Disorder

[macdougdoug]

@Inquiry

(Seeing) can also be self-deception, especially if one is hoping, pining for insight. How will I know the difference between the actual thing and the thing I’ve set my sights on?

If I am imagining something, and I want it badly, am pining for it; and I get what I wanted and imagined : this is not insight as we defined it earlier. This is just the usual projection of myself.

In the midst of confusion, what I set my sights on is part of that confusion.

There is a difference between dishonesty and insight, one is the appeasement of pain, the confirmation of knowledge; the other the appeasement of confusion itself, a vision of simple liberating fact.
One is the prolongation of conflict, the other a liberating vision of the conflict.

[DanMcD]

@macdougdoug

One is the prolongation of conflict, the other a liberating vision of the conflict.

The ‘insight’ into the self image ‘web’ spun since childhood ; a complex of fears, ideals, comparisons, hurts, approval seeking, education, judgements, (aka ‘the known’) is a “liberation” from that inner ‘reality’. K questioned though whether an insight that didn’t immediately dissolve the ‘false’ reality of self was an insight at all.

[macdougdoug]

@DanMcD

K questioned though whether an insight that didn’t immediately dissolve the ‘false’ reality of self was an insight at all.

This relates to the questions above, about telling the difference between the confirmation of one’s worldview and “real” insight.
I’ll just add that experientially there is a difference between feeling justified in one’s beliefs and the Aha! moment of comprehending something new.

As to dissolving, I like to point at awareness dissolving the unecessary experiences of self as and when they arise, which happens thanks to having come face to face with what the self is.

[Inquiry]

@Jobuys

To see the bird in his flight, to see the flower on the pavement, indeed, it seems to be simple.and do you know why? Because the bird, the flower , nature on a whole , doesn’t want sthg from you.
And indeed it becomes arduous when we look at our neighbour or at our beloved ones, because indeed they are demanding.

Interesting notion, but the fact is that we’re no better at seeing birds, flowers, or “nature on a whole” clearly, without bias, without sentimentality, without knowingness, than we are at seeing ourselves and each other.

[Inquiry]

@macdougdoug

What demonstration is there that the description of what is seen is somehow clearer than what is seen?

It isn’t “clearer”… it’s just communicable.

It might be better for the purpose of communication, but surely it is the narrative that is inchoate (at best) when compared to the thing it describes?

There is no narrative until there’s articulation. The thing described is the insight, the significance of which is inchoate until it is articulated.

[Inquiry]

@DanMcD

K questioned though whether an insight that didn’t immediately dissolve the ‘false’ reality of self was an insight at all.

If I’m not mistaken, he also spoke of partial insights, and it seems to me that the brain must have many partial insights until the whole of what they’re a part of dispels all confusion.

[Jobuys]

Reply to DanMcd
The fact is that there is no point of return, whatever the cost might be.
After all , it is our life and what do we do with it?

[Inquiry]

@Jobuys

The fact is that there is no point of return, whatever the cost might be.

“No point of return” from what?

[Jobuys]

Yesterday? Or the day before yesterday?
No joking at all !
I might be able to do this but then i will live in an illusion, wouldn’t I?
Do you want to live in an illusion?

[DanMcD]

@Inquiry

it seems to me that the brain must have many partial insights until the whole of what they’re a part of dispels all confusion.

I think so too. In his case something catastrophic seemed to occur. An explosion. Very rare event?

[Inquiry]

@Jobuys

Do you want to live in an illusion?

Are you not the sum total of all your illusions, including your illusory self?

[Inquiry]

@DanMcD

In his case something catastrophic seemed to occur. An explosion. Very rare event?

It’s just an opinion, but I suspect K had a series of partial insights that led up to and naturally culminated in the first and last step, the total insight that was the end of self-deception and the beginning of choiceless awareness.

[Jobuys]

There seems to be two tracks that are being followed: one is about insight , the other about illusions.
Which one are we going into?

[WimOpdam]

@Inquiry

but I suspect K had a series of partial insights that led up to and naturally culminated in the first and last step, the total insight that was the end of self-deception and the beginning of choiceless awareness.

Oh my, oh my, both a wrong turn and as an illusion of knowledge within one sentence!

[Jobuys]

I don´t understand Wim what are you talking about?

[WimOpdam]

In itself, that is the attitude we should also take towards the teaching, right?

Now, what essentially underlies the so-called wrong turn?

Is it not the assumption/suspection that what makes sense in the physical world has crept into the psychological world without choice or limit?

The so-called knowledge has literally taken on a life of its own and seeing that led to that one sentence!

[Inquiry]

@WimOpdam

Oh my, oh my, both a wrong turn and as an illusion of knowledge within one sentence!

Care to elaborate?..

[fraggle]

@Inquiry

I suspect K had a series of partial insights that led up to and naturally culminated in the first and last step, the total insight that was the end of self-deception and the beginning of choiceless awareness

Which would imply that K would have been accumulating knowledge from all previous “partial perceptions”, which would eventually result in what you call “the first and last step”, which in turn would spoil not only any supposed “choiceless awareness” but also the whole K’s teaching, right?

[fraggle]

@Jobuys

And indeed it becomes arduous when we look at our neighbour or at our beloved ones, because indeed they are demanding.
And even more arduous when looking at oneself who is everlastingly demanding

So, according to you, to look at what is is arduous because oneself and others are demanding. Now, could you elaborate in what sense (1) others and (2) oneself are demanding, which, according to you, would affect and make it arduous to look at what is?

[DanMcD]

It’s possible that he means “demanding” in the sense that when I have established a relationship with someone there is a felt ‘demand’ to be who the other imagines I am? And observing myself in that situation is an uncomfortable interference?