It is the observer meeting the consequences of living as a divided fragment. So he is responsible for the anger, just as he is responsible for the fear. When he escapes from it through thought, this is irresponsibility. The burst of energy is telling him something; whereas his first conditioned reaction to it is to label, explain and justify what has happened.
So are you saying the burst is a disturbance in energy, and is a form of kick-back for something thought is doing with energy?
Who is this āheā? Itās only thinking and reacting. Your reply gives the impression that thereās an actual āheā/person who is responsible or irresponsibleā¦whereas thereās only the thinking and reacting. Letās not create a guilt trip to reinforce the feeling that āIā am separate from the thinking and reacting. Itās only a trick of thinking that creates the feeling of a separate āIā.
Life is asking: āWhy are you creating pain?ā It is our responsibility to answer this question. When we give an answer from the background of our own little bundle of personal problems and concerns, thatās a sure way to guarantee that the pain continues.
Yes, this is very clear. And it seems to be where weāre stuck. Because itās all we have to work withā¦knowledge and experience. We canāt seem to put it aside. In fact only insight into how this divides us constantly from understandingā¦from lifeā¦will free us from this predicament
Thinking about the anger and the fear, I ask myself what is taking place. I am thinking it is the disablement of self. Probably we can imagine there is beauty in a dissolution of self, or have temporary experiences of this. But when it happens expectantly, there is a shock to the system, and I am disabled. Then I react (as if to regain control, and the ability of self) This reaction is the anger and fear. The result is I, self, living in fear, and poised to react.
The feeling of loss of control - feeling of injustice because I canāt get what I want?
It is not a predicament. It is a fact that I cannot do anything about it without causing more pain. The insight has already taken place. All I can do now is watch what happens. Am I willing just to watch? Or do I want to know beforehand exactly what will happen? In other words, can I drop altogether the security of knowing?
1 Like
Itās a predicament because weāre using knowledge and experience to solve our problem/s which are created by the division of knowledge and experienceā¦the past. Thatās how Iām using the word, predicament. Perhaps that insight youāre speaking of, has not taken place fullyā¦or weād not be making further efforts.
Which means you are still seeking security in knowledge. Although one sees the necessity of doing nothing, one is still actively seeking the confirmation that this is the right thing to do. Instead, do it and find out. Find out what happens when you do nothing at all.
Can āIā negate the movement of the āIā? How can āIā do nothing? I am the doingā¦the efforts, goals, motives, the reactions, thoughts, and so on. It sounds like some sort of zen practiceā¦the practice of sitting quietly and trying to ādo nothingā. Of course this is a contradiction.
We only ever undertake a practice such as sitting quietly because we hope to achieve something from it. This is not about sitting quietly. This is about the abandonment of hope.
(anger and fear) The self is disabled. Thatās the end. Nothing more. Nothing is coming to mind; no thoughts about what is happening or what will be. Can I stay with that nothingness?
I understand that youāre not advocating a practice. I was only pointing out that what you wrote subtly implied one could do something. The āabandonment of hopeā again is not something āIā can do as hope is a central feature of the āIāā¦me. I would rather say that itās a matter of learning and understanding. One canāt abandon oneself, but perhaps one can learn what this āIā is. Learning and understanding itās danger, then perhaps it will be abandoned/droppedā¦in the seeing and understanding of what it actually is.
But who is the learner? And is there a learning without a learner, an observing without an observer? Therefore, there is only this question with no answer to it. Then the question has enormous energy. But when we try to answer it in terms that make sense to the observer, the learner or the enquirer, we dissipate that energy. Or, we have a dozen other questions on the go, which has the same effect of dissipation. But when there is only this one burning question, that very energy of urgency is its own response.
Yesā¦when thereās insight thereās no learner. K emphasized learning about oneselfā¦and āself-knowledgeā. Perhaps we should have a new thread on this subject, as it was of crucial importance to K.
Shouldnāt think so - although I wonder whether we need to grasp at somethingness
Then what would be our question?
A serious question of mindful awareness; not a question to the other, not a question for consideration, not as a topic, although that may happen.
That energy burns up the self, yes. However itās not an intellectual question but our whole being is awake to the urgency of the question. To the fact that āthe house is on fireā.