Do we see the danger at all?
I put these questions strictly to myself so that I donât wonder away from the Kâs teachings. I careless about others who criticize me because they are bored with themselves and the teachings.
Why did you choose 07007 as your avatar. Here in the US it reminds of James Bond?
âWhy did you choose 07007 as your avatar. Here in the US it reminds of James Bond?â
Basically my intention is to not to strengthen the self or thought.
Numbers have no nationality or beliefs. That is why I chose numbers instead of letter . Nothing important.
1 Like
Excellent question. Let us make it simple. There is no such thing as a static state of knowledge that cannot be added to, negated, modified and changed depending on cosmos time, and distance. There is no ideology that cannot be modified and made more popular while publishing the same books that become almost meaningless to the changes and interpretations and produce religious fanatics and terrorists when taken word for word. Living in conclusions is more comfortable, feels more safe than living without them. But is it really secure and safe? What do you think ?
What about the brainâs discomfiting conclusion that itâs using thought to create and sustain the illusion of self?
Calling each other a nobody is a perverted deviation, and violent attack on each other from the fact of inquiry into our self conditioning. An attack that makes us all feel like a something, and a somebody calling others a nobody to maintain our beliefs that support ourselves as so called superior entities. We are not anything we say we are. The labels are never the thing.
The self is a problem that thought cannot resolve. There must be an awareness which is not of thought. To be aware, without condemnation or justification, of the activities of the selfâjust to be awareâis sufficient. The First and Last Freedom - 113
Awareness has nothing to do with thought, and has little or nothing to do with the brain. All living things are aware, have awareness.
We humans, however, have ideas, hopes, fears, plans, beliefs about what should and shouldnât be, and awareness does not always confirm or support our beliefs, so we are not as choicelessly aware as it takes to live with life as it is. We take awareness to task and distort, deny, or dismiss it to support our hopes, fears, and intentions.
Our problem as human beings is in part the way that we have been conditioned to see ourselves in the world, I think. The way I perceive the world around me is quite limited and I am rarely aware of those limitations. The result of not being aware of them has allowed me to act with impunity, torturing, killing, polluting etc. Iâve taken the ârealityâ I see around me as âactualityâ, forgetting that the realities of all the other creatures here is different than mine. They are all limited as is mine. The âmessageâ that we are as human beings actually in fact, ânothingâ I think, points to something very important that is needed to be understood because without understanding that we are nothing, our destructiveness will go on and with our technology and ingenuity harm not only us, but all those around us.
Being human, it seems to me, brings with it a responsibility to understand why we should âdo no harmâ.
How did I become prone to conditioning? Am I unconsciously keeping a promise a made to myself during my childhood? Could this be at the root of my conditioning, the so-called âwrong turnâ?
In a 2007 experiment to compare intelligence in primates (including humans) we found that chimpanzees did slightly better than us (and orangutans) in most tests - except in social intelligence where humans broke the scale - we are very good at copying (the best by far) - if you want a longer read on the subject, Iâve written a bit on it here
Personally I was very much conditioned by Mork & Mindy during my childhood (I continue studying human behaviour to this day)
The âcognitive trade-off hypothesisâ hypothesizes that we have traded our ability to actually see whatâs what, in favor of being able to imagine and tell our friends what could be. In other words, the parts of our brains dealing with accurate perception and short term memory, may have been atrophied in order to make space for imagination and language.
Very interesting thanks @macdougdoug!
I live along side a beautiful river branch with few houses and many trees. Each morning I am able to enjoy its and the surrounding beauty. Just very recently I noticed something about the âwayâ I was taking it all in: I wasnât! I mean the view offered to my eyes as well as the sounds to my ears were being only partly perceived, if at all. I wasnât perceiving it because it all was âfamiliarâ. It was in memory so there was not the realization of the fact that all that was was being seen / heard was ânewâ and was being seen / heard for the first and âonlyâ time âŚif you get what Iâm trying to convey. Memory was taking the place of being actually present in the moment? Does this relate to what you had written above?
And that begins and ends with seeing the harm weâre doing every moment until/unless the brain awakens to its conditioning.
1 Like
The story we tell ourselves (memory or prediction) takes precedence over what we see - narrative beats perception
So, yes sounds similar to the cognitive trade off hypothesis
Similarly when we see a person that we are âfamiliarâ with, we donât see them with âfreshâ eyes but through the veil of images that have been formed about them. This âlazyâ way of meeting the world probably came about because of the lack of need to be alert to our surroundings, for safety, for food etc. We unconsciously replace the vividness of âwhat isâ with a spotty memory of âhow it wasâ. Dragging around the dead past to meet the living present.
Because âIâ was afraid of being lonely. So âIâ accepted each and every conditioning because in return âIâ received a reward. Otherwise âIâ only received punishment and more loneliness.
Yes, âIâ made a promise to myself to never disappoint anyone again from the moment âIâ suffered the consequences of wanting to be myself, asking seriously âwhy?â every time âIâ didnât understand.
Who are you asking this to?
I am asking humanity, anywhere there may be.
Is our conditioning the conditioning of humanity?
Have you asked your parents, your childhood teachers, your classmates, your adult co-workers, your boss, your children, your wife/husband, your girlfriend/boyfriend, your neighbour, the stranger walking down the street?
And if you have asked that question to a humanity that is 24/7/365 by your side, what was/is their answer if I may ask?
Can we look at this sentence for a moment?
When someone says this, is it because he has seen it, which would imply that he is no longer looking at the other through an image, or is it simply a thought that prevents him from seeing, thus perpetuating the image he has of the other?