PDA

View Full Version : True Will of the Soul



Eshai
10-21-2014, 04:35 PM
We all want things, right? I know I do.

The philosophical path that I follow in my life emphasizes knowing my true desires and embracing my strongest passions in order for me to get what I want in life. Naturally, there are many things I want. Surviving is the most basic goal (without meeting this goal all others are moot), followed by all of the desires I have which lead to warm fuzzies and emotional gratification.

Recently, I have come to believe that there are deeper desires hiding within the darkest, innermost recesses of my soul. It is my belief that there is a single, all-powerful Desire which underlays, and ultimately guides, all of my thoughts and actions. This is the true Will of the soul.

But I do not know what it is, and I am uncertain how I might learn it. Through meditation and contemplation, the closest ideas I have had about its nature is that it may be something along the lines of some kind of abstract, absolute freedom. Or perhaps it is power. But even if I had great power, and could destroy entire planets with my thoughts, I feel like I would still hunger for more. So this cannot be the case.

But if it is freedom... freedom from what? I do not necessarily feel enslaved, though technically I could philosophize that I am enslaved in many ways. Perhaps it is ignorance I wish to quell through my lust for knowledge. But there is no end. It is limitless, and I would forever want more.

Can the true Will of the soul be so petty, as to want freedom and power and knowledge and awesomeness? While I want these things, there must be more. These cannot be the Will of my soul.

Thoughts?

Kiorionis
10-21-2014, 06:30 PM
To crave power reminds me of the ego. To desire freedom reminds me of the soul.

Krisztian
10-22-2014, 12:52 AM
To crave power reminds me of the ego. To desire freedom reminds me of the soul.

Both are agendas of the ego [lower mind]. To desire freedom simply means that deep down the ego believes it doesn't have it. To want, is to have the conviction that you don't already have.

The point of aligning oneself with the soul [higher mind] is to surrender and become subservient to the path one contracted to carry out [before incarnation]. Most however want to know the higher mind to manipulate it to do what their ego wants. Which is really why we have the saying: Many are called, few listen [chosen].

Eshai
10-22-2014, 11:06 AM
Thanks for the replies.


The point of aligning oneself with the soul [higher mind] is to surrender and become subservient to the path one contracted to carry out [before incarnation].
You use some interesting words. First, why "surrender" and "subservient"? What are we surrendering to, and what are we serving? I know you said we serve the path we were contracted to carry out, but who (or what) do you believe set this contract with us? And do you think this path is universal to all beings, or it is determined by the individual?

And how does desire and the ego relate to this? If we desire to surrender and becoming subservient to our destined path, is this an act of the ego and the lower mind even though it is also the same as aligning ourselves with the soul and the higher mind? Can something be both simultaneously, or is this an exception?

Andro
10-22-2014, 11:21 AM
Maybe this short story by Asimov could provide some inspiration on this topic, along with the related thread:

The Last Answer (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?3243-The-Last-Answer)

Krisztian
10-22-2014, 02:14 PM
You use some interesting words. First, why "surrender" and "subservient"? What are we surrendering to, and what are we serving? . . . . And do you think this path is universal to all beings, or it is determined by the individual?

And how does desire and the ego relate to this? If we desire to surrender and becoming subservient to our destined path, is this an act of the ego and the lower mind even though it is also the same as aligning ourselves with the soul and the higher mind? Can something be both simultaneously, or is this an exception?

These are all ego questions.

The answer to all your questions depends entirely on how much of a relationship you have with self, your Self. When there's a dialogue that's pure and without the manipulation of the ego, then you have established, daily, reliably, practically, a method, a way of being, that supports you, the you that's meant to live in harmony. The soul's purpose (I likely don't mean that the way you do), so use Higher Self, can be quite different from the needs and desires of the ego. So the relationship to listen clearly, purely, to a greater knowingness, is severed. Then, you have what you see daily with humanity-at-large: chaos, manipulation, lack of love, displeasure, resentments, distrust, the list goes on.

I wish I could communicate this, but on this intellectual level, on a Forum, this answer only brings up ten other questions.


I know you said we serve the path we were contracted to carry out, but who (or what) do you believe set this contract with us?

Ego question, again.

I don't believe, I know.

You did knowingly. Because you live out of your ego, you forgot. That's also why no one is truly a victim.

Eshai
10-22-2014, 04:19 PM
Indeed it does bring up more questions.


When there's a dialogue that's pure and without the manipulation of the ego, then you have established, daily, reliably, practically, a method, a way of being, that supports you, the you that's meant to live in harmony.
How do you know when the dialogue is pure and without the manipulation of the ego?


The soul's purpose (I likely don't mean that the way you do), so use Higher Self, can be quite different from the needs and desires of the ego.
Emphasis mine. Is it possible for the soul's purpose (desire?) to be the same as the desires of the ego?

Now, if there is a power out there which has indeed "contracted" us to perform a duty, and this is something that corresponds to what I have labeled as the true Will of the soul, should we not be suspicious of this? Might there be nothing more manipulative than a greater or more powerful entity or force enlisting us to serve its will who has convinced us that this is our divine purpose?

And ultimately, how do we know we have discovered our "higher" contractual obligations? Is it just a feeling, or is there some sort of experience that accompanies it?


you live out of your ego
Is it really possible to live without ego? And if so, how?

Eshai
10-22-2014, 04:53 PM
Maybe this short story by Asimov could provide some inspiration on this topic, along with the related thread:

"The Last Answer" was interesting, however, what I seek does not exactly follow along the same lines. I have no real interest in an answer (or purpose), because I would never believe any answer I would get. I honestly do not think there is a purpose, other than what I create. So for me no one purpose is inherently better than any other because the end results are the same.

What I really seek is to learn the base desire which drives all my other desires. I presently believe that for me, this is something unknown. But I think there may be clues in my present passions. The things I am drawn to and the things which give me pleasure must all go to support something else, as often many things are embraced because they support a greater desire. And perhaps this is all entirely based upon the ego. But is striving to exist beyond the ego any less about serving the same ego, and is doing so inherently better than not doing so?

The ego as I understand it... is me. It is what I want, and be damned with what I am told I should want. Is it really that I am being manipulated by my own ego, as Kris pointed out, or am I being manipulated by the egos of others who have possibly deceived me and made me think that I want certain things?

In "The Last Answer," for instance, Murray's purpose became to destroy the nexus and the connection to the Voice. Even so, his very purpose was still dependent upon the Voice, and this desire was not of his own making as he said. But since we are constrained by our experiences (that is, we cannot know things which we cannot experience, directly or indirectly), how can we ever want something we have not experienced?

Awani
10-22-2014, 05:08 PM
One answer could be that the true will of the soul is to reconnect/submerge back/rise back up into the Spirit.

I think you are complicating matters (judging from the thoughts and questions that you have)... well they seem to be complicating things when I compare them to my own understanding of my own desires, ego etc.

I can't give any advice really. These types of questions can only be answered by the personal/private quest that you are on... not by another person... still from my own experience I think you are here to learn something... something you need to learn... and not until you die will you know if you have learned it. So pay attention to whatever problems come your way, as they might be a clue to what you should learn...

Also I think that the only way to fully merge with the Supreme Spirit you need to be able to project and receive boundless, infinite love. The most important truths are... true... and timeless.

:cool:

Eshai
10-22-2014, 05:15 PM
Maybe, dev. If so, is there a way to know while still alive? Can we reconnect with the spirit while being flesh and blood, and perpetually live life in such a state?

What if we were never disconnected in the first place? And how might we determine this?

Awani
10-22-2014, 05:30 PM
Maybe, dev. If so, is there a way to know while still alive? Can we reconnect with the spirit while being flesh and blood, and perpetually live life in such a state?

Well this is enlightenment... the truths that are timeless and true, and can be easily found... forget religions and dogma... look at the pure truth...

The Quran
“Allah is all in all. Allah sees you, and is with you, wherever you are, whatever you do.” * Allah = any god, spirit, force

The Bible
"Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you..."

Buddhism
"You can search throughout the entire universe for someone who is more deserving of your love and affection than you are yourself, and that person is not to be found anywhere. You, yourself, as much as anybody in the entire universe, deserve your love and affection."

"Love is a gift of one’s inner most soul to another so both can be whole."

Hinduism
“The great secret of true success, of true happiness, is this: the man or woman who asks for no return, the perfectly unselfish person, is the most successful.”

Scientology
"Happiness and strength endure only in the absence of hate. To hate alone is the road to disaster. To love is the road to strength. To love in spite of all is the secret of greatness. And may very well be the greatest secret in this universe."

Native American
"Wakan Tanka, Great Mystery,
teach me how to trust
my heart,
my mind,
my intuition,
my inner knowing,
the senses of my body,
the blessings of my spirit.
Teach me to trust these things
so that I may enter my Sacred Space
and love beyond my fear,
and thus Walk in Balance
with the passing of each glorious Sun."


What if we were never disconnected in the first place? And how might we determine this?

Birth = disconnect

Have fun... with life ;)

:cool:

Krisztian
10-22-2014, 05:45 PM
All this, is a good dialogue.

When too many questions impend on self, that's a sign that the ego is lost. Being too heady, 'trying to figure it out', these, and other ways, are mechanism of an insecure ego that's most likely had one too many traumatic events that makes it feel uncertain, confused and overwhelmed by thinking. The inner balance is off. So one could never receive pure directions, for the noise of inner chaos rules predominantly. That then becomes the mainstay of one's identity.

