- This topic has 57 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I would agree that in a superficial situation, the choice not to be angry would help to maintain the balanced flow of qi, but in a situation where a more forceful response is desired to maintain balance, anger would be useful.
The idea that “everything is ultimately irrelevant in the big picture” makes sense when we look at the vastness of the universe and our minute place in it, but there must also be a flip side which is that every small action we take affects the microcosm, and that in turn can drastically affect the macrocosm through resonance.
I was looking at Lonny Jarret’s glossary of terms the other day and noticed that his description of the “Ling” is the flip side of the “Shen” in the heart spirit. The Shen represents the process of wu wei, which is to be aligned with change (in the right place at the right time), and the Ling is the The human potency to fulfill destiny and thereby be effective in influencing heaven and evoking changes in the world.
It is that aspect of human will that keeps coming up that interacts with the flow of the dao
So if I’m understanding you correctly, by having the attitude of wu wei, by cultivating attunement with the qi flow, we can achieve a natural alignment with the process of change. This is more equivalent to a “state of attunement with flux”…whenever I think of the “state” of things, it suggests to me something fixed, i.e. “a frozen state”. This is really just a language issue.
I would think though that “experiencing life as it is” could potentially take many forms, we could experience life at a superficial or a deep level depending on our ability to attune to the flow.
It is interesting also to note that being in alignment with change, in the flow of wu wei, is to some degree a choice to be in alignment or not. This brings up again the idea that humans have the potency to manifest themselves as an agent of change in alignment with heaven and earth. This points toward the manifestation of will in alignment with the forces of heaven and earth.
>>>I would agree that in a superficial situation,
>>>the choice not to be angry would help to maintain
>>>the balanced flow of qi, BUT IN A SITUATION
>>>WHERE A MORE FORCEFUL RESPONSE IS DESIRED TO
>>>MAINTAIN BALANCE, ANGER WOULD BE USEFUL.So you believe that things are unbalanced unless
a forceful response is taken? Actually, the universe is
in balance regardless of what you do. That’s my
point. Your comment “forceful response is desired”
is telling. The key word here is “desired”. This
is an expression of the ego saying “my idea is better
than the one unfolding without my input; let me
be the one to run things”.>>>The idea that “everything is ultimately irrelevant in the big picture”
>>>makes sense when we look at the vastness of the universe
>>>and our minute place in it,Yes, but it is not only that.
It doesn’t have anything to do with our proportion of size to
the universe. What it has to do with, is that the universe
knows already what the best course is and does not need your input.
The expression of free will is nothing other than the gift
of the choice to “not trust the way things are unfolding without
our input”. It’s the idea that “we know better”. Part of our
learning here is to realize that the path laid out automatically
by the lifeforce–*without* our input–is always the optimal one.
We can then use our FREE WILL to CHOOSE the naturally unfolding
option that is already presenting itself. The “A-HA” moment is
where you realize that “OK, universe, you actually know better
than I do what the best path is, so rather than fighting you,
I’ll just choose to go along with whatever you prescribe
because you are more intelligent than I. I will SURRENDER
to your infinite wisdom and TRUST that you had the right
idea all along.” Then the struggle is gone, and all the
remains is peace. This is the source of the idea of
“what difference does it make?”. It’s just unconditional
acceptance of all that arises in its purest form.>>>but there must also be a flip side which is
>>>that every small action we take affects the
>>>microcosm, and that in turn can drastically
>>>affect the macrocosm through resonance.This goes back full circle to my comment of using your
time here to cultivate yourself. Through training of
being able to more fully align with the lifeforce and
to decrease our own internal stresses and conflicts, the
lifeforce is able to flow freer and the whole field improves.
Others external to you respond in kind to changes made on
a personal level.Thus, instead of initiating an action to create a “change”
to the direction of the flow, what you are doing is
choosing to completely align with the flow–and in so doing,
you notice that then the flow spontaneously changes ON ITS OWN
without you having to do anything to initiate it.In a nutshell, you win by losing.
Steven
“Thus, instead of initiating an action to create a “change”
to the direction of the flow, what you are doing is
choosing to completely align with the flow–and in so doing,
you notice that then the flow spontaneously changes ON ITS OWN
without you having to do anything to initiate it.In a nutshell, you win by losing.”
*************************************************
Very nice brother.
I would add one thing, we realize we are the flow, we are the change, there is no distinction, this is our true nature.bg
>>>I would add one thing, we realize we are the flow,
>>>we are the change, there is no distinction, this is our true nature.I mostly agree.
Except I would say we are but a fragment of the flow.
So I would say that “you are the flow”, so long as you are acting
in complete accord with the directionality of the lifeforce, as you
are then completely merged–not trying to separate off of it. As
soon as you exert/effort an action that expresses an underlying
desire for a different result than what is occurring spontaneously
without your individuated input, then you–as a fragment of the flow–
are attempting to separate yourself from it.This is the underlying tension and irony.
The ego wants you to feel as if you are an individual, and to feel
like an individual you have to feel as if you are making your own
choices. Therefore the ego wants to–with differing frequency–make
different choices than the ones occurring spontaneously by the
universe. The IRONY is that the naturally occurring direction of the
lifeforce is always the better choice. Thus, in order to make
the ego feel good and to make it feel as if it is choosing things
on its own, it–by necessity–makes an inferior choice.The birth of truth is to get the ego to realize that choosing to
surrender is STILL A CHOICE, and that by making that choice you
are not losing yourself, but instead are finding it.S
This is a different notion than the
Buddhist idea of trying to kill the ego.The ego should not be killed, as it is
an important part of who you are.It should be embraced.
Rather than trying to kill it because it has an
“independent mind”, you cultivate to convince it
to join the party that is already underway.This is really what I feel is meant by “integration”
when you get right down to it . . . the individuated
ego/free will and the overall collective, both sharing
the same voice.S
Hello!
What comes to my opinions about Ilmarinen or anything which I haven’t really investigated, I don’t really know. I will still look up in the library when I have time.
Comrade H
Ps. Few years back one friend of mine wrote and composed musical play with Kalevala themes and he thought that I would have been good Hiisi. I reclined because for me it was too uncommercial.
I don’t think the Buddhists believe in killing the ego, this is a communication error. Their insight is the ego is not your essential nature, we tend to view our ego as what we are, imho to a Buddhist, when we see and know our true nature we see the ego for what it is, one aspect of a functioning of a human, to help us operate during certain aspects of life.
I think we cultivate our essential nature to be aware of itself and then all aspects of our life fall into place, we understand the ego, emotions, etc. Integration comes from understanding, understanding comes from direct experience, direct experience is the life force itself and is our true nature, wu wei is a way to experience this.
Will can help us to cultivate, will does not create anything new. It can be new in the sense we have turned our attention away from an aspect of our self, Will can help us turn back to our self.
Listening to the grateful dead and smiling to you.
bagua
This is a different notion than the
Buddhist idea of trying to kill the ego.The ego should not be killed, as it is
an important part of who you are.It should be embraced.
Rather than trying to kill it because it has an
“independent mind”, you cultivate to convince it
to join the party that is already underway.This is really what I feel is meant by “integration”
when you get right down to it . . . the individuated
ego/free will and the overall collective, both sharing
the same voice.>>>I don’t think the Buddhists believe in killing
>>>the ego, this is a communication error.You are, of course, right. The above is just
my personal perspective on their position, not
the one they actually promulgate.Their emphasis on “not identifying your ego with your
essential nature” can create a negative judgement
against the ego and make one feel that the ego
is superfluous nonsense which gets in the way
of enlightenment.MY feeling is that the ego (and its associated
free will) are vital components of who you are.
They do not obscure your true nature; instead,
they are part of it. Your ego/free will needs
to be integrated just like everything else.Cheers,
StevenOkay, okay, there was a small misunderstanding here.
My expression was not that the life force is inherently out of balance, but that it is a dynamic process, and humans (with their free will) play an important part in that process.
The idea of “responding with anger” is as follows: lets say you are confronted by an excess yang person, and this person is going to walk all over you with possible consequences to the quality of your life unless you respond with conviction, stating your own opinion. You have every right to state your own opinion, and if you have the intention of creating balance, may be doing this person a favor so that they don’t get themselves into more trouble later in their life through bad choices…should you “trust in the life force” that it has consciously thought out and pre-destined your life so that all you have to do is follow along, or CHOOSE what is the best response (possibly including anger) in the moment according to what is most needed to maintain balance (Your balance)?
a very experienced teacher once said to my class: “there are three types of people, those that make it happen, those that watch it happen and those that wonder what happened”. If you are a musician, those are words of wisdom. Especially a teacher…whatever you do is what other people will learn.
The main point here is that the life force can go in any direction spontaneously, and you are in the drivers seat. Of course we are all dealing with a huge river, a confluence of different streams of the life force, so it seems like things are pre-planned, but each action that you take will affect many others.
a re-statement through my lens:
The personal self (the five shen, the “ego”) is here firstly to experience post-natal life and work out issues specific to its unique configuration.
As a result of creating balance in its microcosm, to experience what balance in the macrocosm is.
And, being able to experience balance in both the personal and collective self, allow both parts of the self to co-exist and spontaneously interact with each other, creating a clear pathway of communication for each to learn from the other.
Just to clarify, the personal and collective both being two ends of a continuum (not separate).
>>>The idea of “responding with anger” is as follows:
>>>lets say you are confronted by an excess yang person,
>>>and this person is going to walk all over you with
>>>possible consequences to the quality of your life
>>>unless you respond with conviction, stating your own
>>>opinion.I don’t find it necessary to get angry with others
to defuse a situation. Not saying I don’t get angry,
but it’s usually precipitated by being overly tired
or overly hungry–and after the fact, I realize that
the situation could have been likewise resolved through
calm means.Usually most people are pretty reasonable if you bring
them aside on a one-on-one, and talk with them calmly
and rationally.“Responding with conviction” is different than getting
angry. The former implies emotional neutrality; the
latter does not.>>>if you have the intention of creating balance,
again, everything is already balanced; you don’t need to create it
>>>may be doing this person a favor so that
>>>they don’t get themselves into more trouble
>>>later in their life through bad choicesI disagree. This is the trouble with most religions
in general. It’s an arrogant position of “I know
better than you do”. “My idea” is better than “your idea”,
so you better do as I say OR ELSE. No–let people learn
for themselves. Stop interfering. Give people advice
if you feel it to be helpful, but let it stop there
and let them make their own decisions.S
You create and flow with whatever spontaneously arises.
This is different than trying to stop whatever arises.Suppose you are standing in the middle of highway and a
Mack Truck comes barreling down in your direction . . .
Don’t get angry that the Mack Truck is there.
Don’t try to stop the Mack Truck.
Just neutrally step aside and let it pass.The only way that unforeseen circumstances can disrupt
your joy and/or disrupt your ability to create
if you choose to let it do so.S
>>>a very experienced teacher once said to my class:
>>>”there are three types of people, those that make
>>>it happen, those that watch it happen and those
>>>that wonder what happened”. If you are a musician,
>>>those are words of wisdom. Especially a teacher…
>>>whatever you do is what other people will learn.I agree, but there is also some wisdom in not
making too much of “making things happen”. There’s
too much emphasis in today’s society of creating
a feeling that you “have to do XYZ” in order to
be successful and happy. This can create subtle
pressures and internal stresses putting people in
a state of “always seeking”. There are too many
people working themselves to death, because they
are buying into concept that that’s what they need to
do in order to ACHIEVE happiness.There’s a fine line between “creative, fun exploration”
and falling into the “workaholic trap of seeking”. This
is where the attitude of not taking anything too seriously
is beneficial.Smiles,
Steven
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.