To Harry Potter

To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/19/11 6:19 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Harry Potter 9/19/11 8:24 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/19/11 8:48 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Harry Potter 9/19/11 9:03 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/19/11 10:07 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Harry Potter 9/19/11 10:08 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/19/11 10:19 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Harry Potter 9/19/11 10:36 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/19/11 10:41 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Harry Potter 9/19/11 10:47 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/19/11 11:05 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Harry Potter 9/19/11 11:17 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/20/11 10:13 AM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/19/11 10:48 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Tommy M 9/20/11 3:38 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Stian Gudmundsen Høiland 9/20/11 5:03 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Tommy M 9/20/11 5:24 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/20/11 4:51 PM
RE: To Harry Potter josh r s 9/20/11 6:57 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/20/11 7:08 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/20/11 7:26 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 4:02 AM
RE: To Harry Potter Nikolai . 9/21/11 4:07 AM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 1:53 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/21/11 9:38 AM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 1:57 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Tommy M 9/21/11 2:42 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/21/11 2:47 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 3:14 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/21/11 3:20 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 3:27 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/21/11 3:32 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 3:50 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Tommy M 9/21/11 3:32 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/21/11 3:45 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 3:54 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/21/11 4:13 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/21/11 4:22 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/21/11 4:28 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 5:02 PM
RE: To Harry Potter josh r s 9/21/11 4:28 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 5:08 PM
RE: To Harry Potter #1 - 0 9/21/11 5:37 PM
RE: To Harry Potter josh r s 9/21/11 5:46 PM
RE: To Harry Potter #1 - 0 9/21/11 5:46 PM
RE: To Harry Potter josh r s 9/21/11 6:01 PM
RE: To Harry Potter . Jake . 9/21/11 7:08 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Tommy M 9/22/11 4:03 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/23/11 11:41 AM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 3:12 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem 9/21/11 3:19 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 3:30 PM
RE: To Harry Potter End in Sight 9/21/11 2:44 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/21/11 3:13 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Stian Gudmundsen Høiland 9/24/11 12:09 PM
RE: To Harry Potter josh r s 9/24/11 12:26 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/24/11 12:29 PM
RE: To Harry Potter josh r s 9/24/11 1:15 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/24/11 1:32 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/24/11 12:28 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Stian Gudmundsen Høiland 9/24/11 1:20 PM
RE: To Harry Potter josh r s 9/24/11 1:28 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/24/11 1:35 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/24/11 1:38 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Stian Gudmundsen Høiland 9/24/11 1:44 PM
My challenge Simon L 9/24/11 1:45 PM
RE: My challenge josh r s 9/24/11 1:54 PM
RE: My challenge Simon L 9/24/11 2:10 PM
RE: My challenge josh r s 9/24/11 2:33 PM
RE: My challenge Simon L 9/24/11 2:58 PM
RE: My challenge josh r s 9/24/11 3:13 PM
RE: My challenge Simon L 9/24/11 3:40 PM
RE: My challenge josh r s 9/24/11 4:09 PM
RE: My challenge Simon L 9/24/11 4:13 PM
RE: My challenge josh r s 9/24/11 4:32 PM
RE: My challenge Simon L 9/25/11 8:01 AM
RE: My challenge Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem 9/25/11 11:40 AM
RE: My challenge Simon L 9/25/11 12:15 PM
RE: My challenge Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem 9/25/11 12:35 PM
RE: My challenge Simon L 9/25/11 12:43 PM
RE: My challenge Harry Potter 9/25/11 1:05 PM
RE: My challenge Simon L 9/25/11 1:46 PM
RE: My challenge Harry Potter 9/25/11 1:02 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Bruno Loff 9/20/11 6:59 AM
RE: To Harry Potter #1 - 0 9/20/11 10:33 AM
RE: To Harry Potter Steph . 9/20/11 11:21 AM
RE: To Harry Potter Simon L 9/20/11 4:54 PM
RE: To Harry Potter Harry Potter 9/24/11 11:22 AM
RE: To Harry Potter Tommy M 9/24/11 11:34 AM
Being a man Harry Potter 9/25/11 1:17 PM
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 6:19 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 6:17 PM

To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
On Bruno's practice thread, you wrote

Harry Potter:
Is Bruno seriously going to say "no, I'm not interested in fucking but only actual intimacy" to that atypical woman (not a whore) who proactively offers him sex and the warmth of love?


On Claudiu's, you wrote

Harry Potter:
For example, I will take the longer route A if route B is filled with more hot bitches.


On the surface, it does seem that you have some serious and potentially deep issues to address regarding sexuality, given the apparent venom in your writing.

I'm not writing this post in order to call you out or embarrass you. Whatever issues there are, whatever bad behavior there is on account of them, none of that is your fault. It's 'your' fault. As everyone here recognizes that 'you' is a disease to be excised, and the goal of the practice is to ultimately be rid of 'you' and all 'your' attendant problems and behavior, there is no shame at all in admitting to this in order to figure out what to do about it. (To the extent one has an identity, one will have unseemly elements of 'their' character to deal with.) That's what this forum is here for---a safe place to talk honestly about obstacles in the way of freedom.

However, make no mistake, this appears to be something which is likely to be a serious obstacle if it goes un-dealt with.

Further, there are many people on this forum (fellow travelers on this journey, who we all owe mutual support to) who may not be benefiting from reading expressions like the ones you've written and thrown about so freely. So long as one has feelings, one's feelings can be hurt.

Remember:

"As fast as the will to injure wanes
So fast indeed does suffering decline." --Dhammapada

Happy and harmless.

Neither express nor repress.

It would be good for you to put some effort into working this out, either in a practice thread, or in private discussion with someone. (Your choice.)
thumbnail
Harry Potter, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 8:24 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 8:21 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 84 Join Date: 5/20/11 Recent Posts
Easy, there.

Both the instances had no ill intent upon women, let alone a venomous one.

"hot bitch" or "hot babe" is part of the PUA terminology, used to refer to women with noticeably high sex appeal.

And I used the term "whore" in its non-offensive, matter of fact sense pointing to the fact that I was not talking about a promiscuous offer in particular (it was about the usual 'courtship' behaviour but a more proactive or female-initiated one).

Please note - I already have a practice thread.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 8:48 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 8:43 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Harry Potter:
"hot bitch" or "hot babe" is part of the PUA terminology, used to refer to women with noticeably high sex appeal.


'You' enjoy this terminology, which is why 'you' chose it over a matter-of-fact description; what is your estimate that women on this forum are equally as enamored with your choice of it?

Harry Potter:
And I used the term "whore" in its non-offensive, matter of fact sense pointing to the fact that I was not talking about a promiscuous offer in particular (it was about the usual 'courtship' behaviour but a more proactive or female-initiated one).


So, you believe that "typical" women exchange the use of their bodies for money (as this is the "matter of fact" sense; "whore" being the title of one who works at that job)?

Is this how you believe things are in actuality, or merely how they are when viewed through your sex-and-power-and-social-dynamics tinted glasses? Because the lenses in such glasses would most certainly be 'you'.

Correct me if I have misunderstood you.
thumbnail
Harry Potter, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 9:03 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 9:03 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 84 Join Date: 5/20/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
Harry Potter:
"hot bitch" or "hot babe" is part of the PUA terminology, used to refer to women with noticeably high sex appeal.


'You' enjoy this terminology, which is why 'you' chose it over a matter-of-fact description; what is your estimate that women on this forum are equally as enamored with your choice of it?


Oops, I enjoy the categorization, not the terminology - as categorization helps with discernment in investigation. I use whatever best suitable terminology there is to convey the intended meaning (and my private practice diary has a liberal dose of such phrases). Your later question is better put to the females of this forum themselves.


Harry Potter:
And I used the term "whore" in its non-offensive, matter of fact sense pointing to the fact that I was not talking about a promiscuous offer in particular (it was about the usual 'courtship' behaviour but a more proactive or female-initiated one).


So, you believe that "typical" women exchange the use of their bodies for money (as this is the "matter of fact" sense; "whore" being the title of one who works at that job)?

Is this how you believe things are in actuality, or merely how they are when viewed through your sex-and-power-and-social-dynamics tinted glasses? Because the lenses in such glasses would most certainly be 'you'.

Correct me if I have misunderstood you.


Indeed you have. In the context of the first quote, a "typical women" would of course be someone who is not that proactive and thus prefers the male to initiate courtship procedures. My stressing on this "atypical women" who will initiate courtship is to make the enticement of the offer even more inevitable, which enticement is to challenge Bruno's stance on "not being interested" in fucking.

And what is with this "sex-and-power-and-social-dynamics tinted glasses" accusation? It is obvious-and one does not needed tinted glasses to see it-that in the "real world" sex and power are inextricably linked together. A noticeably confident male gets to have more sex, just like a voluptuous women getting to have a wider pool of suitors to choose from.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:07 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 9:34 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Harry Potter:
Your later question is better put to the females of this forum themselves.


If 'you' feel the need to deflect the question, I find that common-sense provides an answer that is ready-at-hand.

Harry Potter:
In the context of the first quote, a "typical women" would of course be someone who is not that proactive and thus prefers the male to initiate courtship procedures. My stressing on this "atypical women" who will initiate courtship is to make the enticement of the offer even more inevitable, which enticement is to challenge Bruno's stance on "not being interested" in fucking.


Do you believe that a woman who initiates courtship or is promiscuous is thus a woman who is employed in the profession of exchanging the use of her body for money? If not, it is quite mysterious how "whore" entered into your original comment.

And this is the origin of my statement about sex-and-power-and-social-dynamics tinted glasses. (It is not an 'accusation'.)

(EDIT: Let me restate my understanding of what you're saying. Suppose some woman offers Bruno sex. You saw the need to indicate that this was in the context of a proactive but "normal" courtship by pointing out that the woman in question was not a whore. So, you appear to believe that a woman who engages in non-courtship promiscuity is or is likely to be one who engages in the exchange of the use of her body for money as a profession, so that, in this hypothetical case, you found it important to indicate that the "courtship" case was what you meant by denying the "prostitute" case. So, it appears that you are either wearing sex-and-power-and-social-dynamics tinted glasses and projecting the affectively-laced term "whore" onto a sexually forward woman [despite claiming that you oiriginally meant "whore" in the matter-of-fact professional way] or you somehow believe [miraculously, despite familiarity with the PUA worldview!] that you live in an era in which a promiscuous woman is likely to be a prostitute, as most women are chaste and aspire to become housewives or the like.

Since 'you' exist as an identity, and this is how identities function, the most likely case is the obvious one: that you're wearing the glasses.)

Harry Potter:
A noticeably confident male gets to have more sex, just like a voluptuous women getting to have a wider pool of suitors to choose from.


It occurs to me that you are getting this line of thinking from hanging out at PUA forums or the like, as those groups are the places where one hears about such things the most.

Insofar as the identity is still intact, the line between the mere statement of fact, and the feverish projections and imaginings of the identity, is a very thin one, and the separation between the two sides is often indiscernible.

You might ask yourself to what extent your identity is intact, and thus, to what extent you have confidence that you can discern what is statement of fact, and what is colored by sex-and-power-and-social-dynamics tinted glasses...or, further, if you even have the ability to state such a thing as a bare fact, without the identity coloring it and distorting it in numerous ways (as issues related to sex are near and dear to 'you').

You might be interested in reading Vineeto on sexuality, and consider whether there are issues she brings up that have an analogue for the western male psyche.

