An interesting thought, when I am dealing with others as myself or
seeing myself in them (as I see it later) anger often comes to the
surface. When I find them in me it is always with compassion and
understanding. Guilt swings between them both until it's a nauseating,
deadlocked impasse of downward spirals.
This sounds like agape love, I think it's a progressive and
bidirectional skill: as you learn appreciation and compassion for others
it teaches you about yourself and vice versa with the capacity
increasing as you compound the dimensions of compassion. I think there
is a definite element of 'familiarity' involved, whether or not this is
a causal error on my part it is a distinct and resounding part of the
experience (for me).
On 5/3/2011 2:55 PM, pol.science kid wrote:
yeah...we dont see others for who they are..we see them for who we
think they are...but...though ...i am not sure i believe it
completely..but it convinces vaguely nevertheless...unconsciously do
believe it...no it confuses me again...when you love ...deeply...do
you finally see the other person and love them like yourself...know
them in the same breath...or is it again because we see ourselves in
them..i dont know...because i have not really experienced it....to
see.someone...like the naavi people say in the avatar movie
On May 3, 1:30 pm, gabbydott<[email protected]> wrote:
With collective consciousness you mean this group-think programme à la
Molly's [mission] What do YOU think? Na, you're right, PSK is definitely
different from that.
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 10:04 AM, the taoist shaman<[email protected]>wrote:
PSK selfishness arouses discontent because it is contrary to
collective consciousness , try reading the meditations of marcus
auralius chapter 2 verse 1 from the harvard classics .
gabbydott wrote:
From a top-down perspective this is correct. But I understood that PSK
asked
for individual responses from each of us.
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 3:09 AM, rigsy03<[email protected]> wrote:
But you have to admit there are humans who haven't the chance to even
consider this type of thinking as their lives are miserable due to
poverty, war, sickness and all other ills. Plus- what does a culture
celebrate? Wealth? Power? Etc.? You can hardly fault some for buying a
false self and image if that is what their culture teaches them, can
you? It takes a brave rebel to contradict society or challenge group
thought.
On May 2, 12:20 pm, gabbydott<[email protected]> wrote:
If the selfish would truly search their self, they'd quickly die out.
Problem is how they don't see themselves but see themselves in the
others
with the poor others not knowing that they are not taken for
themselves
but
for someone else. My explanation.
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 6:57 PM, pol.science kid<
[email protected]
wrote:
at the first glance of your reply came a thought to my mind about
collective consciousness...rather a question...does the collective
consciousness exist independently...what does it mean exactly...to
put
it
crudely is it the realisation that you are not the only
phenomena..but
what
i feel is....it is very difficult to transcend ones own
person...but is
it
important....why do we really get irritated with self absorbed or
self
seeking people....why do we condemn selfishness..in any sense...are
we
so
insecure as to feel deprived because of that ...or is it something
more.. i
hope i make sense.. and i hope you get waht i am trying to ask...i
would
like all to answer...cos i really want to know....
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:36 PM, DarkwaterBlight<
[email protected]>wrote:
This take appeals to my understanding. Perpetually changing,
evolving
and reforming. Input has an outcome and causes an expanded "mind
space", if you will. Is logic all logical and what is to be said
about
rationalizing the "irrational"? Should my thinking be correct by
the
standards of others or to my own? What of "raising the bar" in
consciousness and of a paradigm shift to a more correct thinking
of
our "collective mind" ? Of all that goes into into thought and
mind is
this not the desired effect?
On Apr 30, 9:23 am, "pol.science kid"<[email protected]>
wrote:
might thought be colored by the mind that engages it ....what is
the
realm
of pure thought that you mention here .... is it logic and
rationalisation...do you mean the method of employing that
thought...because
....knowing...percieving something for the first time the mind
will
automatically fall back on the things it thinks it does know....
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Chad Moore<[email protected]>
wrote:
Knowledge unites, in being or in identity. Thinking
separates, in
subject-object relationship.
Knowing has no place in the ordinary thought process. Thinking
about
something
which has to be known is wrong, since it moves in a vicious
circle.
You
cannot think
of anything you have not known. Such thinking can never take
you
to
the
Truth.
But when you direct your thought to something (say yourself)
which
you
have
otherwise
visualized, the thought loses its own characteristics and
limits,
and
stands
revealed as that Self (Consciousness) itself. Thought is thus
reduced
into
its essence.
--
\--/ Peace- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
--
\--/ Peace- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
