On the sound use of mental suicide.

by Narkissos 86 Replies latest jw friends

  • quietlyleaving
    quietlyleaving

    R crusoe

    Silent Parter ( careful how quickly you say that - lol )

    I do not write poetry!

    But I have written lots of it in the moment - usually online - so a contradiction!

    I see society as Tolle does and am amazed I only learned of him in the past two weeks!

    Maybe if I had earlier I could have lost the pain of much inner conflict which gave rise to some of what I have written - both poetic and otherwise

    You are a free spirit (you come across to me like that) and I can see how the rigid, legalistic aspects of the WTS would in time have broken your spirit - I'm glad you got out.

  • R.Crusoe
    R.Crusoe

    Me2 QL and Que Sera!

  • jwfacts
    jwfacts

    Isn't everything in the galaxy a cocktail of chemicals and compounds?

    Good point Joy, but then that is the question - it is all chemicals, or is there something additional? I have read a number of books by supporters of additional dimensions and psychic powers that report scientific results that back up such things. Then I read books that show none of the research has merit. What I am starting to believe is that modern science has not developed a method to test other dimensions, after lives etc, and so neither prove or disprove them. It will be a significant change to society if this becomes possible.

  • jwfacts
    jwfacts

    Interesting comments DoofDaddy.

    I have experimented with LSD and DMT

    Why do I not find that hard to believe?

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Thank you all for your very insightful comments.

    At a historical and collective level, I find it quite fascinating to watch the "rational" Western modernity consistently blowing its mind out in a number of ways over the past 100 years (probably more). I'm not "preaching" against it, I believe it somehow had to happen (there's something like a "physics of ideas" I guess).

    At an individual level, I'm more worried about the fate of people getting stuck in the "grey zone" and becoming more and more "dysfunctional" in the ongoing old world where functioning still matters. Seeing them as "martyrs for the 'New Earth'" is hardly a consolation to me.

    As far as "mysticism" is involved, it must be clear that I have a personal preference (which I won't even try to defend) for ecstasy (ek-stasis) over introspection. A movement inside -> out rather than outside -> in, as it were. We can compare notes about that but it is pointless to "discuss" it I suppose.

    Anyway my main concern is with the aftermath of such an "experience". Whatever the depth and authenticity of its enlightenment, the emerging "Buddha," "Spirit," "Christ," "new man" or "egoless self" has to live on in the existing social time and space, in a new role (which to most people won't be that of a celebrated "prophet" or "guru") involving both difference and continuity with the past. And this imho requires an articulation of mythology and pragmatism, which has to be thought thoroughly (and afresh inasmuch as the old theological or philosophical patterns do not work anymore for many people).

  • nvrgnbk
    nvrgnbk
    you can't escape playing a role, but you can become conscious that you are playing a role. At best that might make you less dogmatic, not more, as you learn to laugh at the play while playing...

    That's the essence of the idea: awareness.

    Awareness of our mutual dysfunctionality.

    And yes, it's just another role, another label of sorts.

    Maybe a concise way of explaining the idea of the book(A New Earth) would be the following:

    We're all screwed up.

    Some more than others.

    Let's all try not to be so screwed up.

    But if you suffer due to your being screwed up or someone else being screwed up, that's good.

    It's precisely that suffering that will make you aware of just how screwed up it all is.

    With that awareness, things might get just a little less screwed up.

    Fantastic thread, Narkissos.

  • R.Crusoe
    R.Crusoe

    Methinks pragmatism is the reality check!

    It is great if you have few people questioning everything about your intellectual validity and/or the sorts of colleagues who sit and chat over iced tea but....

    ...what if those you know are mostly in the low pay, long hour classes of people who dont care to talk anything through apart from how to get from one ball game to the next, not because they don't have a brain, but because life deals them less variety and far more responsibility?

    The model Eckhart suggests is a powerful one for change, but billions are just stepping onto the conveyor belt of consumerism.

    Is the west evolving into a more NOW with NATURE humanity as we speak?