So I ask, please, if that is the case as stated, how can your ego be aligned with your Higher Self?

[By the way, I am merely sharing, trying to contribute to this Thread. I am not the final word, nor should be]

DonSweet
10-24-2014, 05:49 AM
Caught this thread a couple of days ago when Eshai posted the initial question(s). Interesting developments.

What I have to offer is this ...

One thing I see myself and my fellow human beings struggle with is this concept of a "single self." It's pretty easy to see how we'd all like to condense what we are down to a singularity ... "me" ... but in the end (or even the beginning) that's not what we are. We are a multiplicity of both physical and non-physical entities living in concert.

The best place this was illustrated for me was my time as a mentor to troubled young adults from the most awful sections of Philly. I spent a great deal of time with many of them, with the sole purpose of guiding them to a functional life outside the program they resided in and I worked for. That was the theory, anyway.

Needless to say, something I'd known for many years became glaringly apparent. Trauma clearly shreds and shatters our inner, and often even outer, stability and/or balance. The question is, what are we stabilizing? What are we balancing?

It's been my observation and conclusion, perhaps for many years, that we are balancing our "many selves." One of the earliest versions of this observation came with my interest in Scientology and Dianetics, primarily Dianetics, since that's the "diagnostic" and therapeutic aspect of Scientology. One of the foundational processes is to become "clear" meaning cleared of all trauma or conflict within yourself, which is also the innate goal of psychiatry and psychology ... to "cure."

In my view, there is no denying that we are a conglomeration of many selves, not just ego, and even ego is comprised of many, many parts. You could even say "sub-selves."

The best example is an unresolved trauma, and in reality it could be even the most mild, but naturally those of great trauma are obviously the most critical to resolve. But the point being, any trauma that remains "undiscussed" or resolved will break off a part of ourselves and literally fester like any untreated wound. That time your mother smacked your face when you were six when you wouldn't give a toy back to your sibling that was your toy in the first place will peel off a part of yourself that will sulk and bother you for decades to come. That six year old will still be in your mind decades later nagging at you that it was your toy in the first place and your mommy was totally wrong to smack you. That child is literally standing right next to you griping about that day many years ago ... as are so many other parts of your persona that were hurt, bruised or betrayed, and no resolution was ever offered.

But that's just the aspects that contribute to our dysfunction. Normal functioning is clearly defined as varied elements. Your body "talks" to you, letting you know when things are either good or bad. Your Right Brain tells you when things are "just wonderful" and your Left Brain tell you when things don't make sense. Your spirit provides you with connection to the universe outside yourself and your soul provides you a "center" on which you can base your foundation. You are surrounded with voices and impulses that are constantly inputting, both negatively and positively, and any one of these inputs can be dominant over you at any point in your life.

Even the ego isn't a singularity. It is a combination of elements ... your right brain, your left brain, your brain stem or "lizard brain" which is a technical term used in marketing. The ego can even constitute input from your body's cravings, for sex or food or physical gratification. All these things are what us "conspiracy theorists" know the "conspirators" prey upon to keep us simple-minded and consuming. But the point being that they are multiple aspects of our selves ... selves within our self.

You are literally a committee of beings, not a single being. Each one contributing to an ongoing discussion -- or even argument -- within yourself. And these contributions take place whether you want them to or not, particularly when it comes to your basic components, but even more prevalently when it comes to your "traumatized selves." Each one of your/our traumatized selves is nagging and tugging at you every moment of every day ...

... if those traumas are not resolved.

My brother's wife (now passed) could not be a passenger in a car. I once had her as a passenger with my brother and wife on an evening trip to Philadelphia. Nearly the entire time, she laid her head on my brother's lap in the back seat distressing over [normal] traffic, both there and back. She'd been in three accidents so serious that she had to be extracted by The Jaws of Life and had never spent a single minute in therapy for the trauma, nor did she feel she had to. She spent the rest of her life with low self-esteem, manifesting as excessive issues of her appearance and had serious control issues even outside of an automobile.

Okay ... so I'm being a little long-winded about this. Eshai's original question was about personal desires, about "wanting stuff."

My answer is, sure, want stuff ... just run that wanting through a clean filter.

Krisztain has brought up ego, and yes, one must be very cautious of ego since it can overwhelm and dominate. My caution with ego is that it is not a "bad" thing when kept in context. Not all ego is bad. Ego tells us when there is danger. Ego reminds us to eat. Ego can be a pleasant companion when we have an ice cream cone. But no, at no time should ego ever be allowed to dominate. At best, ego's contribution to nearly everything we do should hover around something like 10% ...

... which is interesting since the majority live with the ego asserting something around 95%.

One thing I see you struggling with Eshai is reconciling what you desire compared to what you have. What you have is a fallacy of life ... you have what you have ... you are living, therefore you are "limited."

It is not my opinion that we were nothing before we were "alive" and now, since we are alive, that we are "something." I believe that we have [B]always been something ... "what" is up for argument and discussion, particularly since we were all born into what I call a Sacred and Profound Ignorance.

What I believe we were before we were alive has much to do with being directly connect to All That Is ... to Source Energy. We had a perspective that was all-encompassing. We knew answers and we knew -- or were connected to -- all that is.

Your struggle, Eshai, is reconciling not knowing, which is now a new experience for you, as you perceive that experience in this life. You now find yourself without a connection to Source and all the answers.

The trick here is the fact that your perception is that you are disconnected from Source Energy. It is only perception. You're inhabiting a body with only five physical senses. The wavelengths of energy you perceive through this filter of a body only gives you the illusion of separation, when you are, in fact, not separated at all.

Once you get past that "committee" of selves you call your Self, which are bickering, whining, tugging, nagging and drawing your attention away from the larger picture, you may come to see that you actually do have access to the things you desire ... perhaps not in the immediate physical universe you perceive through your living senses ... but through all those senses that have been muted by the act of living itself.

Just by asking these questions and struggling with that balance, you have proven yourself to be a moral being of compassion and empathy.

This is life's journey.

What you are discovering is that all things are sacred, even things like lust and hunger, but all these things must be held in context. With great knowledge, you might have the power to destroy planets, but in context you would know not to do it, holding things like compassion and empathy just as dear as your power of knowledge to destroy.

Asking yourself, "Am I just being petty?" is a GOOD thing, because through it you come to know what petty is, and with luck, insight, intellect, discernment, contemplation and consideration, you know not to be that. It is GOOD to know what NOT to be.

It is an Alchemical process ... of calcination. You are burning away the undesirable, the gross or dross.

Addressing and reconciling each and every trauma, no matter how small, is also the calcination process, so that you may "purify" your own ingredients, cleansing the whole.

Make sense?

Also ...

I've said something similar to this before, but feel the need to reiterate. I'd like to borrow Krisztain's closing line and also say ...

"By the way, I am merely sharing, trying to contribute to this Thread. I am not the final word, nor should be."

Krisztian
10-24-2014, 03:18 PM
My caution with ego is that it is not a "bad" thing when kept in context. Not all ego is bad. Ego tells us when there is danger. Ego reminds us to eat. Ego can be a pleasant companion when we have an ice cream cone. But no, at no time should ego ever be allowed to dominate. At best, ego's contribution to nearly everything we do should hover around something like 10% ...

... which is interesting since the majority live with the ego asserting something around 95%.

I didn't express it well, yes, I actually never meant to downplay the ego, or that it's bad, thanks for pointing that out. I am merely trying to articulate that people are often lost to the whims and neurosis of the ego. Look how many people have been banned here, for example, all for the same reason: unstable ego that personalizes everything. The ego has it's role, and it is as it should be.

However, if people are interested in accelerated evolution, the ego, believe it or not, has a much, much less role in that to play.

Eshai
10-24-2014, 03:37 PM
My answer is, sure, want stuff ... just run that wanting through a clean filter.
How do you do this?

DonSweet
10-25-2014, 02:30 AM
Krisztain ...

If you're talking about 5th Dimensional evolution, I couldn't agree more. But down here in the 4th Dimension it's a valuable tool.

I watched a UFO whistleblower in a video a while back, speaking of his brief meeting with a couple of ETs in an underground facility out West (his claim, naturally). He asked some questions of them, including what they thought of human beings. Apparently, they were 5th dimensional beings and didn't speak, but communicated by telepathy since their existence is on a slightly higher dimensional plane. One of them commented that we "smell bad," referring to our thought processes.

Personally, I totally relate to that having been around a myriad of human beings for 58 years now. Some people you just can't stand to be near, and they can be anyone, whether in work clothes or a fifteen-hundred dollar Armani suit.

Eshai ...

Short answer is -- "Clean your filter."

Long answer is a bit more complicated, other than to perhaps suggest that, "This is the essence of Alchemy."

Keeping the conversation focused on Alchemy, I'd highly recommend Dennis Hauck's book, "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Alchemy." He has an astounding depth of knowledge in Alchemical processes, including how an Alchemist incorporates themselves into Alchemy, paralleling their Inner Work with their Alchemical work as a whole. I consider the Inner Work so critical that I have been spending more time on it than anything actually in the lab recently. It's making a tremendous difference in how I perceive my lab work for the future.

Outside of that, there may be a few simple exercises you can perform that may help get you started.

I'm going to use the word "meditation," but as Mr. Houck suggests, it's not traditional New Age style meditation. It's more of a working concentration. I use this exercise often when I'm working on almost anything remotely creative.