In a more general sense, I would ask that you consider what mode(s) of thinking are more likely to help you on your journey to AF, and which are likely to hold you back or keep you far from that goal.

There is no obligation to respond to this post. Please think about the points I raised with an open, curious, and exploratory attitude.
thumbnail
Harry Potter, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:08 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:08 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 84 Join Date: 5/20/11 Recent Posts
Please think about the points I raised with an open, curious, and exploratory attitude.


So far, I have. You're welcome to address my points specifically, instead of fabricating things.

End in Sight:
Harry Potter:
Your later question is better put to the females of this forum themselves.


If 'you' feel the need to deflect the question, I find that common-sense provides one that is ready-at-hand.


The reason I was not inclined to answer that question was that I know that one's use of terminology dealing with sensitive issues tends to not have an equally favourable effect on the other. That is the price you pay for discussing these matters. I find that it is better to directly ask the women in question whether they find this offensive or not, instead of two males speculating as to that.

Harry Potter:
In the context of the first quote, a "typical women" would of course be someone who is not that proactive and thus prefers the male to initiate courtship procedures. My stressing on this "atypical women" who will initiate courtship is to make the enticement of the offer even more inevitable, which enticement is to challenge Bruno's stance on "not being interested" in fucking.


Do you believe that a woman who initiates courtship or is promiscuous is thus a woman who is employed in the profession of exchanging the use of her body for money?


No.

If not, it is quite mysterious how "whore" entered into your original comment.


A "woman who is employed in the profession of exchanging the use of her body for money" is exactly what I mean by "whore". As to why of my explicit clarification of the subject being not a "whore" is needed, you only need to re-read the question you posed above. A woman who initiates courtship is not a whore, and in the first quote I was specifically referring to the former, not the later.

And this is the origin of my statement about sex-and-power-and-social-dynamics tinted glasses. (It is not an 'accusation'.)

Harry Potter:
A noticeably confident male gets to have more sex, just like a voluptuous women getting to have a wider pool of suitors to choose from.


It occurs to me that you are getting this line of thinking from hanging out at PUA forums or the like, as those groups are the places where one hears about such things the most.


Ah, I first heard of this "line of thinking" from evolutionary psychology and also by observing the real world. I don't usually participate in PUA forums.


Insofar as the identity is still intact, the line between the mere statement of fact, and the feverish projections and imaginings of the identity, is a very thin one, and the separation between the two sides is often indiscernible.

You might ask yourself to what extent your identity is intact, and thus, to what extent you have confidence that you can discern what is statement of fact, and what is colored by sex-and-power-and-social-dynamics tinted glasses...or, further, if you even have the ability to state such a thing as a bare fact, without the identity coloring it and distorting it in numerous ways (as issues related to sex are near and dear to 'you').


Let's not complicate the matter. It is a fact that (in general) women are more attracted towards confident males, and (in general) men are more attracted towards voluptuous females.


You might be interested in reading Vineeto on sexuality, and consider whether there are issues she brings up that have an analogue for the western male psyche.


Is this your way of going about judging facts? By ascertaining from anecdotal information?


In a more general sense, I would ask that you consider what mode(s) of thinking are more likely to help you on your journey to AF, and which are likely to hold you back or keep you far from that goal.


I'm not too concerned about modes of thinking. From my investigations, I know that feelings of low self-worth, desire and resentment (at couples, women) are what holding me back from progressing. And that's what I'm interested in exploring. "Right thinking" is something that I gave up long time ago.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:19 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:17 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Harry Potter:
Please think about the points I raised with an open, curious, and exploratory attitude.


So far, I have. You're welcome to address my points specifically, instead of fabricating things.


The only one who could possibly benefit from this conversation is you, and you appear to have decided that it isn't beneficial to you, so I will decline your offer.
thumbnail
Harry Potter, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:36 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:36 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 84 Join Date: 5/20/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
Harry Potter:
Please think about the points I raised with an open, curious, and exploratory attitude.

So far, I have. You're welcome to address my points specifically, instead of fabricating things.

The only one who could possibly benefit from this conversation is you, and you appear to have decided that it isn't beneficial to you, so I will decline your offer.


I may be imagining it, but perhaps you need to investigate this master-disciple identity? Why must in a conversation only one party can benefit?

Let me address your later "edit"

End in Sight:
Let me restate my understanding of what you're saying. Suppose some woman offers Bruno sex. You saw the need to indicate that this was in the context of a proactive but "normal" courtship by pointing out that the woman in question was not a whore.


Nor necessarily "normal", no. It could even be an one-night stand. Yet, that doesn't mean she is a professional sex trader.

So, you appear to believe that a woman who engages in non-courtship promiscuity is or is likely to be one who engages in the exchange of the use of her body for money as a profession


No ... it was you who brought the idea of "normal" courtship, and then "non-courtship promiscuity" and then equating it with whore. Yet, I used the word "whore" in the matter of fact sense to refer to a professional sex trader.

, so that, in this hypothetical case, you found it important to indicate that the "courtship" case was what you meant by denying the "prostitute" case.


Yes, if "prostitute" refers to professional sex trader (not necessarily a promiscuous offer). I now realize that my first response was incorrect: when I wrote "promiscuous" I had the definition of a professional sex trade in mind. It is clear that the dictionary has an even wider meaning.

So, it appears that you are either wearing sex-and-power-and-social-dynamics tinted glasses and projecting the affectively-laced term "whore" onto a sexually forward woman [despite claiming that you oiriginally meant "whore" in the matter-of-fact professional way] or you somehow believe [miraculously, despite familiarity with the PUA worldview!] that you live in an era in which a promiscuous woman is likely to be a prostitute, as most women are chaste and aspire to become housewives or the like.


Is it now clear that your conclusion above is wrong?

A "whore" has to exempted only to make the offer more enticing for Bruno, as it is obvious that professional sex traders offer sex and feigned romantic behaviours in exchange for money (and not love).

Since 'you' exist as an identity, and this is how identities function, the most likely case is the obvious one: that you're wearing the glasses.)


Ha, and "who" is delineating a matter-of-fact of word into all of this?

PS: I have nothing against promiscuous, polyamorous or even "whorish" behaviours at all. If anything, I'm somewhat uncomfortable with monogamy (compersion beats jealousy any day)
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:41 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:41 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Harry Potter:

I may be imagining it, but perhaps you need to investigate this master-disciple identity? Why must in a conversation only one party can benefit?


I am merely giving you friendly advice about how to attain what you want to attain. If you don't think my advice is of benefit to you, there is no need to go on talking about it any further, as that would be idle chatter, further distracting you.
thumbnail
Harry Potter, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:47 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:47 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 84 Join Date: 5/20/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
I am merely giving you friendly advice about how to attain what you want to attain. If you don't think my advice is of benefit to you, there is no need to go on talking about it any further, as that would be idle chatter, further distracting you.


I do appreciate your intent, but your advice comes from a fundamental misunderstanding (that I intended malice through the use of words "hot bitch" and "whore"). It would be much better if you could rather provide that level of attention in my practice thread (where I have written about the progression of my feelings at length).
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:48 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:48 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Let me also say that I had no intention of causing you any agitation, but it seems that I may have. Whether it was due to my own misunderstanding or yours, please accept my apology for what appears to have been unskillful behavior on my part.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 11:05 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 10:58 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Harry Potter:
I do appreciate your intent, but your advice comes from a fundamental misunderstanding (that I intended malice through the use of words "hot bitch" and "whore").


My advice is what it is. The only thing I intended was to try to be of some help to you. If you decide that it's unhelpful and prefer not to pursue these issues further, please simply assume that I have no insight into the workings of your mind. It's perfectly OK to say "thanks but no thanks".

Again, my sincere apology for any unskillful behavior I exhibited.
thumbnail
Harry Potter, modified 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 11:17 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 11:17 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 84 Join Date: 5/20/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
Harry Potter:
I do appreciate your intent, but your advice comes from a fundamental misunderstanding (that I intended malice through the use of words "hot bitch" and "whore").


My advice is what it is. The only thing I intended was to try to be of some help to you. If you decide that it's unhelpful and prefer not to pursue these issues further, please simply assume that I have no insight into the workings of you mind. It's perfectly OK to say "thanks but no thanks".


I went over this thread once more, and the only issue I can find is your perception (which is also the origin of your statement about sex-and-power-and-social-dynamics tinted glasses) of myself feeling contempt for promiscuous women. Correct? This is reasonable as my very first response incorrectly used the word "promiscuous" in the sense of a professional sex trade, which turned out to be incorrect as I later verified its definition (English is not my native language).

A related issue is your questioning of my assertion that "(in general) women are more attracted towards confident males, and (in general) men are more attracted towards voluptuous females." and you brought this up on relation to the incorrect perception of myself feeling contempt for promiscuous women which contempt is to "color" the fact? Yet, my point was that, neither did I feel contempt when writing "hot bitch" and "whore" nor did I see the aforementioned fact as being coloured by any social identity at all.

I assumed your bringing up of Vineeto's writings on sexuality as a way to challenge the aforementioned fact, hence my response as a indirect question to inquire why that would invalidate that fact.

Finally, your more general suggestion of analyzing the "modes of thinking" appeared like the Buddhist morality and is at contrast with the actualism method of investigating feelings. Hence, I responded with the summary of my current feelings of which resentment at women and couples is one (low occurrence these days); yet, that did not make me choose the terminology.

I wrote all this just to clarify things.

Again, my sincere apology for any unskillful behavior I exhibited.


No need to apologize at all as I was not offended, only mildly annoyed but that happens.

I hope this 'friction' doesn't ripple into our future interactions.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 10:13 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/19/11 11:49 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
My last use of the term "issues" was supposed to have been synonymous with "topics".

I don't think you've understood what I was getting at with respect to some of the issues I brought up. For example, I didn't bring up Vineeto in relation to the matter of sexual attraction, but because she writes quite a lot about how social beliefs, values, and judgments are often ingrained into the psyches of western women. Reading her can be interesting because there can be a similar process (albeit with very different social beliefs, values and judgments) that occurs for western male psyches. These ingrained things are "thinking patterns" (modes of thinking) which are related to feelings...one can work on the feelings, but one can also work on the thinking patterns, and depending on the details it may be advantageous or simpler to do the latter. She found investigating them useful enough as to have written about them...and, of course, this ultimately got her AF. (EDIT: Not by itself, of course, but as part of a "package".)

Perhaps I should have been clearer in stating what I meant, or mindful of the possibility that you were not a native speaker. (What's your native language?)

If you want to pursue some of these issues again (we can go back a few steps, and see what might be worth investigating from a "fresh" perspective), that's fine, but it's wholly up to you. Let me know.

Harry Potter:
No need to apologize at all as I was not offended, only mildly annoyed but that happens.


I'm glad to hear that it wasn't a big deal.

Harry Potter:
I hope this 'friction' doesn't ripple into our future interactions.


No worries.
thumbnail
Bruno Loff, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 6:59 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 6:59 AM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1094 Join Date: 8/30/09 Recent Posts
Dictionary:

whore
— n
1. a prostitute or promiscuous woman: often a term of abuse
— vb
2. to be or act as a prostitute
3. (of a man) to have promiscuous sexual relations, esp with prostitutes
4. ( often foll by after ) to seek that which is immoral, idolatrous, etc


I would suggest that since "whore" is indeed used typically as an insult, and might thus disturb people emotionally, and since this is likely to be the case particularly for women, due to a cultural-emotional-historical condemnation of freely excerted female sexual gratification, it might be appropriate to avoid using the term altogether, unless one is absolutely certain that it will not be disturbing (in some specific circumstance).

Other than this, I don't see that the fact harry makes use of this term necessarily indicates that he has something "to deal with" with regards to his image of women. It might, but it might not. And even if he does, his use of "whore" might be completely unrelated.

E.g. my brother occasionally uses the term "faggot" (the Portuguese equivalent), but I know very well (due to his confrontation with my own sexual preferences, and due to other elements in his personal history) that he has no ill feeling towards homosexual men (not even the somewhat-usual disgust response when confronted with, say, a kiss between two men).

Though it might be curious to note, his insistence on using the term is sometimes due to his identity --- I think he is somewhat proud in the way his use of the word contrasts with his own feelings towards the subject.

I find it very funny to think about how our use of language reveals or doesn't reveal the identity inside. But whenever I consider it I always depart too far onto speculation.
thumbnail
#1 - 0, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 10:33 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 10:33 AM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 104 Join Date: 8/8/10 Recent Posts
being emotionally disturbed is an incredibly useful tool, i hope everyone had the attentiveness to pay attention to it when it happened
thumbnail
Steph , modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 11:21 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 11:21 AM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 669 Join Date: 3/24/10 Recent Posts
maybe it would be useful to have a woman chime in on this.

similar to what bruno mentioned about his brother using the word "faggot" to refer to homosexual men, in the past i have used the term "hot bitch" to refer to other women, with what i thought at the time was intended as a compliment. "whore" has always been an insult in my book, and yes, i have used that term to refer to other women with the intent to insult.

however, i should break this down a little further.. upon closer examination of using "hot bitch", it turns out what was intended as a compliment is still a back-slap to women. a lot of women play the game of wanting to seem like they're not uptight while in the company of men. in also adopting the insulting terms that men use to refer to women, we somehow feel it makes us appear either more attractive or less of a threat to some men (i stipulate both because i have played this game around men i was sexually attracted to, as well as men who were platonic friends). we think it makes us seem like we're laid back, cool company to keep, don't get offended easily and are not what these men may perceive as the "typical" prissy uber-emotional woman. i can't speak for all women here, but i am speaking from my experience, as well as quite a few other women i know.

i might add more later, but that's all i have time for at the moment.
thumbnail
Tommy M, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 3:38 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 3:38 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1199 Join Date: 11/12/10 Recent Posts
"hot bitch" or "hot babe" is part of the PUA terminology, used to refer to women with noticeably high sex appeal.

That's a huge generalization, what you're referring to is a sub-section of the PUA community who tend towards derogatory labeling. These are usually the guys who end up getting a slap in the face and a drink in their faces when they pull this angle, unless they're aiming for an 'easy lay' since the 6's to 10's (if you're into PUA then you know what I mean) don't usually go for this approach.

I played that game for a while too.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 4:51 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 4:51 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Harry Potter:
Easy, there.

Both the instances had no ill intent upon women, let alone a venomous one.

"hot bitch" or "hot babe" is part of the PUA terminology, used to refer to women with noticeably high sex appeal.

And I used the term "whore" in its non-offensive, matter of fact sense pointing to the fact that I was not talking about a promiscuous offer in particular (it was about the usual 'courtship' behaviour but a more proactive or female-initiated one).

Please note - I already have a practice thread.


Wow, the seduction community really has been going downhill... There was a time when HB meant "HARD BODY" or "hot babe".

Harry, your posts reek of obsession with sex. Have been for quite some time. I'm willing to bet that if a girl that looks exactly like your absolute dream girl, stunningly beautiful, just walks up to you and say "Let's get it on, I live nearby" all the principles you say you have go right out the window.

Frustration, obsession, those are the things that come across in your posts.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 4:54 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 4:54 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Steph S:
maybe it would be useful to have a woman chime in on this.

similar to what bruno mentioned about his brother using the word "faggot" to refer to homosexual men, in the past i have used the term "hot bitch" to refer to other women, with what i thought at the time was intended as a compliment. "whore" has always been an insult in my book, and yes, i have used that term to refer to other women with the intent to insult.

however, i should break this down a little further.. upon closer examination of using "hot bitch", it turns out what was intended as a compliment is still a back-slap to women. a lot of women play the game of wanting to seem like they're not uptight while in the company of men. in also adopting the insulting terms that men use to refer to women, we somehow feel it makes us appear either more attractive or less of a threat to some men (i stipulate both because i have played this game around men i was sexually attracted to, as well as men who were platonic friends). we think it makes us seem like we're laid back, cool company to keep, don't get offended easily and are not what these men may perceive as the "typical" prissy uber-emotional woman. i can't speak for all women here, but i am speaking from my experience, as well as quite a few other women i know.

i might add more later, but that's all i have time for at the moment.


Screwed up huh? Women going with the degrading position men put them in to gain their acceptance.

Thanks for the honesty Steph!
Stian Gudmundsen Høiland, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 5:03 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 5:03 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 296 Join Date: 9/5/10 Recent Posts
Tommy M:
I played that game for a while too.


Did that get you any free, airy "drinks"? emoticon
thumbnail
Tommy M, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 5:24 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 5:24 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1199 Join Date: 11/12/10 Recent Posts
Did that get you any free, airy "drinks"?

emoticon

Not at all, I had a lot of fun but it was just another stage in the search for answers. Sex and death, it's the same old story.... emoticon
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 6:57 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 6:45 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts

Wow, the seduction community really has been going downhill... There was a time when HB meant "HARD BODY" or "hot babe".

Harry, your posts reek of obsession with sex. Have been for quite some time. I'm willing to bet that if a girl that looks exactly like your absolute dream girl, stunningly beautiful, just walks up to you and say "Let's get it on, I live nearby" all the principles you say you have go right out the window.

Frustration, obsession, those are the things that come across in your posts.


those are the things that come across in everyone who has a self's posts. the obsessions are with different things for different people and sometimes expressed with more subtlety (dishonesty?) but they are still there. calling people out on things they've already admitted to seeing probably doesn't help them very much, maybe investigate your desire to call other people out (such as here, or in "God, what is wrong with you?") it's basically the same as harry's sexual desire or whatever caused me to write this post. use your calling out on yourself, like richard always says, you're the only one who you can change.

I only ended up pressing submit because based on some analysis i decided it would be beneficial, but i have plenty to investigate too
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 7:08 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 7:08 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
josh r s:

Wow, the seduction community really has been going downhill... There was a time when HB meant "HARD BODY" or "hot babe".

Harry, your posts reek of obsession with sex. Have been for quite some time. I'm willing to bet that if a girl that looks exactly like your absolute dream girl, stunningly beautiful, just walks up to you and say "Let's get it on, I live nearby" all the principles you say you have go right out the window.

Frustration, obsession, those are the things that come across in your posts.


those are the things that come across in everyone who has a self's posts. the obsessions are with different things for different people and sometimes expressed with more subtlety (dishonesty?) but they are still there. calling people out on things they've already admitted to seeing probably doesn't help them very much, maybe investigate your desire to call other people out (such as here, or in "God, what is wrong with you?") it's basically the same as harry's sexual desire or whatever caused me to write this post. use your calling out on yourself, like richard always says, you're the only one who you can change.

I only ended up pressing submit because based on some analysis i decided it would be beneficial, but i have plenty to investigate too


Well the thing is that Harry says one thing (like the route A and B thing) and comes across as someone who doesn't fit that.

Btw, not everyone with a self has obsessions. And calling other people out, I call that helping.

And I think I did apologize for my tone in the "God, what is wrong with you?" thread.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 7:26 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/20/11 7:26 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Simon L:

Btw, not everyone with a self has obsessions.


Are you sure?

Simon L:

And calling other people out, I call that helping.


You should be careful in assuming that you know what helping is. As evidenced by this thread, it is often hard to judge, even going in with the best intentions.

In addition, when one with an identity attempts to help, one cannot even be sure that one has the best intentions, as the identity itself is constantly distorting the behavior and judgment of one's body and mind.

So, please be careful, lest you use "helping" as a cover for self-aggrandizement.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:02 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:00 AM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
Simon L:

Btw, not everyone with a self has obsessions.


Are you sure?


Yes.

From webster.com:

ob·ses·sion
noun \äb-ˈse-shən, əb-\
Definition of OBSESSION
1
: a persistent disturbing preoccupation with an often unreasonable idea or feeling; broadly : compelling motivation <an obsession with profits>
2
: something that causes an obsession
— ob·ses·sion·al adjective
— ob·ses·sion·al·ly adverb

Not everyone has this problem. Are you sure that everyone does?

End in Sight:
Simon L:

And calling other people out, I call that helping.


You should be careful in assuming that you know what helping is. As evidenced by this thread, it is often hard to judge, even going in with the best intentions.

In addition, when one with an identity attempts to help, one cannot even be sure that one has the best intentions, as the identity itself is constantly distorting the behavior and judgment of one's body and mind.

So, please be careful, lest you use "helping" as a cover for self-aggrandizement.


I know what helping is. It is when one has the genuine intent to help, at least in my definition. Whether or not the help is any good is another question.

And I am sure I have the best intentions. The idea that an identity is unable to be sure of its intentions is ridiculous.

This whole "identity is bad" undertone is what troubles me.

Self-aggrandizement, haven't had any of that since I grew up.
thumbnail
Nikolai , modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:07 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:05 AM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1648 Join Date: 1/23/10 Recent Posts
Simon L:

And I am sure I have the best intentions. The idea that an identity is unable to be sure of its intentions is ridiculous.



Hi Simon,

How's your working on triggering a real deal PCE going?

Nick
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 9:38 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 9:38 AM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Simon L:
I know what helping is. It is when one has the genuine intent to help, at least in my definition. Whether or not the help is any good is another question.

And I am sure I have the best intentions. The idea that an identity is unable to be sure of its intentions is ridiculous.


I thought this at many times in the past, but eventually I realized that I was full of shit.

Just my experience on the path...

Simon L:
This whole "identity is bad" undertone is what troubles me.


Undertone? Insofar as I and many others have talked about it, we're like the dudes who drive around at 2am, blasting music from their tricked-out car stereos.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 1:53 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 1:53 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Nikolai .:
Simon L:

And I am sure I have the best intentions. The idea that an identity is unable to be sure of its intentions is ridiculous.



Hi Simon,

How's your working on triggering a real deal PCE going?

Nick


Not quite there yet. The thing is that as soon as I get the start of a PCE, I get overwhelmed by a feeling of bliss, sometimes wonder, sometimes fascination. So in the instant I get there all sorts of wonderful feelings come up in response.

These feelings happens so fast, that I don't even know for sure if I actually got to a full PCE. It's like when someone shows you a picture of a boat for an instant, so quick that you're not quite sure if there was a boat in it, but you think there was. Maybe.

All the PCE type experiences in my past have always been accompanied by good feelings, which makes it hard to get to a full PCE.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 1:57 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 1:57 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
Simon L:
I know what helping is. It is when one has the genuine intent to help, at least in my definition. Whether or not the help is any good is another question.

And I am sure I have the best intentions. The idea that an identity is unable to be sure of its intentions is ridiculous.


I thought this at many times in the past, but eventually I realized that I was full of shit.

Just my experience on the path...


I'm sure I'm not full of shit, so that's where our experiences differ.

End in Sight:
Simon L:
This whole "identity is bad" undertone is what troubles me.


Undertone? Insofar as I and many others have talked about it, we're like the dudes who drive around at 2am, blasting music from their tricked-out car stereos.


Very well. Still troubles me. The aversion to identity makes it so it gets blown out of proportion and make it seem like a much more terrible thing than it actually is. Sure, there are bad things about some people's identities, but there are also a lot of good and beautiful things.
thumbnail
Tommy M, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 2:42 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 2:42 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1199 Join Date: 11/12/10 Recent Posts
Still troubles me.

What troubles you about this? What do you believe is incorrect about what's being suggested here?

The aversion to identity makes it so it gets blown out of proportion and make it seem like a much more terrible thing than it actually is.

You will not make progress with this practice if you continue to provide support for identity, it's that simple.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 2:44 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 2:44 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Simon L:
I'm sure I'm not full of shit, so that's where our experiences differ.


Perhaps you are a moral saint, and so have no need for any sort of practice.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 2:47 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 2:47 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Tommy M:
You will not make progress with this practice if you continue to provide support for identity, it's that simple.


Why do you see the need to disagree with him? Perhaps he is a saint of some kind. Let him enjoy his sainthood.

On the other hand...are you enjoying your disagreement?
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:12 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:12 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Tommy M:
Still troubles me.

What troubles you about this? What do you believe is incorrect about what's being suggested here?


Let me give you an example. A little kid gives his favorite toy to his mother, because he or she loves her so much.

This is something bad to those with an aversion to identity and emotions. The above example is filled with beautiful emotions. Yet some people on here seem to have an aversion to all kind of entity related stuff. I think that is screwed up.

Tommy M:
The aversion to identity makes it so it gets blown out of proportion and make it seem like a much more terrible thing than it actually is.

You will not make progress with this practice if you continue to provide support for identity, it's that simple.


Well, then not. Referring to the example above, and the enormous amount of beautiful identity related examples that could be given; there are many beautiful things about identity. I cannot *not* offer support for the little kid for example.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:13 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:13 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
Simon L:
I'm sure I'm not full of shit, so that's where our experiences differ.


Perhaps you are a moral saint, and so have no need for any sort of practice.


Why this reply? I find it odd that, during our discussion, you suddenly seem to get offended.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:14 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:14 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
Tommy M:
You will not make progress with this practice if you continue to provide support for identity, it's that simple.


Why do you see the need to disagree with him? Perhaps he is a saint of some kind. Let him enjoy his sainthood.

On the other hand...are you enjoying your disagreement?


At which point did you decide to turn against me and felt the need to become insulting?
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:20 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:17 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Simon L:
End in Sight:
Tommy M:
You will not make progress with this practice if you continue to provide support for identity, it's that simple.


Why do you see the need to disagree with him? Perhaps he is a saint of some kind. Let him enjoy his sainthood.

On the other hand...are you enjoying your disagreement?


At which point did you decide to turn against me and felt the need to become insulting?


I acknowledge the possibility that your intentions are good and pure and undistorted by identity, and you consider this insulting?

EDIT: For the record, let me review your recent claims pertaining to your moral stature:

Simon L:
I know what helping is. It is when one has the genuine intent to help, at least in my definition. Whether or not the help is any good is another question.

And I am sure I have the best intentions. The idea that an identity is unable to be sure of its intentions is ridiculous.

Self-aggrandizement, haven't had any of that since I grew up.
thumbnail
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:19 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:19 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 2227 Join Date: 10/27/10 Recent Posts
Simon L:
Tommy M:
Still troubles me.

What troubles you about this? What do you believe is incorrect about what's being suggested here?


Let me give you an example. A little kid gives his favorite toy to his mother, because he or she loves her so much.

This is something bad to those with an aversion to identity and emotions. The above example is filled with beautiful emotions. Yet some people on here seem to have an aversion to all kind of entity related stuff. I think that is screwed up.

Tommy M:
The aversion to identity makes it so it gets blown out of proportion and make it seem like a much more terrible thing than it actually is.

You will not make progress with this practice if you continue to provide support for identity, it's that simple.


Well, then not. Referring to the example above, and the enormous amount of beautiful identity related examples that could be given; there are many beautiful things about identity. I cannot *not* offer support for the little kid for example.

the following post might interest you (from here), and also this thread, starting with "Initially I found it difficult to experience a PCE/EE while parenting..."

SW:
I have a five year old daughter. When my daughter is sick, or upset, I hold her, hug her, rub her back, give her kisses, and cuddle her. And I enjoy giving her comfort and taking care of her. I am not motivated out of a sense of distress or worry when she is ill or upset, but only want to help her feel better in whatever way I can. Nor am I motivated by any sense of what I 'should' do as a parent or out of sympathetic co-suffering; she is a human being in pain, and I will do all I can to help her be pain-free. She happens to be my child, so it is my especial (and legal) obligation to take care of her the best way I can.

A concrete example:

My daughter currently has an ear infection and for a few days before it was diagnosed, she was grumpy and in pain. It was very easy, before she was on antibiotics, to figure out what she needed from me. When she wanted a hug, I gave her a hug. When she wanted to be held, I held her. When she was pensive and withdrawn, I asked her, "Are you okay?"

Being actually free means that I didn't freak out because she was ill. It means that even though I know she is in physical pain, I am not anxious as a result. It doesn't mean that if she wants contact, reassurance, and comfort that I stonily withhold it; that would be silly.

I don't think people "from the outside" would see much difference in how I parent my daughter now and how I did before. The difference between "then" and "now" is that prior to becoming actually free, I would spend hours googling every ailment she had to figure out what was wrong, talk endlessly to friends about it, swap horror stories with other parents, spend copious amounts of time sanitizing her hands to keep her from germs, and generally being stressed about her health and well-being. Many of my friends still do this and are pretty stressed out, all things considered, about their children.

I'm not stressed about my child. I take very good care of her, give her what she needs, and remain perfectly content the whole time.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:27 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:27 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
Simon L:
End in Sight:
Tommy M:
You will not make progress with this practice if you continue to provide support for identity, it's that simple.


Why do you see the need to disagree with him? Perhaps he is a saint of some kind. Let him enjoy his sainthood.

On the other hand...are you enjoying your disagreement?


At which point did you decide to turn against me and felt the need to become insulting?


I acknowledge the possibility that your intentions are good and pure and undistorted by identity, and you consider this insulting?

EDIT: For the record, let me review your recent claims pertaining to your moral stature:

Simon L:
I know what helping is. It is when one has the genuine intent to help, at least in my definition. Whether or not the help is any good is another question.

And I am sure I have the best intentions. The idea that an identity is unable to be sure of its intentions is ridiculous.

Self-aggrandizement, haven't had any of that since I grew up.


Right. So you truly believe that I may be a saint of some kind? If you say:

"I acknowledge the possibility that your intentions are good and pure and undistorted by identity, and you consider this insulting?"

If this is, in all honesty, your intent behind your remarks, then you really are considering the possibility that I am a saint of some kind.

Other than that I can only see your comments kind of like childish bullying. Your aggression is something that seems to be an undertone in many of your replies.

Get over it.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:30 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:30 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:
Simon L:
Tommy M:
Still troubles me.

What troubles you about this? What do you believe is incorrect about what's being suggested here?


Let me give you an example. A little kid gives his favorite toy to his mother, because he or she loves her so much.

This is something bad to those with an aversion to identity and emotions. The above example is filled with beautiful emotions. Yet some people on here seem to have an aversion to all kind of entity related stuff. I think that is screwed up.

Tommy M:
The aversion to identity makes it so it gets blown out of proportion and make it seem like a much more terrible thing than it actually is.

You will not make progress with this practice if you continue to provide support for identity, it's that simple.


Well, then not. Referring to the example above, and the enormous amount of beautiful identity related examples that could be given; there are many beautiful things about identity. I cannot *not* offer support for the little kid for example.

the following post might interest you (from here), and also this thread, starting with "Initially I found it difficult to experience a PCE/EE while parenting..."

SW:
I have a five year old daughter. When my daughter is sick, or upset, I hold her, hug her, rub her back, give her kisses, and cuddle her. And I enjoy giving her comfort and taking care of her. I am not motivated out of a sense of distress or worry when she is ill or upset, but only want to help her feel better in whatever way I can. Nor am I motivated by any sense of what I 'should' do as a parent or out of sympathetic co-suffering; she is a human being in pain, and I will do all I can to help her be pain-free. She happens to be my child, so it is my especial (and legal) obligation to take care of her the best way I can.

A concrete example:

My daughter currently has an ear infection and for a few days before it was diagnosed, she was grumpy and in pain. It was very easy, before she was on antibiotics, to figure out what she needed from me. When she wanted a hug, I gave her a hug. When she wanted to be held, I held her. When she was pensive and withdrawn, I asked her, "Are you okay?"

Being actually free means that I didn't freak out because she was ill. It means that even though I know she is in physical pain, I am not anxious as a result. It doesn't mean that if she wants contact, reassurance, and comfort that I stonily withhold it; that would be silly.

I don't think people "from the outside" would see much difference in how I parent my daughter now and how I did before. The difference between "then" and "now" is that prior to becoming actually free, I would spend hours googling every ailment she had to figure out what was wrong, talk endlessly to friends about it, swap horror stories with other parents, spend copious amounts of time sanitizing her hands to keep her from germs, and generally being stressed about her health and well-being. Many of my friends still do this and are pretty stressed out, all things considered, about their children.

I'm not stressed about my child. I take very good care of her, give her what she needs, and remain perfectly content the whole time.


Sure, this I have no problem with. What I have a problem with is the aversion against all identity related things, including the beautiful ones. Whether or not AF is a superior mode of operation, I feel it is troubling that people find all of identity bad.

Whether or not it is inferior to AF, there are beautiful things about identity and self.

The total aversion against it is problematic imo.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:32 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:32 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Simon L:

Right. So you truly believe that I may be a saint of some kind? If you say:

"I acknowledge the possibility that your intentions are good and pure and undistorted by identity, and you consider this insulting?"

If this is, in all honesty, your intent behind your remarks, then you really are considering the possibility that I am a saint of some kind.


I cannot see into your mind. It is not right for me to argue about your claims regarding yourself, if you are convinced that your moral stature is what it is. Further, I see no reason that others should argue with you about those claims either, as they (self-admittedly not possessing such stature, nor possessing the ability to see into your mind) are merely indulging their base desires if they choose to argue.

I also suggested that you have no need for a practice, as the ultimate purpose of a practice is to correct one's failings.

What more needs to be said?
thumbnail
Tommy M, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:32 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:32 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1199 Join Date: 11/12/10 Recent Posts
On the other hand...are you enjoying your disagreement?

Simon appears to have similar reservations about these practices to those I once held, this is why I commented, not to disagree with or defend anything.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:45 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:45 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Tommy M:
On the other hand...are you enjoying your disagreement?

Simon appears to have similar reservations about these practices to those I once held, this is why I commented, not to disagree with or defend anything.


You wrote:

Tommy M:
You will not make progress with this practice if you continue to provide support for identity, it's that simple.


Preaching to a man about what will be good for his progress in the practice after he explicitly stated (in this very thread) that he does not share the goals of the practice?

Why do you care to tell him about what will be good for his progress even though he is not interested, and has explicitly rejected the practice? Is it helping him? Is it helping you?

(These are rhetorical questions.)
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:50 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:50 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
Simon L:

Right. So you truly believe that I may be a saint of some kind? If you say:

"I acknowledge the possibility that your intentions are good and pure and undistorted by identity, and you consider this insulting?"

If this is, in all honesty, your intent behind your remarks, then you really are considering the possibility that I am a saint of some kind.


I cannot see into your mind. It is not right for me to argue about your claims regarding yourself, if you are convinced that your moral stature is what it is. Further, I see no reason that others should argue with you about those claims either, as they (self-admittedly not possessing such stature, nor possessing the ability to see into your mind) are merely indulging their base desires if they choose to argue.

I also suggested that you have no need for a practice, as the ultimate purpose of a practice is to correct one's failings.

What more needs to be said?


The purpose of the practice, for me, would not be to correct any failings. It's about reaching a way of functioning that is the perfect way for human beings. Whether that is AF or something else.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:54 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 3:54 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight:
Tommy M:
On the other hand...are you enjoying your disagreement?

Simon appears to have similar reservations about these practices to those I once held, this is why I commented, not to disagree with or defend anything.


You wrote:

Tommy M:
You will not make progress with this practice if you continue to provide support for identity, it's that simple.


Preaching to a man about what will be good for his progress in the practice after he explicitly stated (in this very thread) that he does not share the goals of the practice?

Why do you care to tell him about what will be good for his progress even though he is not interested, and has explicitly rejected the practice? Is it helping him? Is it helping you?

(These are rhetorical questions.)


Hold on. I at one point, did decide that AF was not for me, but later on came back to investigate it further.

Yes, there are several things I find troubling and there are things I have doubts about, and I have made those clear.

My current goal is to reach a full PCE in which, as Richard says there is, I find the evidence for AF being the ultimate goal. For me, no evidence means I don't want it. If there is evidence though, I will go for it.

In my practice thread I have discussed this and was told that there is a way to have a full PCE without stepping into AF. Since AF is irrevocable, I need the evidence first. It just seems wise.
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:13 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:13 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Simon L:
Hold on. I at one point, did decide that AF was not for me, but later on came back to investigate it further.


As your statements about your own moral stature contradict the official actualist position, I quite reasonably assumed that you had abandoned AF as a goal.

Similarly, did Nick not tell you that you will be in a position to resolve these questions after having a full PCE? I am not aware that he advised you to think about these issues discursively, which seems to be what you are doing here.

In what sense can you be said to be investigating, when you state your beliefs that the official actualist position is wrong with such conviction? That is appropriate for the end of an investigation, not the beginning.

To what extent do you think it's possible that having taken up an ill-suited attitude is hampering your investigation?
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:22 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:21 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Simon, let me put this another way. Count the number of posts you have written recently, and notice that they are concerned with talking about your moral stature, arguing with others, and trying to call me on my behavior. Calculate the time you have just wasted on doing those things.

You claim that you are trying to investigate (which in this case means trying to attain a full PCE). This, as you know, requires cultivating the pure intent to be happy and harmless. And yet, your actions suggest that you are not cultivating pure intent at all. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that your claim is mistaken in some way. Perhaps it is outright false. Or perhaps it is true, but you have been distracted by the passions, distortions, and overall confusion that is associated with your identity.

Please think about that in an open, exploratory, curious way.

Also, please do not respond to this post, as I am not interested in hearing your explanations (and will not respond to them) until you attain a full PCE or something close, or until you have reformed your behavior.
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:28 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:28 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
And I think I did apologize for my tone in the "God, what is wrong with you?" thread.


that's fine. i'm not trying to sue you or attack you, just point out that you too have naturally occuring malicious and sorrowful passions (all humans are born with them) and you may be deluding yourself to some extent about their existence. again, i've done the same thing and i still do the same thing but in more subliminal and subtle ways, seeing this process of delusion is necessary to getting rid of it.

as for your doubts about the actualist practice, they seem to have been answered in your previous conversations. the feelings and identity which are positive are redundant and support the ones that are negative. if you love someone you are liable to hate someone who hurts them. if you care for someone then you are liable to sorrow if they are hurt. none of these feelings are necessary to their actual welfare, and often can have negative effects on your welfare and that of others.

you can help someone without feeling bad for them, so why feel bad?
End in Sight, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:28 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 4:28 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1251 Join Date: 7/6/11 Recent Posts
Pure intent?

Simon L:

Wow, the seduction community really has been going downhill... There was a time when HB meant "HARD BODY" or "hot babe".

Harry, your posts reek of obsession with sex. Have been for quite some time. I'm willing to bet that if a girl that looks exactly like your absolute dream girl, stunningly beautiful, just walks up to you and say "Let's get it on, I live nearby" all the principles you say you have go right out the window.

Frustration, obsession, those are the things that come across in your posts.



Simon L:
Right. So you truly believe that I may be a saint of some kind? If you say:

"I acknowledge the possibility that your intentions are good and pure and undistorted by identity, and you consider this insulting?"

If this is, in all honesty, your intent behind your remarks, then you really are considering the possibility that I am a saint of some kind.

Other than that I can only see your comments kind of like childish bullying. Your aggression is something that seems to be an undertone in many of your replies.

Get over it.


Simon L:

And I am sure I have the best intentions. The idea that an identity is unable to be sure of its intentions is ridiculous.

This whole "identity is bad" undertone is what troubles me.

Self-aggrandizement, haven't had any of that since I grew up.


Is cultivating the perception that there is a problem, or cultivating a negative feeling, part of pure intent?

Simon L:

Let me give you an example. A little kid gives his favorite toy to his mother, because he or she loves her so much.

This is something bad to those with an aversion to identity and emotions. The above example is filled with beautiful emotions. Yet some people on here seem to have an aversion to all kind of entity related stuff. I think that is screwed up.


Simon L:
Sure, this I have no problem with. What I have a problem with is the aversion against all identity related things, including the beautiful ones.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 5:02 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 5:02 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
End in Sight, I must say I find you a little weird. Other than that, for some reason, you seem to be misunderstanding and misinterpreting my responses. You seem to perceive that I come from a negative position.

You quote parts of my responses, and might do so again, as evidence for your perceptions, while in those quotes there is nothing of what you seem to perceive.

Do you have trouble understanding people in general?

I will not bother responding to your posts if this continues.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 5:08 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 5:08 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
josh r s:
And I think I did apologize for my tone in the "God, what is wrong with you?" thread.


that's fine. i'm not trying to sue you or attack you, just point out that you too have naturally occuring malicious and sorrowful passions (all humans are born with them) and you may be deluding yourself to some extent about their existence. again, i've done the same thing and i still do the same thing but in more subliminal and subtle ways, seeing this process of delusion is necessary to getting rid of it.

as for your doubts about the actualist practice, they seem to have been answered in your previous conversations. the feelings and identity which are positive are redundant and support the ones that are negative. if you love someone you are liable to hate someone who hurts them. if you care for someone then you are liable to sorrow if they are hurt. none of these feelings are necessary to their actual welfare, and often can have negative effects on your welfare and that of others.

you can help someone without feeling bad for them, so why feel bad?


Sure, there was a slight slip in my functioning when I lashed out but I have corrected that.

As for this:

"the feelings and identity which are positive are redundant and support the ones that are negative. if you love someone you are liable to hate someone who hurts them. if you care for someone then you are liable to sorrow if they are hurt. "

It's your own choice what you feel. Sometimes you need to correct that if something slips through, but that only happens to me with something minor, like getting a bit harsh while posting on a forum.

But when someone I love gets hurt by someone, I do not automatically hate them. It is your responsibility to choose your responses. If someone I love gets hurt, I will choose a healthy emotion that is helpful to the situation.

The idea that people are a victim of their emotions is false. You do them to yourself. You do them yourself. You generate those emotions and you can choose to not do it or to generate something else.
thumbnail
#1 - 0, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 5:37 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 5:37 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 104 Join Date: 8/8/10 Recent Posts
I think this thread is unlikely to aid in anyone's practice, especially the people participating in it.

The actualism method is about learning to feel perfect all the time. One notices that the closer one gets to feeling perfect, the less of "me and all my stuff" there is. This seems like a basic flame war that's been washed over with an air of intellectualism, which is the opposite of what everyone here is (i think?) trying to achieve.

Come on guys. This is your only moment of being alive. Please enjoy it.
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 5:46 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 5:38 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
But when someone I love gets hurt by someone, I do not automatically hate them. It is your responsibility to choose your responses. If someone I love gets hurt, I will choose a healthy emotion that is helpful to the situation.

The idea that people are a victim of their emotions is false. You do them to yourself. You do them yourself. You generate those emotions and you can choose to not do it or to generate something else.


yes," I" am those emotions, "I" choose them. but looking around the world and at oneself isn't it pretty obvious that the control is far from perfect? you say that for you it only happens in minor situations, but it stands to reason that if you can reactively lash out over a forum post then you might be prone to lashing out over something major. such lashing out is even built into carefully thought out legal systems. in the U.S. at least you can get reduced sentencing for proving that a murder was a crime of passion! lashing out due to passion is scientifically verified. google temporary insanity if you'd like the evidence

but, let's assume that you manage to gain perfect control of your emotions... you spend your time being really nice to people and generally feeling felicitous, when reactions occur you see them, don't express them and go back to feeling felicitous. but wait a second! this is almost practicing actualism! the only difference is that the actualist works to rid himself of the roots of the emotions so that they don't have to occur at all. if it's nice being able to control the emotions wouldn't it be even nicer if they didn't occur at all?

you control your emotions to keep yourself happy and harmless, but then dont attempt to keep them from arising. even if you get to being perfect and are happy and harmless 99.9% of the time, then you must have decided being happy and harmless is great, so why not go 100%?

in my experience, being almost satisfied, even 99.9% satisfied is nowhere near being 100% satisfied. if there is any tiny little issue, as there will inevitably be if a self exists, you will never quite be satisfied. if there is any tiny little thing that can bother you in the tiniest little way, then there is still a problem, and you can never fully relax. trying explain that perfection is good seems a bit silly, rationally perfection is always better and thus should be sought after. try to think about it purely logically.

assuming you value happiness and harmlessness...

if A is better than B, B should be sacrificed for A. nothing is better than or equal to actual freedom (if you know something i'd love to hear) so it's logical that one should achieve actual freedom. the only way you could draw another conclusion would be if you have irrational attachment and thus your ability to be rational is subverted... or you value something more than happiness and harmlessness (beauty?). in which case there is absolutely nothing i or anyone else can really do to help you, also it wouldn't really make sense that you'd take this path of holding down emotions for the sake of happiness and harmlessness.

put succinctly, if you value happiness and harmlessness above all else then it's logical to go 100%. if you find that you do value happiness and harmlessness above all else then you might want to look into whether or not you are temporarily insane due to emotional attachment. if however you value something above happiness and harmlessness and thus would rather not go 100% if it means losing that thing, I'd love to hear about it, and we should talk about that.

edit: 1-0 - i agree that this is not a practical conversation and thus will not help anyone who is interested in doing the practice. but the issue at hand is the validity of the practice itself and I can't think of another way to discuss this issue. maybe it should be moved to the dharma battleground, as there have been several similar discussions recently.

I appreciate your advice though, and will not continue to discuss this issue if it causes me emotional distress and interferes with my ability to be happy and harmless, because for me, yes that is by far the most important thing.
thumbnail
#1 - 0, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 5:46 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 5:46 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 104 Join Date: 8/8/10 Recent Posts
Josh, nice Adventure Time avatar. Isn't that show fantastic?
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 6:01 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 6:01 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
ha, i've only seen like 1 episode, i just like the dumb looking horse
thumbnail
Jake , modified 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 7:08 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/21/11 7:08 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 695 Join Date: 5/22/10 Recent Posts
#1 - 0:
Josh, nice Adventure Time avatar. Isn't that show fantastic?


That show's awesome. Regular Show too :-) Yayyyy-ah!
thumbnail
Tommy M, modified 10 Years ago at 9/22/11 4:03 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/22/11 4:03 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1199 Join Date: 11/12/10 Recent Posts
"the feelings and identity which are positive are redundant and support the ones that are negative. if you love someone you are liable to hate someone who hurts them. if you care for someone then you are liable to sorrow if they are hurt. "

It's your own choice what you feel. Sometimes you need to correct that if something slips through, but that only happens to me with something minor, like getting a bit harsh while posting on a forum.

But when someone I love gets hurt by someone, I do not automatically hate them. It is your responsibility to choose your responses. If someone I love gets hurt, I will choose a healthy emotion that is helpful to the situation.

The idea that people are a victim of their emotions is false. You do them to yourself. You do them yourself. You generate those emotions and you can choose to not do it or to generate something else.

Do you believe that there is such a thing as a seperate and permanent self? Show me where it is.

Do you believe that there is such a thing as an identity beyond a series of mental constructs? Show me where it is.

Would you agree that an emotion requires it's opposite to exist, in the same way that light requires darkness? Disprove this if you disagree.

Do you honestly believe that you are able to maintain full control over your emotions, both the positive and negative, in any situation?

It's all well and good to say "if someone I love gets hurt, I will choose a healthy emotion that is helpful to the situation", but how can you possibly know that this will be the case should such an incident occur? By "someone I love gets hurt", what sort of "hurt" are we talking about here? Do you believe that you would have the skill to choose a "healthy emotion that is helpful to the situation" if someone you love were to be beaten, murdered or raped? I use these three examples because they are situations which I've had to deal with pre-enlightenment and my responses ranged from tears and anger to trying to use a nail gun to crucify someone. In the case of the latter, it was only through realizing how futile and painful for me and those I love such a course of action would be that prevented me from carrying this out. It was also this situation which led me to understand how, as long as the human condition still operates, we are all capable of such feats of violence and malice if the conditions are right.

Bear in mind too that, until very recently, I was probably ever more skeptical of AF and its outcome that you are right now, and for very similar reasons, which is why I'm discussing this with you. I have no stake in you achieving any goals, or any interest in defending the AF line, but I know through my own experience over the last 13 or so years that the practices being discussed here are incredibly effective for achieving the outcomes you mention before.

Go get a PCE, a real, full-blown, crystal clear and stable PCE, then see what changes in your view. I know from experience that this is what becomes the convincer, anything else is just mental masturbation.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/23/11 11:41 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/23/11 11:41 AM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Tommy M:
"the feelings and identity which are positive are redundant and support the ones that are negative. if you love someone you are liable to hate someone who hurts them. if you care for someone then you are liable to sorrow if they are hurt. "

It's your own choice what you feel. Sometimes you need to correct that if something slips through, but that only happens to me with something minor, like getting a bit harsh while posting on a forum.

But when someone I love gets hurt by someone, I do not automatically hate them. It is your responsibility to choose your responses. If someone I love gets hurt, I will choose a healthy emotion that is helpful to the situation.

The idea that people are a victim of their emotions is false. You do them to yourself. You do them yourself. You generate those emotions and you can choose to not do it or to generate something else.

Do you believe that there is such a thing as a seperate and permanent self? Show me where it is.

Do you believe that there is such a thing as an identity beyond a series of mental constructs? Show me where it is.

Would you agree that an emotion requires it's opposite to exist, in the same way that light requires darkness? Disprove this if you disagree.

Do you honestly believe that you are able to maintain full control over your emotions, both the positive and negative, in any situation?

It's all well and good to say "if someone I love gets hurt, I will choose a healthy emotion that is helpful to the situation", but how can you possibly know that this will be the case should such an incident occur? By "someone I love gets hurt", what sort of "hurt" are we talking about here? Do you believe that you would have the skill to choose a "healthy emotion that is helpful to the situation" if someone you love were to be beaten, murdered or raped? I use these three examples because they are situations which I've had to deal with pre-enlightenment and my responses ranged from tears and anger to trying to use a nail gun to crucify someone. In the case of the latter, it was only through realizing how futile and painful for me and those I love such a course of action would be that prevented me from carrying this out. It was also this situation which led me to understand how, as long as the human condition still operates, we are all capable of such feats of violence and malice if the conditions are right.

Bear in mind too that, until very recently, I was probably ever more skeptical of AF and its outcome that you are right now, and for very similar reasons, which is why I'm discussing this with you. I have no stake in you achieving any goals, or any interest in defending the AF line, but I know through my own experience over the last 13 or so years that the practices being discussed here are incredibly effective for achieving the outcomes you mention before.

Go get a PCE, a real, full-blown, crystal clear and stable PCE, then see what changes in your view. I know from experience that this is what becomes the convincer, anything else is just mental masturbation.


I agree. I will quickly answer your questions and then move on to actual practice stuff.

"Do you believe that there is such a thing as a seperate and permanent self? Show me where it is."

No. Doesn't exist.

"Do you believe that there is such a thing as an identity beyond a series of mental constructs? Show me where it is."

No, it is a mental construct.

"Would you agree that an emotion requires it's opposite to exist, in the same way that light requires darkness? Disprove this if you disagree."

No, doesn't require it. Example, children often love without ever having known hate.

"Do you honestly believe that you are able to maintain full control over your emotions, both the positive and negative, in any situation?"

Mostly yes, and if I fail, I need to correct that.

Anyway...

Let's get practical. emoticon

My goal is to get a full PCE and find the evidence, if there is any. It should be a PCE which ends instead of turning into AF. I want to turn back and evaluate first.

The challenge I have with this I have explained in another post in this thread (the blissful feelings challenge). If you scroll up you'll see it in this thread.

Anyway, I would highly appreciate your assistance!
thumbnail
Harry Potter, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 11:22 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 11:22 AM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 84 Join Date: 5/20/11 Recent Posts
Steph S:
maybe it would be useful to have a woman chime in on this.

similar to what bruno mentioned about his brother using the word "faggot" to refer to homosexual men, in the past i have used the term "hot bitch" to refer to other women, with what i thought at the time was intended as a compliment. "whore" has always been an insult in my book, and yes, i have used that term to refer to other women with the intent to insult.

however, i should break this down a little further.. upon closer examination of using "hot bitch", it turns out what was intended as a compliment is still a back-slap to women. a lot of women play the game of wanting to seem like they're not uptight while in the company of men. in also adopting the insulting terms that men use to refer to women, we somehow feel it makes us appear either more attractive or less of a threat to some men (i stipulate both because i have played this game around men i was sexually attracted to, as well as men who were platonic friends). we think it makes us seem like we're laid back, cool company to keep, don't get offended easily and are not what these men may perceive as the "typical" prissy uber-emotional woman. i can't speak for all women here, but i am speaking from my experience, as well as quite a few other women i know.

i might add more later, but that's all i have time for at the moment.


I have now decided to drop these phrases as I intend not to degrade women.

Please feel free to add more if you wish, as I was able to relate to what you said about women. Strangely enough, I tend to exhibit these patterns of behaviour; I too subconsciously "play the game of wanting to seem like I'm not uptight while in the company of women". For fear of seeming foolish (or a beta male)? Ah, need more of naivete!
thumbnail
Tommy M, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 11:34 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 11:34 AM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 1199 Join Date: 11/12/10 Recent Posts
Strangely enough, I tend to exhibit these patterns of behaviour; I too subconsciously "play the game of wanting to seem like I'm not uptight while in the company of women". For fear of seeming foolish (or a beta male)? Ah, need more of naivete!

Nice one. Maybe look at the feelings related to "being a man", not alpha or beta, just the social expectations of playing this role. Either way, you've made a useful decision and, after the back and forths with others over the last week, that took some doing.
Stian Gudmundsen Høiland, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 12:09 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 12:09 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 296 Join Date: 9/5/10 Recent Posts
Simon L:

From webster.com:

ob·ses·sion
noun \äb-ˈse-shən, əb-\
Definition of OBSESSION
1
: a persistent disturbing preoccupation with an often unreasonable idea or feeling; broadly : compelling motivation <an obsession with profits>
2
: something that causes an obsession
— ob·ses·sion·al adjective
— ob·ses·sion·al·ly adverb


Emphasis added by me.

If you take away the word often, is this not a perfect description of "self"?
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 12:26 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 12:25 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
ha! good point, and it's not just often, it's nearly all the time
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 12:28 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 12:28 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Stian Gudmundsen Høiland:
Simon L:

From webster.com:

ob·ses·sion
noun \äb-ˈse-shən, əb-\
Definition of OBSESSION
1
: a persistent disturbing preoccupation with an often unreasonable idea or feeling; broadly : compelling motivation <an obsession with profits>
2
: something that causes an obsession
— ob·ses·sion·al adjective
— ob·ses·sion·al·ly adverb


Emphasis added by me.

If you take away the word often, is this not a perfect description of "self"?


Can't agree with that:

- persistent. Although I've been thinking about self more lately, I can't say it's persistent even now. And before I got into this, I cannot say that my thoughts about myself were persistent.

- disturbing. Not at all. It's disturbing if it's problematic. Normal thoughts about self are not disturbing and generally I don't see the people around me having a disturbing relationship towards self, nor do I.

- preoccupation. Not either. I'm not preoccupied with self, nor are many of the people I know.

The only people I know who fit the above terms are people with mental problems.

- unreasonable. Maybe.

But this definition fails on many counts to make it a perfect description of self imo.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 12:29 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 12:29 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
josh r s:
ha! good point, and it's not just often, it's nearly all the time


For whom?
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:15 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:10 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
you, i, him, anyone with a self. if your thoughts have reference to self, if you have feelings, there is an obsession, a preoccupation with an unreasonable idea.

edit:
if the preoccupation, or whatever you want to call it, isn't disturbing then why are you practicing? if i found that suffering was not caused by having a self i can't imagine trying to surmount the enormous obstacles and actually rid myself of it. if it's not a problem then don't do anything! enjoy your life

taking you at your word, you have a self but it isn't a problem. if there's no problem why practice? but maybe you should take another look and see if there is in fact a problem, either way enjoy your life, that's what it's about. for me, it's necessary that i get rid of self to enjoy my life fully, it's possible your self could be not as much of a problem, whatever, do what you want!
Stian Gudmundsen Høiland, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:20 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:20 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 296 Join Date: 9/5/10 Recent Posts
Regarding your disagreement on the description of "self": I don't feel equipped with the language to make myself sufficiently understood as to why I believe the process of "selfing" has passed you by, made evident by your disagreement.

Then again, it might be a matter of differing semantics, and if you claim that you do have a good grasp on the process of selfing, I'm inclined to believe so.

In short: the pervasion of "selfing" and its consequences seems to be too subtle for you to pick up on.

Nonetheless, while this is definitely off-topic, I hope someone willing to contemplate why this description can be a perfect description of "self" might do so and share their thoughts with us.
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:28 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:28 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
Can't agree with that:

- persistent. Although I've been thinking about self more lately, I can't say it's persistent even now. And before I got into this, I cannot say that my thoughts about myself were persistent.

- disturbing. Not at all. It's disturbing if it's problematic. Normal thoughts about self are not disturbing and generally I don't see the people around me having a disturbing relationship towards self, nor do I.

- preoccupation. Not either. I'm not preoccupied with self, nor are many of the people I know.

The only people I know who fit the above terms are people with mental problems.

- unreasonable. Maybe.

But this definition fails on many counts to make it a perfect description of self imo.


ok i'lll give a shot to that contemplation

persistent. yes, it exists in every single thought and emotion, there is reference to self, emphasis added to things perceived as self (body, status in others' eyes, etc.) i don't persistently contemplated the actual concept of self, but my thoughts about other things are assuming this concept of self is reflected by something real.

disturbing, yes, i undoubtedly suffer due to the added importance given to things self related. for example, if i hear that someone across the world is starving, i am unaffected. if however my body tells me i am hungry i feel upset about this, demonstrating a clear belief that this body is somehow more important due to it being self and that other body isn't as important

preoccupation, yes, basically same thing as persistent, and almost everyone i know has a self as well, and has the same problems as i do

unreasonable, yes, the self doesn't actually exist so why suffer so much for it.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:32 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:32 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
josh r s:
you, i, him, anyone with a self. if your thoughts have reference to self, if you have feelings, there is an obsession, a preoccupation with an unreasonable idea.

edit:
if the preoccupation, or whatever you want to call it, isn't disturbing then why are you practicing? if i found that suffering was not caused by having a self i can't imagine trying to surmount the enormous obstacles and actually rid myself of it. if it's not a problem then don't do anything! enjoy your life

taking you at your word, you have a self but it isn't a problem. if there's no problem why practice? but maybe you should take another look and see if there is in fact a problem, either way enjoy your life, that's what it's about. for me, it's necessary that i get rid of self to enjoy my life fully, it's possible your self could be not as much of a problem, whatever, do what you want!


"you, i, him, anyone with a self. if your thoughts have reference to self, if you have feelings, there is an obsession, a preoccupation with an unreasonable idea."

You are leaving out the persistent and disturbing part of the definitions. And preoccupation means "extreme or excessive concern with something". The occasional thought about self is not extreme, excessive and often not even concern.

Why practice? That's been asked before. Because even if you have no problems, but there is something better, it would be good to go for it. That's why I'm looking for evidence for that in a PCE.

If your life is great, and there is a way to make it better, would you still ask "why?". Things being excellent doesn't mean I wouldn't want to get something even better.

As I said, not sure if AF is that, hence the need for evidence. I understand that that can be found in a PCE and I want to see that for myself, to see if it is true, before I go all the way.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:35 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:35 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
josh r s:
Can't agree with that:

- persistent. Although I've been thinking about self more lately, I can't say it's persistent even now. And before I got into this, I cannot say that my thoughts about myself were persistent.

- disturbing. Not at all. It's disturbing if it's problematic. Normal thoughts about self are not disturbing and generally I don't see the people around me having a disturbing relationship towards self, nor do I.

- preoccupation. Not either. I'm not preoccupied with self, nor are many of the people I know.

The only people I know who fit the above terms are people with mental problems.

- unreasonable. Maybe.

But this definition fails on many counts to make it a perfect description of self imo.


ok i'lll give a shot to that contemplation

persistent. yes, it exists in every single thought and emotion, there is reference to self, emphasis added to things perceived as self (body, status in others' eyes, etc.) i don't persistently contemplated the actual concept of self, but my thoughts about other things are assuming this concept of self is reflected by something real.

disturbing, yes, i undoubtedly suffer due to the added importance given to things self related. for example, if i hear that someone across the world is starving, i am unaffected. if however my body tells me i am hungry i feel upset about this, demonstrating a clear belief that this body is somehow more important due to it being self and that other body isn't as important

preoccupation, yes, basically same thing as persistent, and almost everyone i know has a self as well, and has the same problems as i do

unreasonable, yes, the self doesn't actually exist so why suffer so much for it.


I could answer you reply, since I have some disagreements, but I think it won't be useful. I want to get back to practice and my goal:

Achieving a full PCE, from which I can turn back, to see if there is any evidence for AF being "it".

Btw, I have seen through the illusion of self, that part I get. Just to be clear.

Anyway, back to practice. I have a challenge with PCE's that I would like some help with, I'll repost it here in a sec.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:38 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:38 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Stian Gudmundsen Høiland:
Regarding your disagreement on the description of "self": I don't feel equipped with the language to make myself sufficiently understood as to why I believe the process of "selfing" has passed you by, made evident by your disagreement.

Then again, it might be a matter of differing semantics, and if you claim that you do have a good grasp on the process of selfing, I'm inclined to believe so.

In short: the pervasion of "selfing" and its consequences seems to be too subtle for you to pick up on.

Nonetheless, while this is definitely off-topic, I hope someone willing to contemplate why this description can be a perfect description of "self" might do so and share their thoughts with us.


Well, I've been into self-hypnosis and meditation for at least 15 years and have explored every possible thing there is about myself. I have achieved liberation at one point and I have stopped finding new things about myself a long time ago, since there just isn't anything more.

Anyway, as I said in a previous reply, I want to get back to practice and my challenge. I'll repost it now.
Stian Gudmundsen Høiland, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:44 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:44 PM

RE: To Harry Potter

Posts: 296 Join Date: 9/5/10 Recent Posts
josh r s:

ok i'lll give a shot to that contemplation (...)

Good one emoticon

Simon L:
I want to get back to practice and my challenge.

Yes! emoticon
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:45 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:45 PM

My challenge

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Ok. Richard said that there is evidence for AF being "it" in a PCE. Not his exact words, but that seems to be what he meant.

My goal is to trigger a PCE from which I can come back from to see if there is in fact real evidence/proof. If there is, I know that AF is "it". If there isn't, I will not continue.

In going for my goal I have a challenge. Recently Nick asked me the following question in this thread:

"Hi Simon,

How's your working on triggering a real deal PCE going?

Nick"

My reply was:

"Not quite there yet. The thing is that as soon as I get the start of a PCE, I get overwhelmed by a feeling of bliss, sometimes wonder, sometimes fascination. So in the instant I get there all sorts of wonderful feelings come up in response.

These feelings happens so fast, that I don't even know for sure if I actually got to a full PCE. It's like when someone shows you a picture of a boat for an instant, so quick that you're not quite sure if there was a boat in it, but you think there was. Maybe.

All the PCE type experiences in my past have always been accompanied by good feelings, which makes it hard to get to a full PCE. "

So that's where I'm at. Any suggestions?

P.S. While I appreciate all the replies, I agree that it has become too theoretical. That can be interesting and I did enjoy the discussions, but for the purpose of both this forum, other people's practice as well as my own, it's not useful. I'll refrain from replying to theoretical posts, not because I don't appreciate them, but because I think it's better for the forum and everyone involved.
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:54 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 1:54 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
ok, i agree the practical is the only thing that matters, everyone's thoughts about these things aren't really important. keep practicing, i haven't had a PCE so i don't feel like i can guide you. but i have had your experiences of going in the direction that appears to be PCE and then feeling blissful sensations.

for clarity maybe we should refer to only "full PCEs" as PCEs. anything short of no affect and no self at all can be referred to as an excellence experience. just to use the actual freedom trust's terms so as not to get confused by anyone.

so, i've had those same experiences, and right now i'm just taking them and trying to simply observe the bliss and actual sensations at the same time. doing this makes the bliss seem less special, and i feel like it's moving in the right direction. if you don't think it's worthwhile to investigate the bliss because you don't think that bliss necessitates negative emotional counterparts, than maybe investigate it based on Richard's claim that it stands between you and the actual world.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 2:10 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 2:10 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
josh r s:
ok, i agree the practical is the only thing that matters, everyone's thoughts about these things aren't really important. keep practicing, i haven't had a PCE so i don't feel like i can guide you. but i have had your experiences of going in the direction that appears to be PCE and then feeling blissful sensations.

for clarity maybe we should refer to only "full PCEs" as PCEs. anything short of no affect and no self at all can be referred to as an excellence experience. just to use the actual freedom trust's terms so as not to get confused by anyone.

so, i've had those same experiences, and right now i'm just taking them and trying to simply observe the bliss and actual sensations at the same time. doing this makes the bliss seem less special, and i feel like it's moving in the right direction. if you don't think it's worthwhile to investigate the bliss because you don't think that bliss necessitates negative emotional counterparts, than maybe investigate it based on Richard's claim that it stands between you and the actual world.


I've investigated the bliss and am in doubt as to what to do with it. One of the recommendations Richard gives is to go for feeling good, since it is from a point of feeling good that you can get to a PCE. So that makes me feel like it's better to keep it.

Also, what I think would be most useful is if I could actually remember a PCE. Richard says that everyone has had one, but that it often is difficult to remember it. (PCE being here a full PCE, I agree with the point about clarity of terms).
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 2:33 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 2:33 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
i guess it depends whether you categorize bliss as feeling good or felicity. i think it's feeling good as richard has many negative things to say about it. particularly in reference to those enlightened people who apparently exist in states of bliss and euphoria. so i think it is indeed something to investigate. read the actual freedom website, all the stuff about PCEs, read some of the things Tarin, Trent, Stephanie Dunning, Nikolai, and other actually free people have said. just keep maximizing felicity and minimizing good/bad with attentiveness and investigation. have you already noticed movement towards felicity and away from good/bad? if so, then you're going in the right direction, and are on the same path as i am. my current strategy is to keep up the maximization of felicity and minimization of good/bad while undertaking some buddhist practices that are supposed to make getting actual freedom easier.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 2:58 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 2:58 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
josh r s:
i guess it depends whether you categorize bliss as feeling good or felicity. i think it's feeling good as richard has many negative things to say about it. particularly in reference to those enlightened people who apparently exist in states of bliss and euphoria. so i think it is indeed something to investigate. read the actual freedom website, all the stuff about PCEs, read some of the things Tarin, Trent, Stephanie Dunning, Nikolai, and other actually free people have said. just keep maximizing felicity and minimizing good/bad with attentiveness and investigation. have you already noticed movement towards felicity and away from good/bad? if so, then you're going in the right direction, and are on the same path as i am. my current strategy is to keep up the maximization of felicity and minimization of good/bad while undertaking some buddhist practices that are supposed to make getting actual freedom easier.


Thanks. I have noticed movement towards felicity. Delight and enjoying the senses have been quite strong in the past. But these are still feelings. I understand that in a PCE or in AF, there are no feelings at all. So I really don't know what to do with the feelings associated to felicity.
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 3:13 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 3:12 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
well, there is non-affective enjoyment, felicity is the closest emotion to that. so felicity is something you want to promote, other emotions are things you want to investigate. if you keep that up, then according to a lot of people you should eventually just have a PCE.

while there is a self, the self is best if it is felicitous. if it were possible to just drop the self, you wouldn't need felicity. but if you're stuck with that self then make it felicitous, cuz that's the closest thing
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 3:40 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 3:40 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
josh r s:
well, there is non-affective enjoyment, felicity is the closest emotion to that. so felicity is something you want to promote, other emotions are things you want to investigate. if you keep that up, then according to a lot of people you should eventually just have a PCE.

while there is a self, the self is best if it is felicitous. if it were possible to just drop the self, you wouldn't need felicity. but if you're stuck with that self then make it felicitous, cuz that's the closest thing


Ok, I've never been afraid to ask stupid questions.