    Is this the final spoke in the wheel of the cycle of capitalisms evolution?

    Are all nations destined to revolve into this same space-time?

    And will it happen more quickly to nations currently emerging as capitalist giants?

    What comes after the meltdown?

    So Eckharts model seem more holistic than first glances suggest - but how to personalise the NOW whilst maintaining LOVE for everyone is a tricky evolution for everyone to sort out. And it seems to encourage ignorance and loveless reaction in some respects to loved ones who may be having a tough time of life and what it deals to them. If you encourage complete 'passive peaceful indifference' within close family frameworks, life all too soon can become superficial, artificial and detached on a permanent basis.

    In the respect to always saying the NOW is the only point worth focusing on:-

    The model seems to almost rationalise a zero response to angst as a loving notion.

    I personally know it to be used oftentimes in the most insidiously controlling ways - silence like a cancer grows!!

    Using silence to seemingly demand conformity can become a very destructive and dangerous practise.

    I just wonder about any systems which advocate silence as a caring response = not because of how well intended they are but because of how in reality they get applied! A speechless action is ripe for misinterpretation! I do not recommend it as standard practise!

    Personally I respond to people who will talk things through at length at a personal level - and who will share their feelings with me - the idea of complete detachment from all 'roles' is impractical for most persons and their routines will essentially stretch many into ego realities.

    So I see a lot of misinterpretation may well spurn problems in all sort sof ways = if people are not on the same wavelength of Eckhartism - they may be perceived as ignorant or heartless or whateva?

    I think the model is one which intends to support the individuals sanity and preserve their non-reactive nature whilst the world around them continues to eb and flo with angst and ambition?

    It is an interesting proposition! An evolutionary model! But it seems to defer responsibility in some ways which are very interesting to project!

    Mmmmm?

    Back to reality = what does it mean for me this minute?

    Get my ass in gear and on with the grind!

    Que Sera.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    R.C., I thoroughly enjoyed and agree with your analysis in that last post.

    I also think we are currently living through an important shift in thought structures: it started decades ago in the West and extends through globalisation, affecting and being affected by other traditional cultures along the way; it reflects in popular religion, philosophy, psychology and communication in general. The big narratives, systematic theories, comprehensive world visions on which huge, pyramidal, centralised power systems were built are not working any longer. We now tend to function in a horizontal network pattern, exchanging fragmentary information and using more fuzzy criteria to assess them (as we are doing here on the Internet). Our self- and world-understanding has to adapt to this situation. Still I feel nobody can dispense (at least on any extended period of time) with the need for some such "understanding," relative and provisional as it has ever been. It has to make sense of "I," "us" and "the world," of difference and antagonisms as well as communi(cat)ion, even though on a less tragical and more playful mode perhaps. In a sense we are all working through that along different, sometimes opposite paths.

  • zensim
    zensim

    Brilliant thread! And I don't mean this just on a mind level - I believe this is one of the most fundamental questions facing humanity currently.

    Sorry my response below is so long - I am just catching up.

    Until this week, I hadn't visited this forum for almost a year. I must confess Nark, even though I always found your insights thought provoking and interesting, there was always an element of mind fuck with them.

    Now ... I don't know if it is reflective of my own growth, or a gradual softening in your own methodology (prob both), but I find such resonance with everything you have said - an understanding and knowing that comes not only from just experience or learnt knowledge - but time to digest and integrate this experience and knowledge. My guess (and at best it is that, though I trust that these things are often born from within a deeper place) is that, in starting to reveal your own experiences (eg on your profile) there is a deepening happening where you are embodying all knowing and taking no ownership or placing no ownership on others.

    From my perception, there is a fresh element of kindness running through your words. This whole thread is testament to this because I completely understand where you are coming from in the deepest moral sense.

    I have been watching my sister in these past few months go into the sheer terror of mental suicide and it is such a difficult thing to watch (yes, she is still a JW). I try telling my family I understand what she is going through, I too have experienced it but (a) I can see they don't quite think I have, because my experience was private and hers is 'dramatic' and (b) that is cold comfort to most of them because their greatest fear is that - if she survives this experience intact - she will of course "end up like" me :) (lol, a possibility I find immenseley amusing).

