Do I, you, understand conditioning?

[DanMcD]

@Huguette

And if it IS understanding, it is not the end of understanding, is it. If it IS understanding and it is clung to, it becomes memory, knowledge, and understanding is lost, isn’t it? It must be released like a dove.

Like the flight of an eagle, leaving no trace?

[Inquiry]

@DanMcD

Like the flight of an eagle, leaving no trace?

No, like releasing a dove. If I keep the dove, I miss the point.

[Emile]

@Huguette

To be clear, the “doing nothing” itself is not a positive action. It is not a positive “doing something” in the sense that a positive choice is made to do nothing. Rather, the doing nothing is a negative action or “non-action” of sorts. It is the spontaneous action engendered by the spontaneous (effortless) understanding of the fact of limitation, as I see it.

Is it possible to elaborate on this? Seems to me that this is what most of us have difficulty with. We earnestly “try” to act negatively based on positive understanding and then fail miserably.

Is the difficulty that we are trying to bring about this type of inaction in the future rather coming to terms with the fact of the utter limitation of the fixer in the present? To be satisfied with freedom for just a moment, this one? Active inaction in the immediate present.

We do not usually see perceived value in something that has no continuity, that cannot be learned and set on automatic. Having an understanding that one does not own or cannot cling to and use again at will is not a common experience.

Or is the issue simply that we don’t feel the horror of human consciousness intensely enough and so the understanding is not ever present, naturally? We have all experienced strong depth of feeling when in personal crisis that makes us numb, receding, self-abated afterwards, but time has a way of dulling that intensity in relatively short order.

I am not sure.

[DanMcD]

@Emile

we don’t feel the horror of human consciousness intensely enough

I think this is safe to say🤣

[Peter]

Conditioning is not just a point of view, which we know about, its the exercise, process, system, of knowing. This is all words and words have their origin in things. Is what we see in the world a multitude of things, or is there a seeing which is not about a thing? When I am walking in the forest, am I repeatedly, continually, naming each thing I see, or is there a sense of beauty, a sense of naturally living in the world, nothing to do with words?

[jmsaario]

@Peter

When I sit quietly, and the mind is still, there is a feeling of an all encompassing vibrancy, an energy not being activated or generated by the sitter.

We can make this even simpler.

Being quiet is the awareness of this which you called energy. There is no ask or position for the mind to be still or have a feeling of anything.

Quality of quiet does not require a still mind. Once the functioning of thought and mind is put in its rightful place, the activity of it has no relationship or impact to what we observe.

[jmsaario]

@Huguette

To be clear, the “doing nothing” itself is not a positive action. It is not a positive “doing something” in the sense that a positive choice is made to do nothing. Rather, the doing nothing is a negative action or “non-action” of sorts. It is the spontaneous action engendered by the spontaneous (effortless) understanding of the fact of limitation, as I see it.

@Emile

Or is the issue simply that we don’t feel the horror of human consciousness

Life is action. Doing nothing or doing something are always of the mind. When we see the functioning of the mind for what it is, we can easily see that when we are in either in confusion or in certainty, the right action is “to do nothing”.

This is the most difficult task for the mind to do, and staying with the non-doing demands a great deal of energy and attention so that we do not fall into the trap of the mind to start (thinking about) “doing nothing”.

When we are aware of our consciousness, there is action, which is whole. We are not doing anything, we are alive, living. And as in any case, making this into an idea or a concept is not the thing or right action.

[jmsaario]

@Huguette

@jmsaario

If we conclude, that Man cannot do anything about his action, then we’re finished here.

But is this a conclusion that Man cannot do anything about his action, or is it understanding of a fact?

A conclusion is never a fact. We must see this clearly together.

A conclusion means

• the end or finish of an event, process, or text.
• the summing-up of an argument or text.
• the formal and final arrangement of an agreement.
• a judgement or decision reached by reasoning.
• a proposition that is reached from given premises.

Certainly such a thing is not a fact, but merely an end point of thinking or knowledge. Ending inquiry or investigation to something dead and of the past.

Not sure if I make my point clear, do we see how conclusion is always of the mind? Hence, we need to stay away from making conclusions and agreements, when we want to investigate what is (f)actual psychologically.