You may want to start with a more conventional style of meditation, just to get your mind (and brain) working in this direction.

The first thing you have to do is shed any fear you have of looking at your past. Just let it go. Your past is your past, and no matter how bad some things might have seemed, they can't hurt you now. This is a critical turning point that many people simply cannot do. Their pasts are so painful that looking back just wreaks of it, and often they consider these things so obsessing that they can't NOT dwell on them, making that pain their constant companion. I'm currently dealing with a relative that is so racked with past emotional trauma that he can barely function.

The first barrier to this process is denial ... "Oh, everything is just fine. I don't have any of those problems." Both the young adults I worked with and this relative (as well and many, many people I've known) have literally convinced themselves that they are "just fine," when there is a slew of damage that effects their everyday behavior in fairly serious ways. They've just become so accustomed to it that they think it's all very normal.

I know this because I'm that way myself, and have spent several decades learning how to "clean house."

So first and foremost, you must shed denial ... we all suffer traumas ... and second, you have to shed the fear of facing even the smallest glitch in your history, not just the big things ...

... but the big things are the most paramount to address.

This past winter, I worked with a fellow that is a world-renowned drummaker, helping him catch up on his production. He is just a year older than me, highly intelligent, perhaps a genius, very liberal and free-thinking and very open and seemingly honest and forthright. However, during that winter time I spent with him ... whether my influence brought this about or not, I do not know ... he had a startling revelation. He had been raped at the age of twelve. He had hidden this incident from himself for decades.

The point being, it doesn't matter what we think we know ... we don't always know what we think we know.

You, as your own "patient," have to be able to open the deep cracks and crevasses of your memory and your mind to start the "calcination" process of dealing with those things that impair you, whether you think they do or not, or even if you think they're there or not.

In this "meditative state" you'll need to address each and every instance, in detail, recalling whatever it was completely, then "discuss" the incident with yourself ...

... and what I mean by "yourself" is that self that experienced the trauma or incident. You, as the aged, mature party in the conversation, needs to assure that part of yourself that "everything-is-alright," the incident meant little, certainly not the trauma you've carried all these years, and everything is fine now. Obviously, this is the Reader's Digest version of dealing with something. You may find things to be much more complicated to resolve than I suggest here.

Sometimes you may need to go through an entire "closure" process, and not to alarm you, but some instances may take years.

In my younger years, I was plagued with things I felt my father did very, very wrong with my upbringing. Long story short, an hour long conversation with him on the telephone in 1990 -- although he did not tell me any of these things himself -- lead me to discover that he did many things right, far more than I had given him credit for ... and ... more importantly ... did things for me that were corrections of abuses he suffered in his own upbringing. I was focused on the bad and it wasn't until the trigger of the confrontation that I began to discover how skewed my perception was. When he passed in '03, we had a stronger relationship, although never completely healed.

What I healed was the constant, nagging distaste I had for my relationship with him prior to that.

I tell you these things since "resolved" means actually doing something, not merely telling yourself everything is okay.

You have to have the conversation with yourself ... literally. You have to actually go through the processes of closure.

Over the years I have developed a process of doing this "inner work" while working, usually on creative projects. Although a creative project may occupy my brain and utilize my skills, my mind also needs to "work." So while I'm stitching a piece of canvas, or turning something on my lathe, or screwing together my shed/garage, I'm also doing this inner work ... and naturally this process is being incorporated into my lab.

As I suggest, you may want to start with just "thinking" or meditation in a conventional sense, finding a quiet space and time and concentrate on beginning the process. As you progress, you can use the process while doing other things.

What I have described is also a traditional (and sacred) method and philosophy of Native Americans. One learns to "walk in a sacred manner," meaning virtually the same as I have described here ... cleansing your life as you live it.

The key is to start.

The most important thing is to acknowledge your own faults, fallacies and flaws ... to live with them, accept them and incorporate this imperfection into your self image ... and that that self image is a positive one, despite your imperfections.

Does that help?

Ghislain
10-25-2014, 02:34 AM
One way may be to ask yourself how important the stuff you want is to you...imagine having it already and give yourself a pseudo experience of the effect this will bring in your life as it becomes the norm; you may find you don't really want it in the first place or by the same method you may see a way to acquire those things.

Ghislain

III
10-27-2014, 06:20 AM
Maybe, dev. If so, is there a way to know while still alive? Can we reconnect with the spirit while being flesh and blood, and perpetually live life in such a state?

What if we were never disconnected in the first place? And how might we determine this?


Hi Eshai,


Be careful what you (genuinely) ask for. There is no way of knowing in advance how one will interpret the experiences. There are those who choose to live continuously in the light. It generally takes some years of a lot of inner work and cleansing to build up a tolerance for high voltage light. It's never what you think. BE IN LOVE.

Eshai
10-27-2014, 12:16 PM
Does that help?
It certainly helps to further the conversation.


You, as the aged, mature party in the conversation, needs to assure that part of yourself that "everything-is-alright," the incident meant little, certainly not the trauma you've carried all these years, and everything is fine now.
Forgive me, but what you've written here seems to contradict this:

So first and foremost, you must shed denial
I can see why denial should be removed. It is a method of lying to ourselves to make us feel better about things we dislike. It is a fiction, which will not give us strength any more than imagining lifting weights will give us strength compared to the real deal.

But what inherently makes trauma "unclean" ?
What inherently makes the things that trouble us, or the things we dislike, "unclean" ?

What if trauma is the thing that cleans us, while living with peace of mind is what taints us?

Ghislain
10-27-2014, 02:12 PM
One could say that all peace of mind delivers is a happy face, where trauma is what moves us into action.

I'll use a proverb I have used many times before:


Two friends are sitting having a drink and the first guy has a dog lying by his feet. Every now and then the dog gives out a little yelp and after a while the second guy asks his friend what is wrong with his dog.

The first guy explains to his friend that his dog is lying on a nail and every now and then the nail is digging in him.

The second guy asks why the dog doesn't just move.

The first guy says that it doesn't hurt enough.

How much does it have to hurt before you are spurred into action? I think my point is that if you really want answers you will find them, it all depends on how important it is to you.


A couple of questions DS, if one is in denial how would one know?

Is there a possibility that one could create a belief of denial that doesn't actually exist, like a sort of autosuggestion?

There was a case a while back where a lot of parents were accused of child abuse. It later came to light that the children's therapists had inadvertently planted the thoughts of the abuse in the children's minds with their mode of questioning. The cases were dropped, but mud sticks.

Ghislain

III
10-28-2014, 01:22 AM
It certainly helps to further the conversation.



But what inherently makes trauma "unclean" ?
What inherently makes the things that trouble us, or the things we dislike, "unclean" ?

What if trauma is the thing that cleans us, while living with peace of mind is what taints us?




Hi Eshai,


I will take a try at that one. I don't know that it is "unclean", rather more like "corrupted" as I might see describe it. So Let us look at a trauma that left it's mark on somebody, getting run through with a sword, in a previous death. It produced a "trauma" wound in this person that could not be "accepted" because it couldn't be remembered. None the less the trauma imprinted on the person's "soul" and appeared to cause them endless medical problems in the vicinity of the sword wound. Let me say that a trauma in the present life isn't much different in effect. So the person doesn't want to look at the trauma. Then they try to not remember all the things that are one step away from the trauma, then the things that point at the pointers, then the things that point at the pointers pointing at the pointers pointing at the pointers ... It makes a hole of sorts in one's model of reality. As it connects into the "collective subconscious" or whatever, everybody else can see that there is no hole there. Somebody maintaining that there is a hole there (or their "energy" maintains that) and it causes a dissonance which can be perceived as "tainted" or "dirty" or "corrupted" or "dissonance".


Big traumas tend to have big avoidance areas. When we release the pent up energies as we release the block some would say that is the energy that purifies us, that we use our traumas to be a power source for our Alchemy. Energy that is felt is also information.

DonSweet
10-28-2014, 05:18 AM
Very good response III. I enjoyed it.

Ghislain ...

The denial conundrum is a tricky one, no doubt. I'd dealt with it in myself and had been dealing within others long before I became a mentor to young adults, but then it became a daily professional challenge, of sorts. It's perhaps the most challenging, that damned denial thing. If you're ignorant, how do you know you're ignorant, particularly if you think ignorant is normal?

As a lifelong photographer (from age 14) as well as having a philosophical bent most of those years, I know beyond doubt that we live in a world of contrasts (as our five senses perceive). Your hurt-spurred-to-action comment/question is a good illustration of this. If we did not have the contrast of pain and pleasure, how would we know what either were?

In previous posts, I've alluded to the idea (and outright stated) that life is a "great adventure," and largely established that on the concept of being born to a Profound and Sacred Ignorance. If we knew everything, what could possibly spur us on to know anything? All these contrasts, good and bad, light and dark, right and wrong, literally define that adventure. It is our choice of the choices that define it ... which also substantiates free will.

In my involvement with the Native American community, naturally going back to "original" traditions, not modern, corrupted traditions (post-Colombian), there is no "bad" or "good" experience, there is merely the choice of the perception of the experience. One does not intentionally choose "bad" .. such as picking up a hot coal from a fire ... knowing full well that pain will result. But that doesn't mean it's not possible (or in some case, applicable) to pick up a hot coal.

A concept that few in the West understand is to intentionally cause one's self to suffer. This is an integral tradition in Native culture. Perhaps a dozen times a year, I intentionally "subject" myself to steam temperatures in excess of 500-600 degrees Fahrenheit, sometimes lasting hours (four-and-a-half being the longest), but I won't get into the reasoning, spirituality or philosophy behind "sweat lodge" here. In this context, it's the concept of suffering to understand health. It's the concept of being put off-balance to find balance. It's being deprived of your senses in order to appreciate and understand your senses.

It is an exploration of contrast and an exercise to reach understanding.

It's said there's three versions of every recollection or memory of a circumstance ... your version, my version and the reality. One can argue that any alteration of a memory is a delusion, but is it "really"? Isn't it simply influenced by our plethora of other experiences?

Your suggestion that one could invent a denial is absolutely plausible. In fact, it happens way more often than I'd like. I've actually seen it happen in both my residents, professionally, and I've actually had these types of inventions played out against me by others in my personal life. With the medical community ... sorry to say ... so corrupted by a slew of influences, not the least of which is sociopolitical, even psychiatrists and psychologists can actually cause these fantasies in their patients. Your citation is not uncommon, sadly.

The point is, with you, yourself, (or me, myself) as both patient and doctor, you must establish a solid foundation of objective realism in your internal methodology. You must question yourself and confirm your objectivity. The child in your citation not only had no such mechanism, but the therapeutic methodology the therapist employed was inputting rather than extracting information, and influencing behavior and beliefs rather than analyzing. Any "correction" to behavior or beliefs is very, very tricky, indeed, and most therapists -- again, the result of a corrupt system -- have no clue how to go about it. Not only that, they severely lack the qualifications TO make adjustments AND lack any motivation to gain those qualifications. After all, success or failure, they still collect a paycheck.

Any therapist I have ever met that was worth more than a copper penny -- and there are few -- was one that had compassion, empathy, intellect AND personal experience with recovery. Mere "book larnin" doesn't make it. Political motivations to "save-the-world" not only doesn't make it, but is wholly aberrant and frequently dangerous.

So yes, your suggestion is not only plausible, it happens WAY too often.

Eshai ...

I'm not quite following your contradiction.

In your first citation, I'm speaking of your conversation with yourself, implying a process of reconciliation with your two elements, the calm, experienced Present Self, and your disturbed, Traumatized Self. I go on to say that it's not merely glossing over things to suggest that the incident or circumstance was invalidly claimed as "bad" and discuss the fact that such a reconciliation can take years. You can never invalidate "feeling." It is what it is. You have to literally alter it with understanding. A negative feeling, especially one that festers, lacks understanding. There is nothing to counterbalance the "bad," so bad is all that's perceived.

Whatever method you employ to achieve this balance depends on the situation ... wholly individuated case-by-case. There is no (neither did I imply) blanket "everything-will-be-alright." You can't just say, "Well that sucked ... now just get on with it."

Each and every trauma has to be dealt with one-on-one with that part of you that holds these feelings.

This is the point.

Feelings are held.

This is not a state of healthiness.

We are creatures of flow, not stagnation, and certainly not "backup."

Pain held and festering is the worst kind of backup.

If you look at every aspect of your life, whether physical or energetic, every good and healthy process is something "flowing" through you. You retain nothing. Every cell in your body is replaced every seven years, some daily. Every energetic impulse you have passes and then you have another. And I'm sure someone will nearly instantly correct me that we do not not retain anything, and that is correct. The only thing we ever retain is the memory of the experience, whatever it was.

Everything else passes.

We are creatures of flow, not retention.

My earlier citation of contrast should answer your question about this dance between clean and unclean. It is the process that does the cleaning, but only if and how we have consciously employed it. Consciousness is the key. Left alone, left without process, left without a conscious awareness, the gross/dross will weigh us down ... and ... in reality ... eventually kill us ... either spiritually (non-physically) or physically.

It is consciousness and the application of process in a condition of extreme contrasts ... the very definition of Alchemy ... that achieves higher states.

Eshai
10-28-2014, 07:28 PM
So the person doesn't want to look at the trauma. Then they try to not remember all the things that are one step away from the trauma, then the things that point at the pointers, then the things that point at the pointers pointing at the pointers pointing at the pointers ... It makes a hole of sorts in one's model of reality. As it connects into the "collective subconscious" or whatever, everybody else can see that there is no hole there. Somebody maintaining that there is a hole there (or their "energy" maintains that) and it causes a dissonance which can be perceived as "tainted" or "dirty" or "corrupted" or "dissonance".

Big traumas tend to have big avoidance areas. When we release the pent up energies as we release the block some would say that is the energy that purifies us
Do not people learn from their negative experiences and thereby learn to avoid them? I see nothing about this which is unclean, or corrupt.

I think my misunderstanding comes from my interpretation of the phrase, "let go." I interpret this as not allowing negative experiences to negatively impact future experiences. But is it really "bad" to not "let go" according to my interpretation? Take the instance of the person who was in a car accident, and then feared being in cars. Some call this a mental blockage, or a mental health concern, or downright paranoia. But some may call this simple prudence. The people who aren't "traumatized" by car accidents may simply be ignorant as to how dangerous and foolish it is to ride around in a hunk of two ton steel at 70 mph. Therefore, perhaps it is more dangerous to not be "traumatized" and to be "cleansed" of these negative experiences.

(I must go, but I have more to write. Will return later.)

Kiorionis
10-28-2014, 11:06 PM
Whether or not trauma is outright bad or eventually beneficial, it still creates short-circuits.

And if you want your energy body to flow freely through your physical body, for spiritual advancement or to become more proficient at gathering circulating and projecting energy for magick, any 'blockages' will be in the way.

If you pay enough attention, any aches or pains in the body, especially in the organs, can be condensed into a knot. It's what happens when we 'cringe'.

III
10-29-2014, 03:24 AM
Do not people learn from their negative experiences and thereby learn to avoid them? I see nothing about this which is unclean, or corrupt.

I think my misunderstanding comes from my interpretation of the phrase, "let go." I interpret this as not allowing negative experiences to negatively impact future experiences. But is it really "bad" to not "let go" according to my interpretation? Take the instance of the person who was in a car accident, and then feared being in cars. Some call this a mental blockage, or a mental health concern, or downright paranoia. But some may call this simple prudence. The people who aren't "traumatized" by car accidents may simply be ignorant as to how dangerous and foolish it is to ride around in a hunk of two ton steel at 70 mph. Therefore, perhaps it is more dangerous to not be "traumatized" and to be "cleansed" of these negative experiences.

(I must go, but I have more to write. Will return later.)




Hi Eshai,


What I see is that I have failed to explain what I mean adequately. All any of us can do is describe things approximately how we see it. However, to work out the "misses" between 2 or more can share a meaning, whether there is agreement or not.


"Do not people learn from their negative experiences and thereby learn to avoid them?"

Sounds good to me, maybe. What is a negative experience in your definition?


Let's consider GROUNDHOG DAY. Phil, the weatherman takes the strategy of planning his way through to his ideal day by memorizing all the results of who knows how many years, decades or centuries repeating 2/2. It is a resounding failure because remembering them, he can never repeat the successes because his very responses are different because he is different by virtue of his previous experiences. Basically he learned that the way to success is changing himself so his natural responses are those of a genuinely decent person. He can't fake that by memorizing the answers.


So he tried to avoid all the "negative" outcomes. His "negative" were the ones he didn't want. That is purely an ego definition.


I had lifelong injuries from a red light runner. Like Phil I spent lots of passes trying to avoid that accident. Couldn't do it. After a lot of tries what I saw was that I could change the impact point by +-2 feet. What that could change was the difference between paralysis OR some nerve damage and a "bad back". This is NOT what I meant about avoidance. This is a different thing, denial of self knowledge. So Phil was an asshole in all sorts of ways. He denied that. It wasn't a single understanding he was blocking. His whole personality was shaped by several events that completely blocked his understanding of how he was responsible for how he had turned out and the type of life he had.


The best I approximate that occurs is that there is an "energy" felt that is linked to one of these blockages. In order to not have to see the "knowing" or whatever contained in that glimpse of energy one has to avoid it quickly. When it becomes fast enough and hard enough it appears to turn into a panic trigger. In any case before that, there is a fear attached to the energy which causes a response of more energy and an interpretation to the second or third or more energy links finally. Letting go of this is all about literally aiming for the middle and going through the energy. That works most of the time because it is just an energy that carries some associations. Sometimes one finds an actual primary blockage and has to live out the triggered archetype consciously and then can re-understand it.


It can happen with any kind of "gotta be"s "have to be this way" etc and it isn't, so the cause becomes invisible. The more connections that have to be blocked out the bigger and faster the reaction has to be to block access whenever processing goes through that area so understanding has to be diverted on an emergency basis.


Here is one that is almost bound to bring up in people. As Firesign Theater put it "I think We Are All Bozos on This Bus". We are all assholes. Look for all the things that are protected from being looked at by a reaction to that. It can be that kind of thing. There is a lot worse to be found but these are some of the almost universally blocked items. It can be literally anything including the upset of literally getting caught with your hand in the cookie jar. It was important at the moment the blocks were put in place and reinforced the next few times the matter came up and then it was decided. It may not be important at all to the adult mind.


Traumatized has no absolute definition. I still remember being burned at the stake and being totally pissed off at the Church about it. It sure isn't worth being traumatized about any more. I don't lie to myself about it. I was most definitely a loud and obnoxious heretic. I didn't do anything stupid besides being a loud and obnoxious heretic that I know of. That wasn't really traumatizing. A Nazi concentration camp was traumatizing for me and many others. I've worked with 2 ladies of WWII past lives, one with being in a camp and the relief of death and one a Nazi working in the Camps. Both were quite traumatized by those events of their lives and block it out very severely. One was blocked so badly she was quite unable to accept Shaktipat, the flow of some channels of divine energy. She was terrified of it.


What it is with these death related things is that the blockage existed before death and the person could not accept it in enlightened understanding at death and so it wasn't "closed out". I don't know how to say it right. Maybe "still pending" or "carried over". In any case, as one can have these experiences frequently, this often ends up being the "look ahead" at the end of one sequence and the beginning of the next one. Again, I'm just trying to say it as I see it at this moment. I hope you understand more what I am trying to say.


It isn't about the stories we tell ourselves so much as blocking lot's of energy flows to prevent seeing one's self.

Krisztian
10-29-2014, 01:42 PM
Wisdom to this particular topic (and many others) lies in experience, so as clever and insightful the postings have been, the ultimate test and validation comes from the experience that one has. Any other way, it's a "sounds good", heady, Tour de France, which in itself is entertaining, or can be, but holds no wisdom for the one who hasn't had the experience.

Ghislain
10-29-2014, 06:25 PM
Krisztian

I'm fairly confident that most, if not all, the people here have life experience.

Ghislain

Krisztian
10-29-2014, 08:25 PM
I'm fairly confident that most, if not all, the people here have life experience.

Ghislain

Ghislain, I didn't say people do not have life experience here.

I merely wanted to say, that there's a difference between philosophy and experience. And I would bet on experience as the ultimate final say on this matter, not philosophy.

DonSweet
10-29-2014, 11:22 PM
Lots of excellent things to respond to.

One reason I'd like to, as I have so far, is that I may have had these thoughts, but they haven't coalesced into a coherent form. Writing helps do that, and in turn affirms "feeling it" into a more substantial, tangible form. In other words, I learn. You could even say it's a process of manifestation.

None of what I'm about to type is a dissection or even criticism, but an effort to concur.

"Whether or not trauma is outright bad or eventually beneficial, it still creates short-circuits."

Excellent.

"What I see is that I have failed to explain what I mean adequately."

Actually, I got it ... but I completely understand self-criticism wherein I may interpret my own thoughts as incomplete, regardless of someone else's reaction. When a subject is being dissected to this degree, it's not always easy to know how deep to go or how detailed to get. What follows in your writing is excellent clarification and added to the point(s). After all, sometimes these things actually do need an encyclopedic examination to fully understand them.

"He can't fake that by memorizing the answers."

This is a great fallacy of Western Culture. Knowledge is fine, but it's not understanding. Western Culture has a nearly manic focus on information with little, if any, focus on knowing what the hell the information means. To me, particularly with my exposure to Native American culture, "information" merely fills in the gaps after one has come to understand something. It's "proof" of something you knew and felt to be right in the first place. In my mind, that's the process the right way around, understanding first and information or knowledge second.

It's my belief that Eshai is (correct me if I'm wrong) struggling to understand something he feels is true or correct, but lacks the foundation to know he is correct. There is much trepidation in his process. I've been through this many times. What I've learned, however, is that you can reach a point of trusting your intuition enough to -know- you are correct, and the information (such as Eshai now seeks) is merely an affirmation, not an absolutely necessary aspect of process prior to having understanding. Process merely makes it "full" understanding.

"Letting go of this is all about literally aiming for the middle and going through the energy."

Also excellent. This is the balance I discuss. It is also the flow I suggest. III is talking about "turbulence" at a point of flow. If that turbulence is severe enough -- as it often is with trauma -- it may interrupt flow entirely. Not good.

What I've seen in many, many people (or myself), even in my professional capacity, is the pressure at the point of blockage literally builds up to where the flow will emerge wherever it can, often in dangerous or even destructive ways. In other words, the flow I discuss can never "terminate" and has to go someplace. For many people it manifests as highly negative [confused] emotions, and all too often can even become violent.

"It may not be important at all to the adult mind."

I like this line, and I think it's an important point.

This is an illustration of the priority to intentionally, consciously look back and cleanse the past, even if you may not think that past needs cleansing. My earlier point about being smacked by your mom may appear to mean nothing to you now, but to your "self" at age six it was the end of the world. That part of you still thinks it's the end of the world if you haven't directly addressed it. Remember, this is only an example of a trauma. Don't correlate a smack at age six to all other traumas. Most people "get over" a smack, but my point is that we will have seemingly minor traumas that may build up to a bundle of them which has the potential to accumulate into a blockage ... which is not good no matter how you slice it.

"I was most definitely a loud and obnoxious heretic."

Love this line. Cracks me up.

I would, however, III, take one thing into consideration launching into this subject matter. Not all people have reached the point of being able to take reincarnation for granted. It took me a couple/few sentences to realize that's the direction you were headed. Common as it may be to you and me, it's not necessarily common to everyone's perception (or acceptance). Great points and citations, I'd just be careful to ease a reader onto your path a tad more gently.

Frankly, although I "know" there's reincarnation, I've seen nothing on this Earthly Plane to substantiate it ... no "proof" whatsoever ... so I lack that affirming knowledge I alluded to earlier. I "know" it, but I don't "know" it ... yanno?

"It isn't about the stories we tell ourselves so much as blocking lot's of energy flows to prevent seeing one's self."

"... to prevent seeing one's self," is a core point and a critical issue as far as I'm concerned. The relative I mentioned earlier has such garbage tainting his self image that he is completely incapable of seeing the actual, real person he is in his actual, real circumstances. He frets and worries about money (only one of the symptoms), when, in fact he has all he needs, gets whatever he wants whenever he wants it, and will have a [virtually luxurious] home and all the food and comforts he could possibly want for the rest of his life (he's in his 70's). There isn't a single moment of any day he isn't worried about money, and all this (and his many other "blockages") are solely based on past emotional traumas he's never addressed.

His life is a cyclical nightmare I wouldn't wish on anyone. In his head his overall perspective is, "Everything-is-alright-and-I'm-perfectly-normal-but-there-is-something-very-wrong-here-but-I-don't-want-to-think-about-that-because-Everything-is-alright-and-I'm-perfectly-normal-but-there-is-something-very-wrong-here-but-I-don't-want-to-think-about-that-because-Everything-is-alright-and-I'm-perfectly-normal-but-there-is-something-very-wrong-here-but-I-don't-want-to-think-about-that-because ..." ... ad infinitum. He can barely function and is constantly angry. It is not unlike the several dozen residents I worked with as a mentor that suffered literal torture during their upbringing.

Other than the obvious, how do I know this can be unequivocally categorized as "bad"? ... because I've lived it myself.

"... the ultimate test and validation comes from the experience that one has."

I would agree, whole heartedly. I would, however have one alteration to the perspective derived from my own experience.

For whatever reason, and not to boast, but I learned at a very early age that people of experience have very valuable lessons to share and highly relevant information that I need to heed and pay close attention to. In other words, I didn't slough off something that someone who knew better told me and then go out and do it myself before I believed them. For whatever reason, if I respected the person ... and sometimes even if I didn't respect them, but simply trusted their experience ... when someone told me not to do something or told me how to do it, I would pay attention and do or not do it as they suggested, usually (but not always) ending up being correct.

So yes, "ultimate test and validation," but not to the point of [I]not believing anyone until "whatever" is personally experienced.

Thoroughly enjoying the conversation by the way.

III
10-30-2014, 06:43 AM
Frankly, although I "know" there's reincarnation, I've seen nothing on this Earthly Plane to substantiate it ... no "proof" whatsoever ... so I lack that affirming knowledge I alluded to earlier. I "know" it, but I don't "know" it ... yanno?








That is a logical problem, not much way to "prove" any of metaphysics. I've had to go with joint experiences and just plain weight of experiences. In all this I've had to go with a non-physical universe with consciousness as the basis. Basically there either had to be a continuous stream of running hot and cold miracles or they all had to be part of the normal system and were built in. I was able to build my version of a metaphysics ("every monk his own doctrine") that worked, that "gelled" as a system, only when it was non-physical. In the end we each have to build our own metaphysics even though most of it is taken from previous versions we pick up from our teachers. Metaphysical yoga builds on itself. There are "rules" in claiming something "new", Patanjali defined 5. In any case a non-physical basis is completely compatible with those 5 "rules". Non-dualism is quite suggestive of it anyway, quite compatible with the multi-universe quantum model with the universe variations based on conscious decisions, with perhaps a few tweaks. Anyway, as the Alchemy my partner and I are doing appears to work very well, I have no complaints. One has to be careful, following the ego goes astray. And yet one changes one's self in line with "preferences" of how one "ought" to be. And there is the problem of selecting the "true will" from the ego will" in shaping ones "soul", the work of Alchemy. That is where one must trust inner guidance.






Any of this is damn near impossible to prove. However, since it follows Patanjali's rules pretty well, it can all be taught, there are no secret places, people skilled in the art can be taken to those places and so forth, it can be demonstrated to those skilled in the art, and in this we are basically speaking of various forms of metaphysical "travel" to various metaphysical places.

Ghislain
10-30-2014, 10:30 AM
If a person lounges on a couch every day doing nothing then they have the experience of lounging on that couch every day, whereas I do not. I can philosophise that lounging on that couch doing nothing is not good and is a waste of time, but the person lounging on that couch may philosophise that my activity is a waste of time that could be put to better use lounging on a couch.

That which separates us from other animals is the ability to philosophise on issues we have not, or may never, experience.

Look at your hand and move it in a grabbing action...now try and argue that it is not just a mechanical device...

Our bodies are experience machines and those experiences, whatever they may be are recorded in the brain (CPU/RAM) of this machine. Applying philosophy helps us to organise the input data, create output data on the basis of those inputs and calculate what new inputs are required, but it is I who is the user of this machine; it is my experience vessel.

As such I think that philosophy is just as important as experience, for experience without any philosophy would just be a mass of useless data.

The best bit is there isn't actually anything to experience at all, which makes it totally philosophy :confused: in my opinion.

Now the question is, "did "I" create the text above or "the machine"?" :)

Ghislain

Krisztian
10-30-2014, 02:07 PM
If a person lounges on a couch every day doing nothing then they have the experience of lounging on that couch every day, whereas I do not. I can philosophise that lounging on that couch doing nothing is not good and is a waste of time, but the person lounging on that couch may philosophise that my activity is a waste of time that could be put to better use lounging on a couch.

That which separates us from other animals is the ability to philosophise on issues we have not, or may never, experience.

Look at your hand and move it in a grabbing action...now try and argue that it is not just a mechanical device...

Our bodies are experience machines and those experiences, whatever they may be are recorded in the brain (CPU/RAM) of this machine. Applying philosophy helps us to organise the input data, create output data on the basis of those inputs and calculate what new inputs are required, but it is I who is the user of this machine; it is my experience vessel.

As such I think that philosophy is just as important as experience, for experience without any philosophy would just be a mass of useless data.

The best bit is there isn't actually anything to experience at all, which makes it totally philosophy :confused: in my opinion.

Now the question is, "did "I" create the text above or "the machine"?"

Regretfully, sadly, I keep seeing from you Ghislain the same very small, limited way of thinking over these past years. I keep hoping genuinely otherwise, so I engage in these comments.

You are a very, very, very lost person. I'm actually surprised, continually, you would be posting on a Forum that's called alchemy. But I do respect your sovereignty, and I realize it's my fault to attempt to converse.

So I can't engage in these ultra-lost conversations.

Ghislain
10-30-2014, 03:43 PM
Krisztian

I was quite shocked to read your latest post. I'm sorry if I have offended you in some way, there was nothing personal in what I wrote, just my perspective.

I don't profess to have any truths, I just have my opinion at this present time, which is dynamic and changes quite often, I guess in what one may call a line of best fit.

Even as I wrote in my last post, "it is I who is the user of this machine; it is my experience vessel.", I could hear myself questioning if this was actually correct.

If you only want to converse with those that agree with your perspective then I fully understand that you feel you can't engage in conversation with me as, in a forum that searches for truth, I will not pretend to agree with issues just to please another.

However, I would be grateful if you could point out what made you feel the way you do for I am flummoxed.

Ghislain

Awani
10-30-2014, 03:51 PM
I was quite shocked to read your latest post.

Me too.


...keep seeing from you Ghislain the same very small, limited way of thinking over these past years.

You are a very, very, very lost person.

I'm actually surprised, continually, you would be posting on a Forum that's called alchemy.

I think these comments are breaking the Rules & Guidelines (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/announcement.php?f=5&a=3)... if they had been directed at me I would have felt extremely insulted. Sure they are not outright personal attacks (like "you fucking idiot"), but does it matter if the personal attack happens in a foul way or in a diplomatic way? Not in my book.

Everyone proceed with caution. Continue the thread, don't focus on this "incident"...

Thank you!

:cool:

bleeding yolk
10-30-2014, 06:29 PM
......you are talking about freedom from the changing and chaotic sensory world to which we all are exposed to all the time..........

......the true will of the soul to put it very briefly , is to recognize and unite with the single principle from which we are derived.........this principle in its quality is timeless , spaceless , unchanging , homogeneous , and good..........

......once you become fatigued from the violence and random nature of sensory and temporal existence , you begin to seek it........it is found in silence and stillness.......

Andro
10-30-2014, 06:35 PM
Bleeding Yolk,

I feel and resonate with what you wrote more than you can imagine :)

Then again, if you wrote it, you probably CAN imagine...

Thank you!

bleeding yolk
10-30-2014, 06:48 PM
Bleeding Yolk,

I feel and resonate with what you wrote more than you can imagine :)

The again, if you wrote it, you probably CAN imagine...

Thank you!

thank you .....:)....and this may be off topic........but i believe that this is what the philosophers stone truly is........ceaseless labor through hardship ( overcoming physical and mental desires , erroneus assumptions and motivations , etc.) to eventually realize the single principle from which the myriad effects of the world come from. ........to come to this realization is to transform all into gold ( all pervading , indestructible and immortal )and this transforms all things into itself.........

Andro
10-30-2014, 07:07 PM
thank you .....:)....and this may be off topic........but i believe that this is what the philosophers stone truly is........ceaseless labor through hardship ( overcoming physical and mental desires , erroneus assumptions and motivations , etc.) to eventually realize the single principle from which the myriad effects of the world come from. ........to come to this realization is to transform all into gold ( all pervading , indestructible and immortal )and this transforms all things into itself.........

I once again agree...

IMSU, the Hermetic Extremists (like myself :)) more than anything seek the Perfection and Bliss of the UN-Knowable/Absolute Origin/One Thing.

Interesting that, just like cats (9 lives), The Stone is also (said to be) in need of 9 multiplications until it's 'smart' enough to realize it has no business staying here :)

So yes, even if only subjectively (how can it be otherwise in this relative mental creation?), my own "True Will of the Soul" is very similar to what you wrote above... and even a bit beyond, which I won't discuss here :)

Illen A. Cluf
10-30-2014, 07:51 PM
I'm constantly besieged by many synchronicities, and as a perfect example, just minutes before I read this thread today for the first time, I returned from our local Library, where I found, on the table of books discarded by the Library, a booklet called "Research on Reincarnation" by Manly P. Hall, 1964, who is also the author of "Secret Teachings of all Ages", which also includes some interesting information on alchemy.

This book deals quite completely, with the issue that has been discussed here, of whether or not scientific proof of the immortality of the soul can be proven. He says that it depends upon the kind of proof an individual is willing to accept, and also to a degree, upon what constitutes a fact. He says "Experience reveals that both truth and fact are terms about which there is little agreement on a critical level". He also stresses that factuality is intimately associated with physical phenomena, and that "from a tradition supported by observation and sustained by experimentation, we can approach the objective universe with a fair degree of certainty". However, if "our researches lead into the sphere of intangibles where we cannot weigh, measure, and estimate with the scientific instruments at our disposal, we must either admit that facts are not available, or create a new definition for the term." He says that "life would be hopelessly overburdened with statistics if we actually demanded adequate substantiating evidence for even the most commonplace of our attitudes and opinions".

He goes on further, to say:

"In all honesty, we cannot as yet demonstrate to the skeptic, the doubter, the unbeliever, or the disbeliever, that reincarnation is a proven fact. In the first place, we have no common agreement as to the kind of evidence which would be acceptable to those of various minds and temperaments. A thing, to be actually known, must be experienced, for even the sworn testimony of our nearest and dearest friend will not overcome the doubts or objections. The doctrine of rebirth is actually a concept relating to the state of the human being after death. This concept is acceptable to, and has been accepted by, countless human beings from time immemorial. To be quite factual, however, the concept would not be proved if every human being accepted it, nor would it be disproved if no one accepted it."

The booklet continues on, in this excellent, thought-provoking way, for 46 pages. His last paragraph ends:

"As part of this grand conviction, rebirth is the most reasonable of all doctrines, but it cannot be held as an isolated belief, or fitted thoughtlessly into some other system of theology. Unless the end to be obtained be meritorious, the means are without enduring significance. We are not here merely to grow from life to life in order that our physical or even our intellectual efficiency may be increased. We are here to grow from personal life toward universal life. This realization itself helps us to escape limitations of self-interest, tends toward moderation of conduct, clarifies basic ideals, and presents us with a challenge. To meet this challenge, we must dedicate total resources to the achievement of total purpose."

Although I haven't read this booklet in its entirety yet, based on what I have read so far, I highly recommend this excellent booklet to those who are interested in the subject of reincarnation.

III
10-31-2014, 12:12 AM
I once again agree...

IMSU, the Hermetic Extremists (like myself :)) more than anything seek the Perfection and Bliss of the UN-Knowable/Absolute Origin/One Thing.

Interesting that, just like cats (9 lives), The Stone is also (said to be) in need of 9 multiplications until it's 'smart' enough to realize it has no business staying here :)

So yes, even if only subjectively (how can it be otherwise in this relative mental creation?), my own "True Will of the Soul" is very similar to what you wrote above... and even a bit beyond, which I won't discuss here :)


Hi Androgynus,


"UN-Knowable/Absolute Origin/One Thing." The chamber of undifferentiated consciousness without an object is what I think you are speaking of.


An interesting chamber; nothing to perceive or be perceived and no duration to "remember" by nobody. Franklin Merrell-Wolff (1887–1985) a Jnani Yogi who had a lot to say about PHILOSOPY OF CONSCIOUSNESS WITHOUT AN OBJECT. You might find his very few books to be very interesting.






What do you mean by "seek the Perfection and Bliss of" the UN-Knowable/Absolute Origin/One Thing ?
I don't understand what you mean by that. Experiencing it once is the same as Eternally. Is it a continuous seeking? Is it the Eternal in-falling into the Absolute said to be the goal of an ultimate Samadhi for a Yogi? That happens to be part of why I call myself an Alchemist instead of Yogi. I'm trying to get a context for what you are saying. I've seen lots of different wordings of approximately both phrases. I get "Perfection and Bliss" and am also familiar with "Shining Perfection and Bliss". I get the usual "seek" meaning but put it all together and I am unsure what is meant. BE IN LOVE

DonSweet
10-31-2014, 05:10 AM
Eshai's head is probably spinning on his neck at the moment.

I'm gonna attempt to swing this echoing hallway back towards some of his original questions.

A lot of my previous discussion was about finding out exactly who we are ... what our components are ... since Eshai's original questions are mostly about what makes him tick ... or "want" to be more precise. Without an understanding of at least our rudimentary construction ... like ego and higher self and mind and brain and traumatized self and mature observer self ... we can't really answer these questions.

It's clear this thread has been a dissection of these concepts, and it's also clear that some of this dissection has been upsetting, or at the very least challenging, for some.

No surprise there.

We are seemingly unified as a singularity in the present "me" concept, but I'm certain folks reading this have seen that I do not hold that to be true. "Me" is an "us."

Now ... Eshai ... this is something I see you missing in a post of about a week ago that starts, "Indeed it brings up more questions," and, in fact, you've continued to resist this idea of something outside that "container" you consider to be "you."

In that post, you've put forth the idea that you are you and this higher-self-thing is trying to intrude on your territory. In other words, you're more or less convinced that any of these other elements of "you" aren't you at all, but some exterior entity trying to crowd or manipulate you.

I believe that Krisztain was attempting to point out that this "core you" that you imply is your ego ... that part of yourself that is earthly based and sensing the Universe through your five senses and brain.

Having chatted with you in the past, I know that you are fairly young. This ... pardon me ... error of yours to identify ego as you, only you, and all of you is classic and common. Hell, I did it myself in my earlier years.

In other posts, you've also alluded to the idea that you can't know something unless you've experienced it yourself. Well ... yeah ... in its purest form as an absolute, I'd agree, but only in its purest form as an absolute. You actually CAN come to "know" something you haven't personally experienced simply by employing intellectually backed spiritual observation.

Now, just what exactly the hell do I mean by that?

This is where you break from those fives senses ... or ... more accurately ... employ both them AND your "other senses" that have been muted.

And here's what that means --

I can prove to you with one, simple question that you are more than your brain, body and senses.

What is your mind?

Now ... if you're quick to answer and say something like it's that thing in my head that tells me who I am and what I'm feeling, or anything similar ... wrong.

That's your brain.

Your mind is something entirely separate from your brain. Sure you "think" with your brain, and you can even "feel" with it, but there is no way in hell you can explore, understand, know, or have any higher reasoning capacity beyond a "calculator" with only a brain.

All those things happen in your mind.

Your mind is non-physical. Your mind is not contingent on your brain function. People in comas still have an active mind. Schizophrenics with malfunctioning brains all have clear, feeling, knowing minds behind them. I've personally experienced this with several residents who were severely schizophrenic ... daily ... month in and month out. There are "real people" in there.

So ...

You are more than your "vessel." You are greater than two arms, two legs, a torso and a head. You are more than synapses firing from braincell to braincell. You are more than mere body heat burning the food you ate.

Am I getting anywhere here?

That "thing" you've been calling you is steeped and anchored in your "earthly self." It's pretty apparent that you have a fairly hard time looking outside those eyeballs to the point where "seeing" doesn't require them. This higher-self-thing you're resisting is YOU, just not anchored here on this physical plane.

Hard to fathom, I know ...

... but only if you're exclusively listening to your brain and earthly senses. Those things aren't allowing your mind to expand your reach.

If you take just a few minutes ... only a few ... and sit quietly ... and look into yourself ... it's unquestionable that within a very, very short time, you will begin to literally hear a conversation going on between your brain and your mind.

How's that?

A conversation??

Isn't talking to yourself supposed to be something insane?

Hardly.

At its barest minimum, the conversation that's taking place inside your head right now is between one physical synapse-firing organ between your ears, and a non-physical "thinking" entity that has little or nothing to do with your brain ... your mind.

Where there are two goats, there's bound to be three ...

... meaning that if you are segmented AT ALL, you are a nearly uncountable number of parts ...

... and those parts are only perceived to be a singularity.

Your spirit self isn't some ghost haunting you ... it's YOU, in spirit form. Your higher self isn't some externally contracted beast that's trying to enslave you into some "duty" ... it's YOU, as you are literally (but non-physically) connected to all of Creation.

This whole thread ... in my opinion ... has been you struggling with one simple thing ... breaking free of your ego ...

... that part of yourself that's locked into five senses and a synapse firing brain.

You have to get one thing straight about this "ego thing."

Due to our history, our evolution, and the tenacity to which human beings evolved and survived, the ego is a VERY powerful part of our life force. It HAD to be. It was our key tool to survival in our earliest days coming up as a species.

However ...

... and this is a biggie ...

We ain't there anymore.

We are "higher" beings now. We have reasoning powers WAY beyond surviving on the tundra. We have cognitive powers that FAR surpass the need to seek food, sex, warmth, or other gratifications. We are conscious beings, not merely reactionary "animals" at a level of survival. That ego is your reactionary animal ... literally ... and it doesn't like yielding control of "you" very easily. It wants what it wants and has a million years of evolution helping keep it entrenched as the dominant force in your life.

Yet ...

We are soooooooooooooo much more than that.

This is your challenge ... to acknowledge the fact ... and that's fact ... that you are more than these senses and your brain firing.

I have a pretty good idea that you're fairly deer-in-the-headlights over this entire thread ...

"Just what the HELL are you people talking about?"

You can't know what those things are -- won't even have an inkling -- until you step out of the box of your body and brain. Being locked into that "trap," without letting go, you may never have a sense of what any one of us are saying.

Not only are you more than you think, you are connected ... directly ... to everything.

It's clear from the opening of this thread that you feel wholly disconnected from nearly everything.

That's your [highly complex, but extremely limited] ego talking.

III
11-02-2014, 07:27 PM
I once again agree...

Interesting that, just like cats (9 lives), The Stone is also (said to be) in need of 9 multiplications until it's 'smart' enough to realize it has no business staying here :)

I don't have the same kind of background or language. I am not sure what the "stone" translates to in something I understand or why it would multiply or what effect said multiplication has. However, "multiplications" seems to be a clue as I know of only one situation in which "multiplications" occurs and that has everything to do with the growth of the being. I have no idea how or why that would relate to the stone.
_______________________________

Mod Note: Topic continued on Spin-Off Thread: Alchemical Multiplication & Evolution (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4137-Alchemical-Multiplication-amp-Evolution)

III
11-04-2014, 05:23 PM
Hi DonSweet,


I quite agree, "WE" is singular. There is just the illusion from whichever part that "I am this and always have been and always will be" even if "this" is a chamber just entered 3 seconds ago. To become a genuinely unified being takes a lot of work. Different Alchemical patterns cause different architectures. I have observed that earlier beings attempted to make a huge monolithic being. That didn't work out so well. A more modern understanding can bring about a "multi-processor" version that can perhaps be looked at as a whole lot of different versions of ones life and if arranged I certain ways can be viewed as a large Monte Carlo simulation and one looks for the version of ones self needed to solve that next part of ones life. I'm not describing it well.


Ego thinks it is the whole show. As one grows, each "CPU" also evolves and each time it reaches a certain degree of "completeness" the whole set is updated. So there is an evolution in the parts of ones self as well as the whole evolving together. I have found that having science and computer concepts are helpful to understanding the construction of ones self.


I hope not to be adding to confusion but rather to help bring clarity.

DonSweet
11-05-2014, 03:49 AM
Nawww III. It's not confusing. I like your analogy using computers and such.

When my life is screwy, I'm rather disorganized, but when I'm clear-headed, and even when I was young, I'm a highly organized being.

What I mean by that is I've seen the "organs" in "organize" for a long time. Computers have organs in a sense, too ... CPU, hard drive, RAM, power supply, even the case. I'll bet that CPU thinks it's the whole show, too.

But expanding on the organ concept, ever stand back from a really messy room or work area and not know what to pick up first? A long time ago, I decided that when I found myself in that position I should just stop agonizing and pick up "something." It doesn't matter what. Then look at it and decide what "organ" it belongs to.

In a domestic situation, is it a shoe? Then it goes with shoes. Is it laundry, then it goes in the hamper. Everything belongs to one sort of "organ" or another, and all the organs make up a whole. Things are a lot less confusing when you can break them down, then "organ"ize them that way. You start with one unified mess, then break it down according to organs.

Each one of those bits of ourselves, the ego and higher self and mind and brain and traumatized self and mature observer self -- just like the organ of our bodies -- are organs, too.

I also like what you said about evolution. It reinforced what I said about cleansing. Not all our bits and parts will evolve at the same rate. Our Traumatized-Six-Year-Old-That-Got-Slapped hasn't evolved at all. It's just back there pouting about being slapped. We have to do what we can to "unify" the whole to a common evolution, or at the very least, a common understanding.

Don't be self-conscious. Good job.

III
11-10-2014, 10:09 PM
Hi DonSweet,


I worked for some years (about 20 years) with a lady who had DID (MPD). She asked me a question I couldn't answer. She asked "Does everybody have psychotic parts? How do they manage that situation?"


Her psychotic part(s), which self identified as "we", a small "we", were working on the theory that repeated recurrent suicide eventually would make the being disappear. This idea I first saw put forth in a book by Peter Ouspensky (A New Model of the Universe, I think). She never read it or heard of it that I know of. Her last therapist would just go ape-shit when "we" addressed her so she never learned what or why she was doing what she did.


She had all sorts of disconnected parts and clusters of parts. She had been repeatedly abused. Her unification is very difficult and far from complete.


So my question now is do we all have psychotic parts lurking disconnected in our greater beings? I'm looking for ideas and potential understanding.

DonSweet
11-11-2014, 07:50 AM
III ...

You should have been able to glean from my writing that not only do we have the "parts" you imply, it's incumbent, if not necessary, to recognize, acknowledge, address, heal and assimilate them into our whole self.

I take "their" existence as a matter-of-fact ... and not just as fact, but as ordinary.

"Their" is in quotes to separate the concept you've put forth ... "psychotic parts lurking disconnected" ... to imply the opposite. They are not disconnected at all. "They" are us.

Simplistically, fundamentally, a cave man looks down into a calm, reflective pool of water and sees one cave man. We, however, know this (intellectually) not to be the case. We know there is a spiritual self, a physical self, an observer self, an ego constructed of many parts, and so on.

Where we err is in our generally emotional resistance to such a fragmentation. Emotions want to stand on their own. Emotions don't want to be "wrong" or invalidated. They particularly don't want to share their space or lose their dominance ... anger rarely willingly yields to bliss ... fright has a hard time abandoning its place for the sake of joy.

Each one of these things comprises our persona, and our persona is simply a term used to describe the whole.

Of course, all this is entering into the long version of the answer to your question. The short answer is, yes, we all have these parts. These parts are us. These parts are me.

Likely, the woman you discuss doesn't have the same mechanisms most people do to integrate her factions. Most of us do it automatically ... virtually oblivious ... but as I've suggested, we all have her problem. If you have not gone back and intentionally, purposefully, consciously addressed even the small "damages" we've experienced, they will break away, in a sense, and always assert themselves as separate with the intent to dominate.

"Pay attention to me!!"

If the traumas are great enough, or the volume of small traumas high enough, they will truly dominate.

One thing I used to say to residents of mine that were willing to listen ... not a common thing ... is that ignoring these traumas is like walking on a broken, unhealed leg. Ignoring the pain won't prevent the leg from being broken. Ignoring it's broken is the first and most common mistake.

"Everything is just fine. I'm okay. Things like that don't happen to me."

The undeniable fact is that they happen to everyone ... every day ... from the day we're born. Trauma is an integral part of life.

Most Western societies simply perpetuate the myth that everything is just fine. This is where we find ourselves ... scratching our heads as to why psychosis is rampant. In fact, we barely acknowledge it since we've literally normalized it.

So ...

When people like your friend short-circuit to the point of either dysfunction or disrupting the social order around them, no one seems to have very many answers.

The reality ... the fact ... the actual normalcy ... is the condition of cyclical trauma-healing-trauma-healing that we all ignore.

Well ... I don't personally ignore it since I make a great effort to normalize the process.

That doesn't suggest it's in any way easy, particularly since our culture lacks the mechanisms to promote it, and frankly, largely because unstable people of ill-health is a profitable cash cow. There's far more profit in illness than there is in health, so why promote healthiness? Whole medical disciplines and corporatized multinational industries are devoted to the perpetuation of illness rather than even approaching a cure ... not even discussing the possibility.

So your question is no surprise.

So yes, not only do we have psychotic parts lurking disconnected in our greater beings, such a thing should be common and ordinary ... normal ... to observe, address and correct, perpetually, as a matter of course.

We do, after all, have the innate desire to be "whole" beings. The only way to accomplish that is to acknowledge, understand and consciously coordinate our parts.

Assuming we're "just fine" without the slightest effort to get there is just fucking goofy.

III
11-17-2014, 05:33 PM
Hi DonSweet,

This specific young lady was different in the sense of the dissociation. Her memory was more segmented than somebody not so diagnosed. She had a full blown psychotic episode following a serious increase in abuse severity as a teen. She ran away and hid out for a week until she put together a more or less socially acceptable façade. That was what was coming unraveled about 6 years later when I met her. She burned through therapists; the males found her too attractive and the females got completely pissed off. Needless to say they had not the foggiest idea what to do with her even more than the usual DID and BPD situation which is just about impenetrable.

She was trying to remove herself from existence based on what I see as a flawed hypothesis. It kept her separated from the divine. She was unable to receive Shaktipat. She was totally terrified of the “light” or “LOVE” or whatever you want to call it. She could not be in the “communion”. I don’t know how that wording fit’s into your model of things. She was in hell in a cycle of repeating suicides..

"Seeing" her structure it was clear that she had been working on self for a very long time, and had some flaws in carrying out her Alchemy. When a psychotic alter was out front it was obvious by any standard.

scratching our heads as to why psychosis is rampant. In fact, we barely acknowledge it since we've literally normalized it.
I think that a major player in that are the cultural norms enforced. The forced paradoxes and false “beliefs” required by society appear to be the causal seeds. This “normalized” societal psychosis is not recognized because it is required to be a “normal” member of society. Those who don’t pay lip service to required cultural disconnects are considered “odd” or eccentric or worse and are often bullied. The bullies recognized me in 3rd grade. So did the girls who needed my skills (in trauma release in joined trance). I see so few people who actually want to “know” our nature and situation much less go through the work needed. The world just isn’t what people want to believe it is and so they block it.
Each one of these things comprises our persona, and our persona is simply a term used to describe the whole.

In the terminology I am used to using the “persona” goes back to Greek theater where the persona was the mask the actor held up for each part. Each part has it’s own “construct” for specific purposes. So I have an insurance agent persona, a photographer persona, a ski patrolman persona, the “bad mood” persona etc. The unified being is something different than a persona. Persona’s are typically asleep and have the illusion that “they” are running the show and that their little corner of understanding is the whole shebang.

DonSweet
11-17-2014, 07:05 PM
Excellent post III.

Thanks.

I'll agree with your variant definition of "persona" on this basis ...

As we progress through our day, perhaps moment to moment, we shift the persona we are presenting to others based on circumstance, whether need-based or desire-based, much like the CGI effect you see in movies where (often tortured) faces are emerging, cycling and changing through the surface of some liquid something.

I'd propose that, generally speaking, it's the Human Propensity to maintain some consistency in the presentation ... that not only do we, individually, wish to maintain [an apparent] continuity for our own sake -- looking in a mirror wanting stability -- but also for the sake of others. We want to at least appear stable for the sake of others.

After all, instability can be the target of ridicule, as you suggest.

Sounds to me like a key reason for this woman's relentless pain and her inability to accept Universal Energy was the fact that she couldn't accept her own, only experiencing pain when encountering it, which was virtually every moment of her existence.

Sad.

I've seen this many times before (even currently) in many others ... a seemingly intelligent, even attractive person whose eyes tell of constant pain. And those eyes often project the culmination of pressure and stress that is millimeters away from an explosion. Either that, or utter surrender and self-destruction.

Sometimes a simple, brief glance into those eyes is extremely painful to me, simply in empathy, a channel of screaming pain shooting through me like a thousand knives.

There's a woman behind the counter at my local grocery store ... pleasant, attractive even though middle-aged, usually well dressed with a reasonably calm demeanor. But any smile that tries to emerge is forced, repressed and painfully manifest. Eyes are racked with suspicion. "Happy" is clearly a distant memory and perhaps even perceived as a forbidden friend, perhaps so forbidden that even the possibility is utterly rejected. Everything about her beyond the obvious thin facade screams of relentless pain, suspicion and even imprisonment.

It's hard for me to buy at that counter when she's working.

As far as your "... and have the illusion that “they” are running the show and that their little corner of understanding is the whole shebang" comment, I lean towards agreeing with you, save for one "process" perhaps few engage ...

... the conscious unification of these personas coupled with the ability to give them all an active, participatory voice.

Just last night, briefly in a discussion with my family, the subject of an active, functioning hypothalamus and cerebral cortex came up ... implying that when all is connected and operating as intended, these things lead to an uncommon experience that really ought to be common. Naturally, this is merely a physical means, but can easily be paralleled in the non-physical.

Yeah ... my family actually talks about this shit.

What I'm talking about is "clear-channeling" energy, uninterrupted by trauma or physical dysfunction, something we humans rarely experience. We seem to swim in an over-sized Jacuzzi teaming with trauma ... and almost like it ... as if it's an old friend we can't live without.

Fast forward to a race of beings that's purged this process and cleansed itself from these mechanisms of dysfunction.

Okay ... so a little SciFi ... then picture just one person capable of this.

Imagine that.

bleeding yolk
01-05-2015, 12:31 PM
I don't have the same kind of background or language. I am not sure what the "stone" translates to in something I understand or why it would multiply or what effect said multiplication has. However, "multiplications" seems to be a clue as I know of only one situation in which "multiplications" occurs and that has everything to do with the growth of the being. I have no idea how or why that would relate to the stone.
_______________________________

Mod Note: Topic continued on Spin-Off Thread: Alchemical Multiplication & Evolution (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?4137-Alchemical-Multiplication-amp-Evolution)

I believe it has something to do with the human nervous system.

And the story of Jesus Christ as a metaphor for its action.


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