    The thing about kindness is - there is the objective kindness of desiring individual liberation - not only themselves, but for collective consciousness sake. Then there is the personal empathy and compassion for the journey you know they will take through the abyss. As one of my mentor's describes: "This is not for the faint hearted". Therein lies the rub, we talk about this at the level of the mind because it feels like it is happening at this level, yet my experience is that there is no separation of the experience between mind and emotion. Both need to be supported.

    Above and beyond, we question ourselves, whether this is a necessary path for everyone to take - even if our instinct is that it will eventually be met by every human in their lifestream.

    I stick to the drama paradigm: you can't escape playing a role, but you can become conscious that you are playing a role. At best that might make you less dogmatic, not more, as you learn to laugh at the play while playing...

    I often wonder whether it is necessary to be doing this consciously or enough to be doing this instinctively and whether I can even tell the difference when observing others.

    It was not "discussion" in the sense of arguing with a worthy partner. It was rather a sense of mutual trust and harmony, allowing each of us to follow on the thought of the other, knowing we would meet again at the next step. It was extraordinarily light.

    This is all I want now and I endeavour to meet others in this way. I know the path I have taken to this realisation. Whilst obviously this is the path I advocate - I am not interested in whether it is ultimately right or wrong or how others perceive it. I only want to meet others in the above place of truth and I really don't care how you got there, because the wonderful thing about being in this place of flowing truth is that your path was indeed different to mine. It is not a 'meeting in the middle' only (this goes back to our discussions on duality and balance), rather it is a continual merging and separation which allows for growth, freshness and vitality.

    In a sense, once you get past the mystical trappings (some never do, blessed are them!), you realise that you have fallen in love with death itself (or, at least, with "something" one of whose many names is death).

    Interesting - because for me it was the experience of realising I had fallen in love with life itself :)

    I find myself agreeing that I would not recommend this to anyone - yet by my very actions I find that I am. The ego still fears and even if I have learnt to live with that fear in myself, I certainly still fear for others (eg my analogy of the coin toss in other thread). The impulse within me to keep growing, to keep evolving, propels me to live in a way that will affect those I meet - such is the dynamic of life. All I can learn to do is to be softer, more tender and patient with others - creating an embrace that hopefully will support them through this time when it visits. And if it doesn't, I try to let go any need on my part that desires it to happen for my benefit.

    Why is anything not understood defined as 'mystical'?

    Re your comment on born again. I was just pondering the concept of reincarnation yesterday and considering how I have 'reincarnated' since leaving the JWs. On most levels my life resembles nothing like my previous life - yet there is an essential nature within that still feels unchanged. This seems to neither come nor go - I have just become more attuned to it and my ability to 'be' this is what has changed, to be conscious of it. Yet I am this and always have been.

    You speak of the 'aftermath' of such emerging experiences. It may not come as any surprise that I am a doula (birth support person, for those wondering) in secular life, and as such I see it encumbent on those who have come through such experiences - who have arrived at knowing themselves in this wholeness, to be there to assist others in making the transition. All the while trusting in the implicit life force that knows how to do this quite naturally without us needing to do a thing!

    I have got to the point where - if the person is asking the q's they are somewhat ready on a level. The wise person will - without limiting - assess their 'need to know' and speak both to this and to the innate knowing that is beyond. Sometimes it is just as simple as not saying anything and just listening, other times it is sharing through stories, teachings, words or actions. By being that which you know they already are, you allow room for that stillness within them to give rise to truth - until they have gone through the transfiguration and learnt the life skill of being able to do this for themselves.

    R.Crusoe:

    I see society as Tolle does and am amazed I only learned of him in the past two weeks!

    Maybe if I had earlier I could have lost the pain of much inner conflict which gave rise to some of what I have written - both poetic and otherwise!

    Would you see society as Tolle does if you hadn't experienced the pain of inner conflict? Btw, I have never been called to read any of Tolle's works and the video you first posted is the first time I have heard him speak. Like your experience with Tolle, I am a new fan of Ken Wilbur and am grateful to have someone else's broader perspective of my experience. Sometimes the information appears to come after the experience, sometimes the experience appears to come after the information. In reality there is no beginning or end - we just tend to put up sign posts retrospectively for poignant or profound moments. My feeling is that I am usually just catching up with that which I already knew :)

    I try and teach my children that they already know everything - they are only here to remember that they know.

    And it seems to encourage ignorance and loveless reaction in some respects to loved ones who may be having a tough time of life and what it deals to them. If you encourage complete 'passive peaceful indifference' within close family frameworks, life all too soon can become superficial, artificial and detached on a permanent basis.

    It looks like this externally, hence the resistance by most (and the labelling). In reality it feels and is quite different through direct realisation. The words sound the same but the living of them is a huge paradigm shift.

    You ask some very important questions which are worthy of being with.

    I personally know it to be used oftentimes in the most insidiously controlling ways - silence like a cancer grows!!

    Using silence to seemingly demand conformity can become a very destructive and dangerous practise.

    I just wonder about any systems which advocate silence as a caring response = not because of how well intended they are but because of how in reality they get applied! A speechless action is ripe for misinterpretation! I do not recommend it as standard practise!

    This comes back to intention, trust and intuition (yours and theirs). If it feels like control - use it as an opportunity to explore that truth within you.

    Nvrgnbk:

    We're all screwed up.

    Some more than others.

    Let's all try not to be so screwed up.

    But if you suffer due to your being screwed up or someone else being screwed up, that's good.

    It's precisely that suffering that will make you aware of just how screwed up it all is.

    With that awareness, things might get just a little less screwed up.

    Love this - the great 'cosmic joke'! :) Why can't we all just play together nicely?

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Thank you very much zensim.

    I often wonder whether it is necessary to be doing this consciously or enough to be doing this instinctively and whether I can even tell the difference when observing others.

    To me the difference is how much stress, or anxiety, or frustration, or boredom everyone can bear. I would suggest (partly from experience, partly from intuition) that as long as one can stand unconsciously playing his/her individual "part" in the social/mental play (taking him/herself "seriously" if you prefer) s/he just does. Whoever is not subjectively able to do that any longer enters in a crisis, leading to either "consciousness" or "death" -- in a sense, both.

    But this is just my view; hopefully the truth may be smoother -- at least for some.

    the wonderful thing about being in this place of flowing truth is that your path was indeed different to mine. It is not a 'meeting in the middle' only (this goes back to our discussions on duality and balance), rather it is a continual merging and separation which allows for growth, freshness and vitality.

    Very much agreed. The only difference, perhaps, is that I would regard it as a blissful exception ("grace" in Christian terms) to the ordinary working of communication -- something that happens rather than is achieved. But, again, that's just me.

    Interesting - because for me it was the experience of realising I had fallen in love with life itself :)

    As antithetic as it may seem I think it is another of "its" names indeed.

    (Have you ever read Borges' short novel Undr?)

    Why is anything not understood defined as 'mystical'?

    As has often been noted, labels (and words in general) are mind stoppers as well as mind tools. You can't open the box and move it at the same time. The good thing is that they prevent indiscrete, intrusive, destructive or otherwise inadequate inquiry. The flip side is endless misunderstanding in ordinary communication.

    On most levels my life resembles nothing like my previous life - yet there is an essential nature within that still feels unchanged. This seems to neither come nor go - I have just become more attuned to it and my ability to 'be' this is what has changed, to be conscious of it. Yet I am this and always have been.

    My impression is that the "unchanged" (or, perhaps, only much slowlier changed) in identity applies not only to what makes me "one" with others but also to what makes me "different" from them. I often thought that the essential distance between people doesn't really change much in a lifetime, no matter how much they talk and interact, live together or apart. That's why I feel true encounters are rare and precious. But, again, this only reflects my experience.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit