Author Topic: The Conversation of Death  (Read 799 times)

Offline daphne

  • Rishi
  • ******
  • Posts: 1560
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #30 on: September 25, 2006, 12:41:02 AM »
There are things you just cannot prepare for.

Yes, very much so!
Perhaps that is really what is behind all the teachings and the techniques we learn? What comes to mind here is the 'sweeping clean' the table of the tonal, and also the connection to the energy body through dreaming and the second attention. We cannot prepare for that which we do not know and so we just clean ourselves - so to speak - so that we are not carrying anything? The energy body has no mass - thoughts and ideas and emotion, to me, convey mass. Perhaps that is also behind all the meanings associated with 'purity'? DJM has said that all our power is in our impeccability. I take that to mean maximum energy minimum mass - mass being that which holds us down (so to speak)

On the other hand, it could have nothing to do with anything like this at all - that cubic centimeter of chance! I am reminded of that in meditation.  Not knowing what else to do.. I continue to clean the table and learning to be aware of my dreaming attention!   :D
"The compulsion to possess and hold on to things is not unique. Everyone who wants to follow the warrior's path has to rid himself of this fixation in order not to focus our dreaming body on the weak face of the second attention." - The Eagle's Gift

erik

  • Guest
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #31 on: September 25, 2006, 12:44:43 AM »
 :D

Very cool!

nichi

  • Guest
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #32 on: September 25, 2006, 12:47:14 AM »
Animals are like small children - they do not know what they are doing.

They know what they know, through their own filters.

Quote
The whole animal life is being plain unaware (or very little aware), but extremely violent.

E, every waking minute of every day for the other animals is not spent in violence and killing. They have a pretty broad gamut of experience beyond their survival needs -- pleasure-seeking, comfort-seeking, warmth, affection, joy and exuberance.

They don't engage in discussions like these, they don't examine "awareness", any more than we climb sharp precipices with hooved feet. To hold that against them seems so odd to me.

What we're engaging in is our human nature. They engage in their bird-nature, feline-nature, ungulate-nature, etc. etc.

Quote
I'm not that interested in eternal childhood without developing any awareness.  :D

And the other animals aren't interested in a lot of mental analysis!

« Last Edit: September 25, 2006, 12:55:16 AM by nichi »

nichi

  • Guest
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #33 on: September 25, 2006, 01:03:21 AM »
In losing the human form ... we have to know what that is. It's deeper than "ego". I'm a living being on this planet, amongst many. What is that "human" thing I do? I've learned what that is through watching, affiliating with, and communing with the critters. I've stalked myself by viewing myself as a creature. Many parts I have in common with the others, many parts I don't. We all have our respective "creaturehoods".
 
The essence of the form I need to lose, becoming a completely spiritual entity, comes not by turning my back on the thing I chose to be, in this lifetime.

Though certainly many is the time I've been utterly disgusted with my own species.  8)

Offline daphne

  • Rishi
  • ******
  • Posts: 1560
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #34 on: September 25, 2006, 01:13:02 AM »
I was just thinking on that myself now!

The 'human form' to me is more than "ego" - though can't say i really know what it is. I tend to look at things in 'relation to'. On the one side of 'human' there is what is called my 'animal' part - though i must admit that i don't really see it as animal.. no disrespect to the other kingdoms of nature meant here, just that the human being evolves physically through having already 'absorbed' the other kingdoms - so to speak, and we are perhaps at a midpoint of 'human' as a whole.
On the other side, is the kingdom of the soul. There is a gateway to that kingdom and perhaps here too we may have different conception of soul, though not in essence different.
All in all, to release the human form, I do see that we need an awareness of just what that human form is that we are setting to release.
"The compulsion to possess and hold on to things is not unique. Everyone who wants to follow the warrior's path has to rid himself of this fixation in order not to focus our dreaming body on the weak face of the second attention." - The Eagle's Gift

nichi

  • Guest
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #35 on: September 25, 2006, 01:20:11 AM »
See, Daphne, I don't do the hierarchical separation....

I like to think I've lived this life with gusto, fully engaging in it, never separating from it, and then I will have much to report when I move on to the next thing!

We all take different routes, as I said. My path has been in the blades of grass and the sweat of my brow. God, Spirit -- they're in the grass, they're in me ... they're not "out there". Well, they are "out there", but my path has been a very grassroots affair.

There are many different sorts of mysticism -- they're all valid.

Offline daphne

  • Rishi
  • ******
  • Posts: 1560
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #36 on: September 25, 2006, 01:24:20 AM »
Yeah V - I get it!
I don't do the "hierarchal separation" thingy either. It's just a metaphor!
"The compulsion to possess and hold on to things is not unique. Everyone who wants to follow the warrior's path has to rid himself of this fixation in order not to focus our dreaming body on the weak face of the second attention." - The Eagle's Gift

nichi

  • Guest
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #37 on: September 25, 2006, 02:03:30 AM »
Back to the agreements we make with death... I think there's truth in this. I watch my mother. As of now, she hasn't given her consent to it.

But I've seen others who have... the quiet letting go of life. What goes into that surrender is a mystery to me. 

nichi

  • Guest
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #38 on: October 19, 2007, 10:54:05 AM »
Absolutely, dreaming and other stuff are just tools for finding keys. None of these techniques are keys themselves (at least I see it that way now). M wrote some time ago at TNF about parallel lines and there was a passage in it about shifting from two-dimensional flight into third dimension - doing 90-degree turn - in order to seek the true awakening. My question was inspired by that passage - it is nice to dive into the ever-expanding perception of the second attention, but where is that cubic centimetre of opportunity to move forward from there?

Michael, now that we are speaking of death with more focus, can you say more about the 2-dimensional flight into the 3rd, doing a 90-degree turn? Is this relevant at all to death's flight, and retaining one's awareness?

Is this flight the same for all, or are there individual differences?

Offline Michael

  • Administrator
  • Rishi
  • ******
  • Posts: 18283
    • Michael's Music Page
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #39 on: October 20, 2007, 12:56:47 AM »
i don't recall anything about a 90% turn - rings a bell, but you will have to locate that reference for me.

2 just happens to be in the middle between 1 and 3, so a confusion arises.
1st world = 3 dimensional (ie. with two eyes we see distance - this and that, and here and there).
2nd world = 2 dimensional (ie a picture world, duality - this and that, which is what pictures are about)
3rd world = 1 dimensional (ie perception without pictures, non-duality, no comparisons)

don't get into a flap about that - it's just a way of talking.

what i think you are asking is how we move from the 2nd to the 3rd world. First, we do it when the astral body dies. But we also do it all the time - we have to be connected to the 3rd world or we wouldn't exist. The issue always is how to extend awareness from the 1st through the 2nd and into the 3rd.

This is what DJ referred to as warriors of the 3rd attention. 3rd world is also known as the Sephirah Kether in the Kaballah, or Brahman in Hinduism - sometimes also associated with Shiva.

Hinduism has the best tools of thought to help understand. Brahman is 'without attributes', meaning it is unknowable, in our understanding of knowing.

3rd attention means extending our attention into the 3rd world. Hinduism calls this moksha. It is worth noting that the entirety of Hindu thought in almost all it's variations, is dedicated to moksha - that's what it's all about. And so is it's 'reformation' Buddhism. Also, one could argue, is what is referred to as Philosophical Taoism, and Esoteric Taoism, but definitely not Popular Taoism.

Neither Judiasm, Christianity or Islam (the Abrahamic Religions) have any interest in this concept at all, aside from placing the Sephirah Kether at the top of the tree in Esoteric Judiasm - and one could also argue Northen Sufism has similar interests. But these are not within the orthodox religious field of any Abrahamic religion.

Toltec is dedicated to this concept, but only as part of it's third wave - a later development.

How to shift into the 3rd attention? Rudolf Steiner actually mapped it - he gave some early phases just passed the doorway, so to speak. I can't remember exactly, but they included things like intention.

There are two ways - direct and long.

Direct is absolute silence - the deepest experience of absolute silence you can possibly plumb.

Long is the journey, of mastery of passage. I mean you only need to master sufficient to pass through. Passage through the 1st and 2nd worlds. This means using the 1st and 2nd worlds - developing effectiveness in - to enter the 3rd world as a consequence of evolution of being - transformation.

It is my opinion that the long is the main task, but it also incorporates the direct. I am suspicious that the direct path can ever really be effective on its own. That is why i launched into the world, instead of retiring to a zen monastery. The problem with the long is that we get side-tracked along the way, and forget we are only passing through (a great song btw).

now we get into an area that preoccupies my attention considerably. I'll just say that at some point, the long is demonstrated beyond a shadow of doubt to be impossible, futile. It simply can't be done. I have a song about that myself ("There's only one thing that you can cling to, and you won't find it no matter what you do.")

This is where we cast ourselves upon the mercy of the Bird. The active principle of Spirit. that does not mean we give up our own efforts.

It is like we are ascending a building, and each floor has steps leading to the next floor. But the the final steps to the roof of the building are missing. There are no steps for the last section.

Jahn

  • Guest
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #40 on: October 20, 2007, 02:48:07 AM »

This is where we cast ourselves upon the mercy of the Bird. The active principle of Spirit. that does not mean we give up our own efforts.

It is like we are ascending a building, and each floor has steps leading to the next floor. But the the final steps to the roof of the building are missing. There are no steps for the last section.

Straaange,
 isn't it!?

Offline Firestarter

  • Ellen
  • Rishi
  • *
  • Posts: 14769
  • Love You ALL To The Moon and Back...
    • SIR
Re: The Conversation of Death
« Reply #41 on: October 30, 2023, 10:54:25 PM »
Facts are facts.
Animal world is utterly violent.
Should it be taken as an example or role model for crafting human behaviour? Considering all the violence?

That is my question.

As for human behaviour and destructiveness...that is a whole different opera.

Coming across good stuff. Pausing 1984.

We have no right to judge anything in the animal kingdom. They may show violence to catch pray. It’s for basic survival. They don’t gorge. They only store what is necessary.

They do also share. Only take if to survive.

They are still evolving.

Their existence helps the eco-system of the planet. They better it. They don’t destroy the planet. We do.

We can learn from them. How about “only take what you need.”

Judge animals. It’s ridiculous. I once saw some video of a woman who force fed her cat a vegetarian diet. It was skin and bones near death.

Anyway the judgment is ridiculous.
"A warrior doesn't seek anything for his solace, nor can he possibly leave anything to chance. A warrior actually affects the outcome of events by the force of his awareness and his unbending intent." - don Juan

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk