Reconciliating Love and change

[4201]

I want to live a life of constant improvement, constant change. I want to be better than I was yesterday.

Yet "better" already implies a concept of a value which I can define any way I want (Better at playing piano, nicer to other people, having more stuff, etc.) This creates some sort of judgement directed toward the self. I attribute myself a value (bad at piano) and I create a desired value (good at piano) which is different from the present moment (an imagined moment in the future where I would be good).

My question is, how can one reconciliate absolute love with self-improvement? If you truly love yourself absolutely, then there is nothing to improve, as anything to improve would be a judgement aka a lack of love.

Yet the idea of sitting down and practicing piano seems like a much more loving idea than sitting down and accepting my lack of piano skills. It's as if this "lack of love" toward the self who doesn't know piano (who isn't improved) is out of love in a sense. 

I don't know how to reconciliate this contradiction, yet after writing this I notice how silly it would be to use this contradiction as a reason not to self-improve.

Edited August 5, 2021 by 4201

[Vynce]

Some top level inquiry there. I add another view from someone, who feels the same.

Perhaps God is so absolutely unbiased that you can bend your definition of success to every degree you want. God will love this definition just as much. 

In the end we are all given this finite level of consciousness, so personal development won't end permanently in infinite God. Duality will be established again.

So why think about the pleasure of playing piano in comparison to infinite truth and love. 

God wants you to make judgements and set preference in order for it to feel this duality. 

[Nahm]

The reconciliation is that there are thoughts about a self but there isn’t a self, so there’s nothing to reconcile (but thinking makes it seem so). 

All piano’s are player pianos. 

[Gianna]

1 hour ago, 4201 said:

how can one reconciliate absolute love with self-improvement?

Maybe through reframing. For instance, think to yourself, "Each new aspect of me that I come to through change, is a different version of myself I get to learn from and spend time with. Each new experience I have gives me a new way to experience myself, love myself, and feel grateful for myself." This is thinking like God. God desires expansion– infinite diversity– a continuous search through infinity. God wants to explore the depths of its own Love. The capabilities of its own Love. 

You need to reframe your idea towards Love. Love doesn't mean stagnation. Love is unconditional openness, willingness, welcoming, and allowing. To want to stay the same is to resist growth because growth is your nature. Expansion is your nature because it is the nature of God. Resisting (especially resisting growth) is not your nature because it is not God's nature. God's nature is allowing, not resisting. 

Edited August 5, 2021 by Gianna

[taotemu]

There is only a contradiction if you are wanting to improve this moment.  Life is a flow.  Evolution and change are part of the nature of the human experience.  The desire to improve is not against loving the moment... it is part of it. 

[LastThursday]

Absolute love is just that, absolute. Whether you self-improve or not, it is still there. Self-improvement is a thought relative to who you are now.

[gettoefl]

you want self halt not self help

then the love shines luminously

Edited August 5, 2021 by gettoefl

[4201]

Many great answers! Thank you very much

On 05/08/2021 at 1:56 PM, Nahm said:

The reconciliation is that there are thoughts about a self but there isn’t a self, so there’s nothing to reconcile (but thinking makes it seem so). 

All piano’s are player pianos. 

Yes definitely. I notice that wanting change and change are different. When I say "I want X" I'm identifying with the desire and creating a self who does not like the present situation. But there is no need for that thought in order to change the present situation. Like you said many times, I can just focus on changing it instead. Focus on what you want instead of focusing on the idea of wanting something and what that leads to.

On 05/08/2021 at 1:54 PM, Vynce said:

Perhaps God is so absolutely unbiased that you can bend your definition of success to every degree you want. God will love this definition just as much. 

You definitely can but actually learning something and reaching material success feels better than convincing myself I don't really want those. But it's a misconception to think one must abstain from doing in order to reach absolute love. It's more abstaining from worrying about it, abstaining from looking at the current moment as if it was a problem.

On 05/08/2021 at 2:07 PM, Gianna said:

You need to reframe your idea towards Love. Love doesn't mean stagnation. Love is unconditional openness, willingness, welcoming, and allowing. To want to stay the same is to resist growth because growth is your nature. Expansion is your nature because it is the nature of God. Resisting (especially resisting growth) is not your nature because it is not God's nature. God's nature is allowing, not resisting. 

Very well said!

On 05/08/2021 at 2:15 PM, taotemu said:

Life is a flow.  Evolution and change are part of the nature of the human experience.  The desire to improve is not against loving the moment... it is part of it. 

Absolutely, the total irony from me of worrying about this rather than living the flow is insane 

 

[Nahm]

@4201

Even simpler… it’s all designed for you to experience, prefer (want); repeat. -Literally- no thinking is needed whatsoever. 

[Leo Gura]

On 8/5/2021 at 9:23 AM, 4201 said:

anything to improve would be a judgement aka a lack of love.

This is a mistake in thinking.

Improvement does not require negative motivation. You can love yourself and also love the process of growing yourself. Not because something is wrong, but because you just love growing and creating.

You don't have to hate a thing to improve it.

[Preety_India]

You can grow just for growth. 

I do this alll the time. In fact my whole journey on Actualized Org is summarized as growth for the sake of growth. 

I call it the growth mindset. I developed it at an early age and it's the best thing ever. 

 

[4201]

7 hours ago, Nahm said:

@4201

Even simpler… it’s all designed for you to experience, prefer (want); repeat. -Literally- no thinking is needed whatsoever. 

Isn't conceptualization necessary for communication though? I need to turn things into concepts to be able to talk about them. My day job is programming, where I literally talk to machines all day. I struggle to see how I could do all that without thought.

But then it's easy to notice the identification with "communication" or "thinking" with statement like "thinking is important in my life" or "I spend a majority of my time thinking, therefore it's hard to stop". Those are just thoughts, the type that aren't necessary, yet I wouldn't be ready to say all thoughts are unnecessary.

I kinda "know" that what you say is true because feeling aligns with it but I don't quite see exactly how it's true.

@Leo Gura @Preety_India Yup totally agree.

[Leo Gura]

Mind is not a problem per se. The problem is when mind is used improperly in a self-biased manner.

Surviving as a human requires thought. That's exactly why you have thoughts. If they weren't an important part of survival you wouldn't have them.

[Nahm]

14 minutes ago, 4201 said:

Isn't conceptualization necessary for communication though? I need to turn things into concepts to be able to talk about them. My day job is programming, where I literally talk to machines all day. I struggle to see how I could do all that without thought.

But then it's easy to notice the identification with "communication" or "thinking" with statement like "thinking is important in my life" or "I spend a majority of my time thinking, therefore it's hard to stop". Those are just thoughts, the type that aren't necessary, yet I wouldn't be ready to say all thoughts are unnecessary.

I kinda "know" that what you say is true because feeling aligns with it but I don't quite see exactly how it's true.

You might say it’s revealed as the most obvious ‘thing’ ever via meditation. That there even is a thing called thinking is as pure ego as is any how it is, or isn’t, ‘true’.

”We'll begin with a spin, traveling in the world of my creation. What we'll see will defy explanation.”
 

[Breakingthewall]

On 5/8/2021 at 6:23 PM, 4201 said:

My question is, how can one reconciliate absolute love with self-improvement? If you truly love yourself absolutely, then there is nothing to improve

You improve because you are passionate about doing something, not because you think you do it wrong and that makes you incomplete. you are passionate about singing and you see that it would be better if you accompany it with piano, then you learn piano, after you start to love piano and you go deeper, if you don't love you stop, it's an expression of love. not because you value yourself little as a person for not knowing piano, it's an expression of feel incomplete. The difference is subtle, the dark side it tends to push us when we are in a state of lack, when we perceive ourselves incomplete. It may work, but it is a sad motivation, you never get excellent . The bright side of doing things for love, pleasure, occurs when we feel complete but have passion, we expend energy for pleasure, not for duty. incomparably better and more efficient, you never stop learn, you can became a master

 

Edited August 9, 2021 by Breakingthewall

[4201]

5 hours ago, Nahm said:

You might say it’s revealed as the most obvious ‘thing’ ever via meditation. That there even is a thing called thinking is as pure ego as is any how it is, or isn’t, ‘true’.

”We'll begin with a spin, traveling in the world of my creation. What we'll see will defy explanation.”
 

I can see how thinking isn't that much of a thing. I can experience voices, images or even imagined sensations but the "thought" itself is never there without an associated experience. Most of my thoughts are vocal, it's like I'm dreaming a voice talking to me (that I label mine). I never interact with the thought but only with the voice that is being dreamed of.

One could say those things are just the "labelling of experiences" and the labelling itself is thought. Labelling here is just a synonym for duality.

Like if I label the experience of a voice as a thought saying me things, is the labelling itself another experience? Am I experiencing the labelling of an experience through another experience, or is there just no actual labelling?

Are dualities experienced? Or are they just "not"? The answer sounds obvious, especially given the name Nonduality. But I long thought that dualities are experienced as part of consciousness (experience of thought). In actuality I don't experience the dualities themselves, but voices and images that I later attribute to thought. I can see how there might be no thinking.

But it will always appear as if I'm thinking, either from neuroimagery or by looking at the actions my body does. The neuroimagery of someone in a total state of flow playing basketball would probably reveal brain activity about basketball and about motor skills. But perhaps brain activity is different from thinking. 

Edited August 9, 2021 by 4201

[Nahm]

1 hour ago, 4201 said:

But it will always appear as if I'm thinking

What’s the it?  What’s the I, the thinker thinking?  If something was appearing as if you’re thinking, you’d think it be worth looking into. 

[4201]

On 08/08/2021 at 10:31 PM, Nahm said:

 If something was appearing as if you’re thinking, you’d think it be worth looking into. 

Absolutely! Love you Nahm 

 

Edited August 14, 2021 by 4201

[Nahm]

@4201 Love you!

(And that’ll never change)