Posts by Introspection

11

Bay Area Dubs

by truthseeker1 in

jw
friends

i just talked to my ex about her weekend and she said something that really disturbed me.

she spent the weekend up in the bay area (sf area of ca) with a bunch of dubs.

she was telling me about them and made the comment of them being different from the stuffy here in fresno.

Introspection

Well I'm in the bay area (Marin county, north of SF) and I gotta tell ya that just didn't make any difference to me.

The thing is, I really bought the whole JW belief system, I thought it was true and it was important to me - I wasn't in it to make friends. The thing is though, it got to a point where I felt I had no support spiritually speaking, and I just couldn't do it anymore. Of course, that was a blessing because later I find out all the reasons there is for leaving, so even though I didn't know much about it at the time it was good I left.

Here's the point.. It's sort of like the difference between having friends at work and the job and the company you work for. Your friends might be nice and cool people, you might enjoy each others company outside of work - some of them may think they work for a good company - but if you know that it's not the case, say they are a front for a drug cartel or whatever - then you probably wouldn't want to stay!

What I would find disturbing IS the fact that they are so relaxed and liberal, because that indicates to me that they got things so well compartmentalized in their mind that they wouldn't care if they stay in an organization that teaches falsehood because they're comfortable with it. I wouldn't want to be with people like that. In fact, it's better to have strict anal witnesses in a way, because atleast those people know where they stand. This kind of liberal attitude could almost be like "Yeah, deep down we don't really believe it - but we won't talk to each other about that because we're all witnesses, lets just go through the motions so we can still have friends and a social support structure." It's this "I don't really care" attitude. (this is not to say liberal witnesses are necessarily aware of how things actually are - it may just be that they haven't bothered to take a close look) I mean, sure it's great that someone doesn't get too caught up with it - it may even allow them to fade eventually. But the thing is they probably don't care about how other people are hurt either, and that's worse than a person in denial. Someone in denial won't allow themselves to face the truth because of the implications, they would have to do a 180 and change their view of the witnesses and seriously reconsider being one at the very least, and with someone that committed if they consider the facts then it's almost guaranteed they would turn around. With someone who doesn't care, they just wouldn't care. Frankly, I think that is more dangerous and at the risk of sounding harsh, if they don't care then they almost deserve what they get.

11

Do You Ever Think Of This While Driving?

by rocketman in

jw
friends

.

Introspection

Hmm, no I haven't in a long time. Once in a while I just glance over at this house on this main street I used to call on, I don't really think about it much but since that guy was kinda cool I sometimes kinda wonder what became of him. Of course, I wonder about the JWs too, but as long as they're in there's not a lot to wonder about I guess..

32

Ok, I NEVER post about anything having to do with god or the bible, but....

by Jesika in

i was in chat a few days ago, and the topic of god came up.

i was trying to understand how people can still believe in one.

now, just wanted you to know where this ?

Introspection

Hi Jesika,

You're probably better off listening to a bird or say the engine of a car, but a definition of spirituality that most people won't have an issue with is probably the essence of life, which of course can be read in different ways. I would encourage you to not take any ideas anybody give you too seriously, because that's all they are - ideas. If this whole thing is about life and what that really is, then all you have to do is look to yourself and all around you - that's life.

21

Is Satan on the Offensive or the Defensive?

by jgnat in

this week's study article again lauds the great power and strength of the devil.

(wt march 1, 2003, study for april 13, 'be courageous and strong', para 3-4. you know, roaring lion, bla, bla, struggling christians, bla bla.

this got me to thinking.

Introspection

Introspection, are you saying that people will violently maintain their own worldview (whether negative or positive) when threatened?

Oh no, people will change their world view. I'm saying people will want to maintain a sense of identity when threatened, and if that means changing your world view and identifying with a new thought system then often times people will do just that. It's sort of like the basic survival instinct starts defending the ego instead of the actual physical organism. In that case, how much truth is in the world view is really secondary to the value one derives from it in terms of a sense of identity, which is psychologically equated with security. (I know what to think now, it seems to kick ass in terms of the truthfulness of the worldview scene is concerned - I am of a strong minded class of people by thinking this way, I can't wait to get my jacket) On the other hand, if you're only interested in what's reasonable and true, you will not defend or attack any position (maybe metaphorically to challenge an idea) but just allow your thinking to change based on what makes sense. Psychologically people find this very threatening, but as far as clarity of thinking and efficient operation of the mind (since there isn't all the extra energy spent on preserving an ego structure) it's much better.

21

Is Satan on the Offensive or the Defensive?

by jgnat in

this week's study article again lauds the great power and strength of the devil.

(wt march 1, 2003, study for april 13, 'be courageous and strong', para 3-4. you know, roaring lion, bla, bla, struggling christians, bla bla.

this got me to thinking.

Introspection

Offensive and defensive requires a position of identification, just as good and evil does. Most of the time it seems that those who fancy themselves as either good or bad lack awareness of the overall picture, since these opposites have no meaning without each other. The result seems to be that whatever your position, the effort to resist the opposite position results in violent behavior, whether it's physical or strictly mental, which can happen on the level of an individual. The reason for the violent behavior (violent in that it is a reaction to the opposition) is the same for both sides, a limited perspective based on self interest, which is to say the interest of that limited perspective.

18

Is God out there?

by digderidoo in

i have left the org for many years now.

sometimes i think jehovah is there, sometimes i think there cannot be a god for all the suffering that we see happening in this world.. just lately i have been wondering if god really exists, is the bible his word or is it all just a load of b*****ks.

i have looked into other religions, buddhism for instance, i believe we are spiritual, but is there a need for a god?

Introspection

Dig, what is God to you outside of a thought or a feeling?

I don't think you need to consider much more outside of this. In any case, that's something you might consider - I probably won't check back to this thread, don't get around to checking messages lately.

6

Enlightenment

by Introspection in

jw
friends

well, i thought a few of you out there might be interested in this, this is taken from the book ask the awakened by wei wu wei:.

enlightenment by non-action.

all so-called volition is a manifestation of the i-concept.

Introspection

I've realized that my beliefs aren't neccessarily reality, so I have no problem with understanding what you are saying about that.
I've also realized that my explanation of what I've come to realize is the Way is very inadequate in that I can't explain to you what I'm talking about.

Well, because of this it follows that perhaps what I mean by those words might not be exactly your understanding of them. As you've observed it's not who's saying what, it just cannot be put into words. Even if one can make an effort to express it through words it is just an expression, but that is of course useful.

It isn't that beliefs aren't necessarily reality, they are never reality. But as I said in the last message it isn't even about beliefs, beliefs are just thoughts you believe in, and the more basic question is what is the nature of thought, rather than what you believe in. Most people like to debate over the accuracy of their thoughts, whether they be beliefs or just descriptions of everyday phenomena, but the whole point is that the nature of thought is such that they are just processes going on in someone's head, and is a nice model for reality at best. Someone who is more interested in reality will just be not as interested in having nice models for it.

Of course, it isn't necessarily important that someone can talk about it in a lucid manner either, because obviously some people will be better at that endeavor than others, and have different approaches even if they all make use of words. There are plenty of other ways a human being can express the same thing and they should, otherwise it may just be that they are intellectually enlightened and are careful enough to not say anything that contradicts with a certain framework. It doesn't really matter if someone can't express their thoughts clearly, it's more important that they recognize their thoughts are not the real thing, (in the sense expressed above) even if they may seem really close.

Most people seem to unconsciously make the mistake at this level - even if they can talk a good game the whole problem is they believe their thoughts are the real thing, when of course it's just what they think about it. To put it another way, the universe just does not exist in the head of any individual, but those few individuals who are realized are transparent in a sense, because they don't have any nice thoughts they are really attached to, they just express it quite naturally as best they can. By saying believing and being attached to a thought I am pointing at the same behavior, which is that of identification with thought. They have this attitude like their way of thinking IS them, (even though the other viewpoint is certainly also in their head) but all you have to do is ask them "who believes that?" There is most likely no question that there is someone that believes whatever idea is being expressed, but people don't really know who that is. The question that comes more naturally for most is "why do you believe that?" which of course tells you that one thought is dependent on another. That being the case, where can you place the identification? It's just a big conglomeration of thoughts. I'm not arguing that we will recognize some thoughts as true like I have ten fingers and not eleven, by the way, but by identification I mean there is a sense of self confined to that thought or thought pattern. I mean, isn't that why people leaving a religion like the witnesses feels like they're dying? Of course the reality is they're not dying, changing maybe - changing their mind only, which only means some thoughts might be dying.

Along with that, another quote from Ask the Awakened:

Where Truth is, Truth must prevail. Does its mask matter? Changing religion changes nothing but that which conceals the Truth.

6

Enlightenment

by Introspection in

jw
friends

well, i thought a few of you out there might be interested in this, this is taken from the book ask the awakened by wei wu wei:.

enlightenment by non-action.

all so-called volition is a manifestation of the i-concept.

Introspection

The problem (or question) I have about all this is that what you are saying also represents a 'belief".
Isn't it considered a belief to believe that it is only by letting go of "belief" and "ego" that someone obtains enlightenment?

Are you saying you believe this is a belief? It may be considered a belief, but that all depends on who you ask. Beliefs need a believer to exist, otherwise it's just some written ideas. In fact, from the perspective I am pointing to there is nobody to let go of a belief, but that probably makes no sense either. You can have a certain idea and for any given person, it can either be a belief or not, it's simple really - that's pretty much how we were taught as witnesses, as is the case with most religions. But aside from whether one buys it or not it is also only a concept, even if you don't believe it. What I am pointing to by my own messages and quoting others (by the way, I starting reading this guy after I wrote my other messages) is that same thing the passage you quoted from is pointing to, it isn't conceptualization. This line of reasoning is from the conceptual mind you might say, which is the thing Lao Tzu and others are saying one must go beyond. (otherwise, why isn't what HE says just a belief? just because he's famous?) These guys are not saying this so you can grasp the concepts, heck, that's why they call it realization. As I said before, try it as an experiment and see for yourself - by all means do not just believe it. You have to first see that there is some awareness outside of your conceptual mind so that you don't just operate from concepts, then all this will start to make any sense. Wei Wu Wei draws the difference between split-mind and whole-mind, those chapters might be of interest if you want to read it. (http://www.weiwuwei.8k.com)

By the way, it is not exactly about letting go of beliefs either, it's more like they're irrelevant. As I've said before, they're irrelevant as far as reality is concerned, because of their very nature of being beliefs - the only way in which they are real is that they are really beliefs. We need a conceptual mind to just get things done in daily life, but people don't live in their head when they use those mental processes, they use it to negotiate their way in the real world! When you start seeing these concepts as just concepts, even the best pointers stop losing their emotional charge, you're not attached to it. One can stop worshipping their beliefs and actually start being spiritual in some real sense. You're not busy looking at the finger pointing to the moon, that it's just a finger is obvious - but it's extended in a certain direction for a reason. You might have some beautiful pictures of say, Hawaii, or even say a DVD, playing through a surround sound system on a big screen TV. But none of that is as good as the real thing is it?

6

Enlightenment

by Introspection in

jw
friends

well, i thought a few of you out there might be interested in this, this is taken from the book ask the awakened by wei wu wei:.

enlightenment by non-action.

all so-called volition is a manifestation of the i-concept.

Introspection

Here's another quote by the same book, this one kind of 'drives it home' ...

All the evil in the world, and all the unhappiness, comes from the I-concept.
There are two methods of dealing with it: the dualistic approach, by seeking to discipline, purify, or otherwise ameliorate this supposed self which suffers and does ill, that is working by means of that which is itself the cause; and the non-dualist method, by disposing of it, by eradicating the cause, by realising that it is only a concept and is not I at all.
Only the second method can be completely efficacious, because it alone is radical and permanent. If it can be realised that the subject is not the I-concept, that the I-concept is not the subject, its power - for evil as for suffering - must automatically cease to be effective.
* * *
We do not possess an 'ego',
We are possessed by the idea of one.

5

Addressing mind control helps the person and helps them leave

by Introspection in

jw
friends

in talking to those that go to the local xjw support group here, it occurred to me that when we address the mental/psychological aspect of witness indoctrination it kind of kills two birds with one stone.

i think this is especially helpful because you can talk about mind control without directly pointing a finger at the wts (of course there is a time for that too) - but it seems it would help you get the wheels turning first.

comparing this to the bombarding-them-with-facts-about-the-society approach, it seems a lot more subtle if not more effective.

Introspection

Well Spanner, basically it's just helping them see how they think, their reasoning (or lack of such) instead of shooting down individual beliefs. For one thing, you can challenge belief itself - this is probably the most direct approach for any religious person and I've kind of been leaning toward this direction as you can see in my posts, but I think we could focus more on aspects of mind control that relates more directly to a person's quality of life, too. (probably a little too direct for many) I can't give you too many examples as this isn't something I've really researched, but it just goes to reason that if you challenge a person's way of thinking, then all the conclusions they've drawn by that way of thinking will automatically be called into question as well, right? In the case of witnesses and many religious people it will more than likely take some repetition and wording it in different ways for someone to get the point, besides the actual thinking process itself is pretty simple. But basically it's like the old saying about teaching a man to fish and he can feed himself - teach a person about mind control and they can sort out the stuff themselves. It seems to me if you take this approach and supplement it with certain key facts, it would make for a more effective transition.