[DanMcD]

@Emile

we don’t feel the horror of human consciousness intensely enough

Is the “horror”, that the mind, which ‘could ‘ be free but is in a sort of imprisonment by thought/time? And the ‘desire’ to escape its situation, to “blossom” or “transform”, etc, is just strengthening the bonds that hold it captive?

[Inquiry]

@Peter

When I am walking in the forest, am I repeatedly, continually, naming each thing I see, or is there a sense of beauty, a sense of naturally living in the world, nothing to do with words?

Yes, but it’s all conditioned response, and you can be aware of that and avoid believing that, for a little while, you are not conditioned.

[rickScott]

@Inquiry

it’s all conditioned response

Everything we humans perceive, feel, think, and do is conditioned. There might be some wiggle room for spontaneity. But even that spontaneity is conditioned!

Fully enlightened humans are said to have transcended conditionality. But for 99.99999999999999% of humanity, that’s just hearsay.

[Peter]

This meaning of conditioning people are using is conditioned, but that is not an understanding of conditioning, it is thought. To insist it is a total condition, and there is no beauty in the world, is an unfortunate ignorance called totalitarianism.

[rickScott]

@Peter

there is no beauty in the world

Never said it, never thought it!

[Peter]

My comments in this blog are not directed at any one personally. The communication is in a context. Please think about the communication, not particular words. What is thought to be a connection is a self image.

[rickScott]

Good to know, thanks. You should be aware, if you’re not already, that your postings often appear to single someone out personally, to deprecate/scold them. If this is truly not your intention, you might want to make that more clear. Or not, your call!

[Peter]

It is up to anyone to see there is a context. I can not help people with their ideas of the personal, or individualism. The basic matter is a reaction with thought, and that is what is addressed. Obviously it involves you and me, him and her, and that is the responsibility, for which I, all, may need scolding. But this is looking at responsibility, and it is not a singular punishment in the way of righteousness, morality, ethics, etc… Essentially there is a psychological disorder, a self image, and that’s what I am addressing. People identify with the self image and react. That reaction is irresponsible.

[rickScott]

Communicating effectively with others is a skill that can be learned and improved. If we all made the effort to communicate skillfully with each other here, we might see an improvement in the interactions: less innuendo, less confusion, more kindness and clarity. The quality of the inquiries might be raised.

Just for the record, I think this is quite a good forum. People are mostly respectful, solid investigative work happens, there’s even the occasional twinkle of humor!

[Peter]

Communication, or to commune together, is primarily sharing of a common ground, and the exchange of words, is secondary. Words are used in examining the interference of thought in this common ground, and the words are in no way exempt from that interference, and can not provide clarity in a common ground. The words are limited to an exchange between people, and ordinarily people are not standing in the common ground. The common ground is not found with words. Words are used to point to the interference, the division, and the conflict.

[Huguette]

#45:

@Emile

Seems to me that this is what most of us have difficulty with. We earnestly “try” to act negatively based on positive understanding and then fail miserably.

I don’t know what else to say to clarify what I mean by negative action. Still, as I see it, understanding negative action is not a crucial necessity. What is crucial is to see the fact that we/I have no choice but to walk through life with uncertainty as our constant companion — to see our desire to change and that we are absolutely unable to bring about fundamental change inwardly or outwardly. When that is seen, there is a spontaneous end to the effort to change, to be other than what we are. So there can be no failing at acting negatively, and no success.

Where, out of the fog of confusion, a clear fact emerges unsought, there is a spontaneous halt to trying to understand it, to change oneself. This is not the action of the conditioned mind, as I see it.

Questioning and doubting have a life of their own, so to speak. One can’t prevent questioning or doubt — questioning one’s nature, questioning the source of everything, and doubting, cannot be prevented. Perhaps in following a question as far as it leads us, and leaving it alone once the end of the question is reached, understanding might emerge.

@Emile

Active inaction in the immediate present.

This strikes me as the clear expression of negative action which I have been unable to put into words, another way of saying awareness.

[macdougdoug]

@Huguette

@Emile

Active inaction in the immediate present.

This strikes me as the clear expression of negative action which I have been unable to put into words, another way of saying awareness.

I was put off by the word “active” - difficult are words to use faced with the subtlety of non-active action (or is it active non-action?). Auumm mané padmé hummmm!