger pointing at us and quite good at admitting that perhaps absolute clarity is not our current point of seeing....however, Arcanum seems to resist the idea that perhaps his lens also could use some windshield wiping.

I'm struggling to see the person behind Arc's posts. I'm certain of his sincerity and I'm certain he doesn't have an ulterior motive and only the best of intentions. There's a saying just popped into my head : The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Hope not.

[inri]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I'm struggling to see the person behind Arc's posts. I'm certain of his sincerity and I'm certain he doesn't have an ulterior motive and only the best of intentions. There's a saying just popped into my head : The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Hope not.

I think in those of us who really enjoy 'teaching,' be it spirituality or anything else, we can become attached to the idea of being all knowing. I speak from experience when I say it can be difficult for those who are 'teachers' at their core to admit to being fallible...particularly when it comes to their self perceived area of 'expertise.'

I agree, Arc is indeed sincere in his motives and intentions, however, sometimes a very strong intention to 'teach' can result in an attachment to 'knowing'.....when this occurs, it is the very depth of the sincerity and the purity of the intentions themselves that create the barrier to accepting and admitting that perhaps we don't actually know everything or perhaps we do not see with absolute clarity.

I've come to see that the ability not only to see that I might be wrong but to admit it to others has been incredibly liberating and in my estimation, deeply 'spiritual' as well.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by inri

I think in those of us who really enjoy 'teaching,' be it spirituality or anything else, we can become attached to the idea of being all knowing. I speak from experience when I say it can be difficult for those who are 'teachers' at their core to admit to being fallible...particularly when it comes to their self perceived area of 'expertise.'

I agree, Arc is indeed sincere in his motives and intentions, however, sometimes a very strong intention to 'teach' can result in an attachment to 'knowing'.....when this occurs, it is the very depth of the sincerity and the purity of the intentions themselves that create the barrier to accepting and admitting that perhaps we don't actually know everything or perhaps we do not see with absolute clarity.

I see. It isn't something I relate to being a teacher. I actually prefer being the student.

I've come to see that the ability not only to see that I might be wrong but to admit it to others has been incredibly liberating and in my estimation, deeply 'spiritual' as well.

Absolutely. Humble pie is good for the soul but a bit hard to swallow.

What are your thoughts on how we uncover the unconsciousness that Arc spoke of? Personally, I think they show in some behavioral traits.

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by inri

I think in those of us who really enjoy 'teaching,' be it spirituality or anything else, we can become attached to the idea of being all knowing. I speak from experience when I say it can be difficult for those who are 'teachers' at their core to admit to being fallible...particularly when it comes to their self perceived area of 'expertise.'

I agree, Arc is indeed sincere in his motives and intentions, however, sometimes a very strong intention to 'teach' can result in an attachment to 'knowing'.....when this occurs, it is the very depth of the sincerity and the purity of the intentions themselves that create the barrier to accepting and admitting that perhaps we don't actually know everything or perhaps we do not see with absolute clarity.

I agree, yet with all things spirituality, it's almost impossible to discriminate when we've crossed over that line, when the ego has reared that ugly head of his. For in the early stages it's very much about subtlety and deception. As such, I think we really need to develop, that is; work on a competency to step back from the immediate situation for a different focus than whatever is going on - this time upon self, our underlying motivations in being involved, and take an objective assessment about whether I’m in it for the greater cause, or for me, my sense of worth.

I've when I do this, I'll often recognise the discussion to a certain extent taking over the participants rather than the other way around. It is then I'll quite often choose to drop out in order to witness for a time from further afield. Unfortunately this can be another painful step, as others often like to interpret this as my acceptance of being beaten or wrong. As a man, this is a hard pill to swallow, until I recognise all that is entirely their issue, their ego-powered need to be ‘right’, according their pseudo camouflage. Therefore any further participation would be fruitless (at best) in any case.

As far as 'seeing the person behind Arc's posts', I don't really feel much need for such appraisal per most forum members, but generally (I think) operate under the assumption he is genuine, sincere in his intentions, and from there seek to find the discrepancies in the respective understandings of the words/expressions being used.

Originally Posted by inri

I've come to see that the ability not only to see that I might be wrong but to admit it to others has been incredibly liberating and in my estimation, deeply 'spiritual' as well.

Indeed it is. Once we release our grasp on the need to be right, which in turn stems from a determined self-protective mode that relates to the (the current that is) pseudo camouflage upon which we rely for relevance, we can commence upon the process of dismantling this and progressively all other pseudo facades that have been applied throughout our lifetime - all for purposes of relevance at any time.

[inri]

Originally Posted by Maguru

What are your thoughts on how we uncover the unconsciousness that Arc spoke of? Personally, I think they show in some behavioral traits.

When we're living an unconscious life, our lack of consciousness will demonstrate itself through a lack of peace...there will be many emotional disturbances which if we're unconscious enough, will fall from our seeing but will impact our general experience with discord.

The more expansive our consciousness, the more peace will prevail. Our indication of a lack of consciousness will absolutely be revealed through our behavioral traits and the lack of harmony inherent within our day to day, moment to moment experience.

[inri]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

I agree, yet with all things spirituality, it's almost impossible to discriminate when we've crossed over that line, when the ego has reared that ugly head of his. For in the early stages it's very much about subtlety and deception. As such, I think we really need to develop, that is; work on a competency to step back from the immediate situation for a different focus than whatever is going on - this time upon self, our underlying motivations in being involved, and take an objective assessment about whether I’m the greater cause, or for me, my sense of worth.

well said.

I've when I do this, I'll often recognise the discussion to a certain extent taking over the participants rather than the other way around. It is then I'll quite often choose to drop out in order to witness for a time from further afield.

Yes!...I very much understand this and am about to make my own similar exit very shortly, I think.

There's just a point where you can see you're going in circles and then you kind of realize that there really is no actual reason for doing this...and it stopped being fun a ways back

Indeed it is. Once we release our grasp on the need to be right, which in turn stems from a determined self-protective mode that relates to the (the current that is) pseudo camouflage upon which we rely for relevance, we can commence upon the process of dismantling this and progressively all other pseudo facades that have been applied throughout our lifetime - all for purposes of relevance at any time.

Don't you find needs are like a structure...once we see through the really big ones, the lesser ones all come crashing down. Iv'e found that the falling away of the need to know what it true or the need to be right was the biggie....when that came down, it all started coming down...no foundation left.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Maguru

So your defense is "I made him wrong, took the opportunity to continue to poke him and I am contradicting him for the sake of argument."

Seems to be what happened, yeah. Why did you do that?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Maguru

hehehehehe Good observation but what you don't see are the shift(s) in consciousness. To me it is spirituality in motion.

Yes, it is, akchuly.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I'm struggling to see the person behind Arc's posts. I'm certain of his sincerity and I'm certain he doesn't have an ulterior motive and only the best of intentions. There's a saying just popped into my head : The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Hope not.

What if there isn't a person to find behind Arc's posts?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I'm struggling to see the person behind Arc's posts. I'm certain of his sincerity and I'm certain he doesn't have an ulterior motive and only the best of intentions. There's a saying just popped into my head : The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Hope not.

Here's something you might misinterpret as personal. Marie and I had our squirrel satsang in the park today, and we talked about emptiness. About how emptiness is how Love flows between us, and how violence on the forum can be transformed into clarity, how all healing happens, not through our own intentions, but by the grace of God. I said emptiness is Stillness. Marie asked, "What does it mean; be still and know that you are God?". We were silent for a long time, just staring at the river. When we finally turned to each other, we both had tears streaming down our faces.

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

What if there isn't a person to find behind Arc's posts?

What if there's a dozen? Perhaps a Jesuit think tank, all working to undermine (as always) true spirituality in favour of Roman mind control?

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Here's something you might misinterpret as personal. Marie and I had our squirrel satsang in the park today, and we talked about emptiness. About how emptiness is how Love flows between us, and how violence on the forum can be transformed into clarity, how all healing happens, not through our own intentions, but by the grace of God. I said emptiness is Stillness. Marie asked, "What does it mean; be still and know that you are God?". We were silent for a long time, just staring at the river. When we finally turned to each other, we both had tears streaming down our faces.

Hey that all seems reasonably personal, in my opinion. I do hope my opinion isn't a misinterpretation, and you were actually perhaps referring to another couple in another park??? What is a satsang, by the way?

[Beingist]

Originally Posted by Apopohis Reject

What if there's a dozen? Perhaps a Jesuit think tank, all working to undermine (as always) true spirituality in favour of Roman mind control?

Actually, a Jesuit think tank working toward Roman mind control comes closer to what's behind my posts.

[Prinie]

Geeze, the development of this thread. I can feel it!

[Apopohis Reject]

Originally Posted by Beingist

Actually, a Jesuit think tank working toward Roman mind control comes closer to what's behind my posts.

Finally a definition from Beingist that gets my chimes all atinkling.