Natasha Tori Maru

How can you be sure of what will be returned? You might forgo assisting another because you do not perceive a return in value - but this actually castrates you from the full potential of experience. Something may be returned you could NEVER expect - and end up valuing more than you realise. The best parts of my experience have resulted in an unexpected return on investment 😁

Very interesting - the topic of language and how it influences context. In terms of transmission information you guys might like this part of a remote viewing (nonverbal information transmission) interview (top CIA remote viewer). Go straight to 39:46 - he speaks about how communication happens without language + it's interpretation: https://youtu.be/JpLThEF2dTM?si=dGnP1Se42mFD3788 Long and short of it is - interpretation and context is an issue. It both sabotages the result and a second person is needed to remove the potential context the remote viewer brings to the process.

@Schizophonia is on the mark, the mirror effect is what I see here also. Enjoy their perspective on these threads as it always comes into play 'mirror effect'

Half of the problem is that there is a massive attachment to thoughts and ideas happening. So when holes are pointed in the basic metaphysical assumptions behind the premise, there is an emotional reaction. This reaction is in your control, but you seem to think others 'cause' you to react. Half your premise is based on foregoing responsibility for you own internal state - this is the inhuman part no? But the commonality is the individual (the self) - some users here would, for example, not get emotional like you. What is occuring there? If the reaction cannot be helped, how can it be different between individuals? The premise is that thoughts are at the base of the human, and that history and conditioning cannot be changed. Or not without a lot of 'FORCE' - the inhuman part again. This is a false assumption - thoughts are not fundamental. I could be wrong. But it seems to me this is at the base of it. There is also no differentiation between perception and awareness (madness... Really strange and important definition). And if there is now, there wasn't when the premise was created (this was discussed a few pages ago). So just from the above - that is 2 assumptions of which the premise is based on. 2 faults already. So none is going to attack the premise as it is a faulty conclusion based on unsteady assumptions - this shows a lack of serious contemplation and care given to fundamentals. And THIS is what the mods have been doing - attempting to get you to rethink these assumptions. Because the faulty conclusion (premise of the thread) is based all on this. This is why @UnbornTao's advice is to return to basics. And it's not cruel to point this out - if you look at all the contemplation threads here many other users are attempting to pull hard topics apart, being shown it is incorrect, throwing it away, and re-evaluating. The problem the mods are pointing out is that Breakingthewall staunchly refuses to be guided into contemplation or to give up their perspective/worldview. They are clinging desperately to these assumptions and will not even try a simple thought experiment (again if you read the thread you will see this happening, an attempt to guide, then frustration at the stubbornness). Others here have been trying to understand but we cannot as these assumptions (thought is fundamental, awareness/perception is the same, humans are have a permanent psychology/ego/self) stop us and we go 'wait a minute! This is an error' Who cares if you have spent hours thinking about this - I spend hours sometimes contemplating only to post, have someone show me an error and then throw it all away! Breakingthewall thinks you cannot control your reactions - so the self therefore is real. Immutable. They may be correct about some other things, but this is not correct. And it causes people to be victims. Like they have no choice but to react and attach to everything - causing unnecessary suffering. I do not like this conclusion because I feel it can do some insidious damage to others who take this on. And yes we (the mods) are repeatedly called narcissists because we have realised this and seen the effects: a reduction in suffering. Greater emotional control, more compassion, love, surrender. But we are inhuman because this is seen by Breakingthewall as repression. It is not at all. You feel MORE. The complex of attachment isn't in the way, so all is felt more keenly. Action can be taken in the moment without hesitation. And it is truer than when the self injects it's personal needs and feelings into the process. You need to really dive into the feelings and self and contemplate to realise this - the opposite of repression. Which, again, is why @UnbornTao is pushing to contemplate the self. I could be wrong but that is the long and short of my understanding. Read the thread - Breakingthewall refuses to give up their frame or assumptions so they cannot counter argue as a result. Just repeat the same thing. This isn't isolated to this thread either - it is a running theme for them. Also really just admit it - you don't like the self being an illusion because it is echoing Ralston. And you hate Ralston. This is where it all comes from 😏

Mining, oil riggers, construction workers Most manual labour jobs - men are the backbone there. I can see Emeralds point (I think both have equal value), but since I work in construction, I see the infrastructure and raw power that men physically have and what it has built. And sustains.

I will add - keep going in your practice. A side effect of serious spiritual practice - it has been great in my career. I manage commercial construction projects and am well known for never losing my cool and handling hard shit with compassion. Hard deadlines, high expectations, insane problems, incompetence. I've never had a day where I hit any sort of breaking point or got overly emotional. I feel stress, but I am clear and focus on the task. It helps me maintain integrity, honesty and authenticity. No self mode Big contrast to the volume of grumpy arse turd CMs I meet...

In my own experience - I am by no means so far into spirituality as many others - I cannot stop a reaction in the body (like what you describe) but I can lessen it. I can lessen my minds inflation of the feeling. The mind really acts to enhance suffering. The feeling still arises naturally (as it will), but I was heaping shit on top of it with my mind. The feeling is NOTHING without the thoughts that you generate on top of it. It is the attachment to it that I lost - or reduced. I feel irritation rising in me - the full feeling of it - but no impulse to act. It registers as an experience - even if really overwhelming. I don't judge it as good or bad or anything - it is a sensation that has arisen because of my body reacting in survival to circumstances. It will always pass. I stop attaching any meaning to the feeling. The mind is the part that adds unnecessary fuel to the fire 'That was so unfair' 'I want justice' 'They did me wrong'. These little narratives are self/ego thoughts. This component you have the ability to control and lesson with practice. Once you realize you are adding this narrative. Having the thoughts. You realize you have the power to change or stop them. The body still has an experience, but you are now in a state to handle it without all the attachment to the thoughts inflating it all. You remain clear minded even when flooded with adrenalin. A lot of serious meditation, contemplation and practice can train the mind to recognize your thoughts aren't all you are - your ideas are just ideas, no need for all the attachment to them. Good for arguing too - less ego involved when someone comes along and destroys your idea. But you seem to be well past this realization on your journey! I have huge issues with my own siblings - who I work with - and I was facing this sort of triggering anger every day for a year. It was only through loosening up the meaning and story I was telling myself that it abated (and now it registers as a mild irritation, like a phone app freezing, whereas before it rendered me unable to maintain composure). Again, others may have better advice. But for myself it was realizing I was not my thoughts. *I* was thinking them. They weren't befalling me. I was thinking those narratives 'Why can't she just recognize I am trying to help, instead of lash out?' and the narratives were fuelling the emotional charge. Making it all worse. I was all about ME - look what she did to ME. The attachment to the narrative and thought was my undoing. Meditation made me super aware of the thoughts. I realized it was the illusory self. And this helped me stop doing it. Now most of the time it is an experience felt - not good or bad. Just a very charged up feeling. I think the Neo Advaita stuff can be useful to realize the paradox that the self is an illusion. To see it for what it is - a construct for survival. But it still remains as long as we survive. I have no hope of eliminating it - not possible. The self is the greatest attachment we have - and surrendering it leads to union - non-duality - love. But you just can't operate from that state - no matter how awesome the blissful moments can be

This sounds like the test from hell... Family has a way of really provoking ego. And it can make you regress to previous infantile dynamics you thought you broke free of. Honestly - how you react, and your ability to manage your emotions in this situation, is an indicator for growth. If you are presented with the same situation again and again but find yourself reacting differently - you have integrated something along the path. Having said all that - this may not be what you want to hear: no one can MAKE you feel anything. No one can make you angry. You generate that internally by reacting to their charged state. You can only control yourself in this situation. You let yourself lose your temper. You are strong enough to divert that huge emotional charge into holding on and controlling anger. Repressing doesn't work - focus all energy on what you wanted to achieve - self-control to resolve the conflict. It may seem like the external causes you to lash out - but it is how you are reacting in the moment. Reacting instead of responding. And I know - I have been the damn queen of instant, intense charged emotion. I don't react at all like I once did. 100% focus on the solution. Resolving the shit. Sometimes reacting differently yourself changes how others respond - although your brother sounds like he has a lot of charged up energy that he throws at you when conflicts arise. It can be really difficult to stand in the face of that and respond, not react. And men have that snap anger that is so intense it can feel like an unstoppable force that needs to explicate. Maybe you could try to reframe this. Instead of looking at it as a setback - see it as a marker that you may have more work to do in your spiritual work. This is a marker and a test. Do you notice anything different to previous conflict with siblings? Is it just as bad? You might cool down quicker now and refocus on fixing the issue - that would be an indicator you have made progress. Overall, don't be too hard on yourself and your practice right now - this is a shitty time that will pass. Everything changes - except change. You will get back on the path, you may just need to accept a pause. If I were in your position, I would be getting out into nature with books as much as possible. Hikes. Air.

The background that shapes the foreground Where foreground is what we are consciously attending to. And background are the conditions that make the foreground possible to appear as it does. Culture, memory, assumptions, language, prior context, bodily state, time/space. I think the background is always going to be some sort of network of relationships that inject meaning into the foreground. And without the background, the foreground would be unrecognized noise. Content and field. This is holographic, no? Context has context. Foreground is just 'noticed background' - background is just 'unnoticed foreground'

My grocery delivery was delayed - an ode to the apples that were late to be experienced

@UnbornTao 'Buildingthewall' The worldview is built with cracks in the foundation, resulting in building movement above & wall joins cracking, causing leaks in the bathroom. There is a returning again and again to fix, patch, paint and plaster and reinstall waterproof membrane. Only to have the building shift from below once again, and crack the walls of the bathroom. The leak presents itself again and again - Ad infinitum The misdiagnosis. My understanding

When I see others trying to facilitate understanding or asking questions that make you really pause and contemplate. This is just a potential indicator. I don't try to gauge who should be a teacher by comparing or contrasting my own experience/knowledge - because I find it is wildly different! Additionally, I constantly go back and throw away all my philosophy and return to 'maybe I do not know' All I know is anyone trying to tell you THEIR truth, is going to be your truth, cannot be heeded. Maybe all a teacher can do is point to a potential that indicates they know something.

I don't know, to be honest! I don't know anything. Revel in the not-knowing 😁 All human beings are on the path, even when they don't realise it. Some just further long than others? There really isn't anything to aim at - just discovery 🙏

@UnbornTao try starting there - that's the most concise answer I could get

The difference is (and my text is full of self!) - I acknowledge ego is involved @UnbornTao images.mp4

I suggest you ask Leo what the forums are for. Again, more assumptions. These are just, like, your opinions, man. Other than to complain - what is the point? Many of us can see there are tons of users at all stages of development. Are you a teacher yourself? Coaches use language to teach when direct facilitation is a barrier. What methods do you employ to facilitate and guide? And the reason you ask why you care? Because you feel entitled.

Okay fundamentally we can end the discussion here - because this is a false conclusion based on some wrong foundational understanding of reality, perspective, experience, being. It's definitely worth re-investigating this one. No self is the ultimate surrender of the ego - the collapse of separation and distinction. Union with other and all else - an inner crucifixion. The self is the barrier to union, and sacrificing the self is the not a destruction, but opening. The highest form of Love. It is not anti-human. You feel just as keenly as the person experiencing a constricting, attached ego self. The whole gamut of human experience - you just don't identify with it and therefore, reduce suffering. The self is the BIGGEST construct humans cling to - identify with - and this causes the suffering. You need to realize just how much YOU are clinging to this. Right now - through this dialogue. Because on the other side of this is pure joy and love of reality. Experience is beautiful - even the mundane. Even the pain. Just another set of experiences I do not judge. It does not serve. Well, you are arguing to be right. Your version of right. Let's not get delusional about how much ego IS involved for you. This whole endeavor is a great example of attachment to the self. Ciao ciao

Okay. Okay - how about we restart with: Define what you conceive is 'no self' in one sentence.

@James123 We know There is the addition you (so to speak) make, to enhance and elevate. To my (so to speak) perception. So to speak

There is a compulsion to reply - what is that? There was no requirement for any of your (so to speak) teaching

Language - If I am understanding the paragraph you are referring to? I think so... But my evil intention there was to point out where James was operating from ego - injecting his need to teach where it may not have been needed, required - or relevant

If you think you aren't arguing to win you are mistaken It is YOU who misunderstands no-self.

The idea behind no self is this: You realize the 'self' you think you ARE is not what you are at all. You see that it is an illusion. But you also see that it is needed for survival. Seeing it for the illusion it is, enables you to let go of all the parts you thought you needed. You can release negative attachments. You stop telling yourself all the stories about yourself - your history - that create unnecessary suffering. It's not about your body being an illusion. It is real. It is about the 'complex' you think is you - thoughts, ideas, concepts - is all in your head. No-self is what you term as 'opening up' - it is the realization that enables the opening. This is the part you keep saying is so hard to dissolve. It's no issue when you see the illusion.

It is not the goal. It is just natural to realize it is an illusion. It just happens on the path to truth. And yes - you still need a self. It is always going to be present. But you need to understand that no-self isn't about obliterating the self. It is about realizing it is an illusion. And that you are attached to it - and it brings you suffering. You realize it is an illusion, and it lets you shed and do away with all the unnecessary parts of you that you thought were needed. It is not a trap at all - it is the openness that you speak of. Then why are you going on about how you have to open the self? If you cannot do it? So you are saying open the self but then keep the self? You are saying to open the self, but intimating it cannot be done. The implication here is that the self is causing issues.... which is true. So why keep all those parts of it you don't need? And if you manage to do so - where do the parts go that are dissolved to be more 'open'? Do you see how they don't exist, if you can dissolve them, no matter how hard that is?

If the self is open - there are no borders. So, no defined self. So, no-self. Which is why I keep repeating you are saying the same thing. Only in your word-view you seem to think the self is something real - which contradicts this openness unlimited concept yes? How can a limited thing, the self, be unlimited - openness, without also being an illusion to be realized as the paradox it is? 'Cracking open' the self to be open is actually the process of realising the self is an illusion - you just seem to have a personal issue with the potential conclusions that could come about as a result. Anyway, I guess I'm answering so you can dance around with some more wordviews