What is felicity?

If you look it up in the dictionary, it is described as happiness:

---
fe·lic·i·ty
noun \fi-ˈli-sə-tē\
plural fe·lic·i·ties
Definition of FELICITY
1
a : the quality or state of being happy; especially : great happiness <marital felicity> b : an instance of happiness
2
: something that causes happiness
3
: a pleasing manner or quality especially in art or language <a felicity with words>
4
: an apt expression
---

In AF, are happiness and felicity considered to be the exact same thing?
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 4:09 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 4:05 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
I've often thought of it as wanting things to be the way they are. It feels like wellbeing/happiness/joy. so yea, it's basically happiness. however, there are alot of emotions others may classify as happiness which might not actually be felicity. things like pride, other positive emotions that are based on a specific cause. felicity seems to be not based on anything specific.

figuring out how to maximize this wanting to be here, this wellbeing, and how to minimize that other feeling good/bad about specific things, that is the first step to actual freedom, if following the actualist path. i can try to take you through some of my methods for these things, because i have a good handle on them. but i probably won't be able to take you all the way to PCE, mostly because it's really up to you, but also because i haven't had one (that i can remember and achieved on purpose)

all emotions want something, felicity is the closest to wanting nothing because it wants things to be the way they are right now. if you find yourself feeling happy and it doesn't have anything to do with some sort of specific condition like winning an argument or something like that, you are felicitous.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 4:13 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 4:13 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
josh r s:
I've often thought of it as wanting things to be the way they are. It feels like wellbeing/happiness/joy. so yea, it's basically happiness. however, there are alot of emotions others may classify as happiness which might not actually be felicity. things like pride, other positive emotions that are based on a specific cause. felicity seems to be not based on anything specific.

figuring out how to maximize this wanting to be here, this wellbeing, and how to minimize that other feeling good/bad about specific things, that is the first step to actual freedom, if following the actualist path. i can try to take you through some of my methods for these things, because i have a good handle on them. but i probably won't be able to take you all the way to PCE, mostly because it's really up to you, but also because i haven't had one (that i can remember and achieved on purpose)

all emotions want something, felicity is the closest to wanting nothing because it wants things to be the way they are right now. if you find yourself feeling happy and it doesn't have anything to do with some sort of specific condition like winning an argument or something like that, you are felicitous.


Makes sense, thanks!

I'm very interested in your methods, please share! emoticon
thumbnail
josh r s, modified 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 4:32 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/24/11 4:32 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 337 Join Date: 9/16/11 Recent Posts
alright.
first step for me is to enter into a specific type of attention which results for me when i notice the answer of "how am i experiencing this moment of being alive." i prefer to think of it as noticing the answer, when i think of it as asking the question, i end up thinking those words in my head which doesn't do any good. that specific type of attention that results from noticing that answer happens to correspond with something described perfectly by Jill here:

to me it would make the most sense to see to it that those affective or 'being' sensations are treated exactly the same way as every other sensation--no more, no less. no giving special attention or making them the focus, and no ignoring them or skipping over them to maintain felicity. this would best mimic the default panoramic and balanced attention of a being-less existence. if you give them special attention, you lose some of the panorama, and if you give them less attention you might be overlooking important stuff. this sounds like just giving them equal observation time as other sensations, but i also mean treating them with the same equanimity, appreciation, acceptance, non-condemnation, wonder and innocence as sensations of space, sight, sound, thought, touch, etc., so that you're constantly fusing those 'being bits' into the big panoramic sensation soup, whether you're 'pinballing' or chilling with everything at once. it doesn't make a difference if they feel suspended, solid, stuck, still, moving, heavy or subtle. if any sensations of being are there at all, there is some sort of unequal treatment of sensations going on, and that's what you want to de-condition. the more equal treatment, the more stuff gets seen, and the more stuff gets seen, the easier equal treatment becomes.


or maybe Jill arrived at this mode by asking HAIETMOBA... i dunno.

anyway, i use that sort of attention, trying to maximize how much i see at once, and how equal my attention to everything is. to me this is the same as haietmoba.

from this type of attention, pain, whether it is emotional or physical, is really not much of a problem. i can easily perceive everything as "just sensations" so it's not really "bad" when i'm upset or "good" when i'm proud. from this perspective of equanimity, i investigate what exactly is causing my good/bad feeling. whatever the desire is, i intellectually attack it from several angles.

angle 1: this desire is not helping me achieve the object of desire. (e.g. if i'm desiring getting a good grade on a test, i pay attention to the obvious fact that some electric impulse running through my nervous system or chemical hormone released from my brain or whatever is absolutely not going to change whether the answers i put down were right or wrong) in other words i attack the delusion that emotions give me power.

angle 2: following the path of desire only leads to more desire. even if i did get this thing i desire, i'll just start desiring something else. in other words i attack the delusion that following the messages of emotions will lead to fulfillment and permanence.

angle 3: this desire is based on imagined concepts. if I'm desiring something it is always based on imagined concepts such as connections and conflicts. if i desire that i win an argument, or in some other way give myself "power," i'm actually desiring something that doesn't exist. or even if i'm desiring that i or someone else survives, i'm desiring that an imagined identity survives, i'm not thinking about the body. notice here, that i'm not saying you should disregard the needs of actual bodies, but you may notice that your desire relating to survival is actually only the survival of the self rather than the body, in fact "you" could care less about a hunk of flesh and a heart pumping. in other words i attack the delusion that the psychologically concepts of identities actually exist.

this last angle is the most subtle. you probably see that the other ones are valid, but for me the one that really gets to the core and gets me back to felicity is that third thing. you have to notice that your desire for the welfare of yourself and others is the desire for the welfare of their imagined identities rather than their actual bodies. there is no desire present for the welfare of their actual bodies, and only when you are free of desires for helping identities can you begin to actually help the thing that truly exists, the bodies.

alright so there ya go. you get that specific form of attention, and then intellectually attack your desires. thats what works for me. the most important part of all of this for me when getting back to felicity is the attention mode and that third angle.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 8:01 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 8:01 AM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
josh r s:
alright.
first step for me is to enter into a specific type of attention which results for me when i notice the answer of "how am i experiencing this moment of being alive." i prefer to think of it as noticing the answer, when i think of it as asking the question, i end up thinking those words in my head which doesn't do any good. that specific type of attention that results from noticing that answer happens to correspond with something described perfectly by Jill here:

to me it would make the most sense to see to it that those affective or 'being' sensations are treated exactly the same way as every other sensation--no more, no less. no giving special attention or making them the focus, and no ignoring them or skipping over them to maintain felicity. this would best mimic the default panoramic and balanced attention of a being-less existence. if you give them special attention, you lose some of the panorama, and if you give them less attention you might be overlooking important stuff. this sounds like just giving them equal observation time as other sensations, but i also mean treating them with the same equanimity, appreciation, acceptance, non-condemnation, wonder and innocence as sensations of space, sight, sound, thought, touch, etc., so that you're constantly fusing those 'being bits' into the big panoramic sensation soup, whether you're 'pinballing' or chilling with everything at once. it doesn't make a difference if they feel suspended, solid, stuck, still, moving, heavy or subtle. if any sensations of being are there at all, there is some sort of unequal treatment of sensations going on, and that's what you want to de-condition. the more equal treatment, the more stuff gets seen, and the more stuff gets seen, the easier equal treatment becomes.


or maybe Jill arrived at this mode by asking HAIETMOBA... i dunno.

anyway, i use that sort of attention, trying to maximize how much i see at once, and how equal my attention to everything is. to me this is the same as haietmoba.

from this type of attention, pain, whether it is emotional or physical, is really not much of a problem. i can easily perceive everything as "just sensations" so it's not really "bad" when i'm upset or "good" when i'm proud. from this perspective of equanimity, i investigate what exactly is causing my good/bad feeling. whatever the desire is, i intellectually attack it from several angles.

angle 1: this desire is not helping me achieve the object of desire. (e.g. if i'm desiring getting a good grade on a test, i pay attention to the obvious fact that some electric impulse running through my nervous system or chemical hormone released from my brain or whatever is absolutely not going to change whether the answers i put down were right or wrong) in other words i attack the delusion that emotions give me power.

angle 2: following the path of desire only leads to more desire. even if i did get this thing i desire, i'll just start desiring something else. in other words i attack the delusion that following the messages of emotions will lead to fulfillment and permanence.

angle 3: this desire is based on imagined concepts. if I'm desiring something it is always based on imagined concepts such as connections and conflicts. if i desire that i win an argument, or in some other way give myself "power," i'm actually desiring something that doesn't exist. or even if i'm desiring that i or someone else survives, i'm desiring that an imagined identity survives, i'm not thinking about the body. notice here, that i'm not saying you should disregard the needs of actual bodies, but you may notice that your desire relating to survival is actually only the survival of the self rather than the body, in fact "you" could care less about a hunk of flesh and a heart pumping. in other words i attack the delusion that the psychologically concepts of identities actually exist.

this last angle is the most subtle. you probably see that the other ones are valid, but for me the one that really gets to the core and gets me back to felicity is that third thing. you have to notice that your desire for the welfare of yourself and others is the desire for the welfare of their imagined identities rather than their actual bodies. there is no desire present for the welfare of their actual bodies, and only when you are free of desires for helping identities can you begin to actually help the thing that truly exists, the bodies.

alright so there ya go. you get that specific form of attention, and then intellectually attack your desires. thats what works for me. the most important part of all of this for me when getting back to felicity is the attention mode and that third angle.


Great post! I have nothing to add but learned a lot from it. Thanks!
thumbnail
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem, modified 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 11:40 AM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 11:40 AM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 2227 Join Date: 10/27/10 Recent Posts
Simon L:
In AF, are happiness and felicity considered to be the exact same thing?


reading through this thread might be informative, as i asked what the difference between 'good' feelings and 'felicitous' feelings are.

after reading that: in my estimation, blissful feelings are 'good' ones. they keep 'me' around wanting to enjoy the bliss. you want to minimize the blissful feelings, and instead maximize the felicitous ones - just generally being happy, relaxed, equanimous, joyous, but not reveling in bliss.

there is nothing you have to do to get the blissful feelings to go away, though. when they come up, just observe them like anything else. don't be averse to them, but reflect on the fact that they are not the entrance in a PCE, and that might be enough to stop clinging to them.

Simon L:
I understand that in a PCE or in AF, there are no feelings at all. So I really don't know what to do with the feelings associated to felicity.

once you are feeling felicitous, don't do anything about those feelings. just activate sensuousness instead - pay exclusive attention to the senses. sight, sound, touch, each one as detailed as possible, yet each one as wide + panoramic as possible at the same time. more felicity allows more sensuousness allows more felicity allows more... until a PCE happens of its own accord.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 12:15 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 12:15 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:
Simon L:
In AF, are happiness and felicity considered to be the exact same thing?


reading through this thread might be informative, as i asked what the difference between 'good' feelings and 'felicitous' feelings are.

after reading that: in my estimation, blissful feelings are 'good' ones. they keep 'me' around wanting to enjoy the bliss. you want to minimize the blissful feelings, and instead maximize the felicitous ones - just generally being happy, relaxed, equanimous, joyous, but not reveling in bliss.

there is nothing you have to do to get the blissful feelings to go away, though. when they come up, just observe them like anything else. don't be averse to them, but reflect on the fact that they are not the entrance in a PCE, and that might be enough to stop clinging to them.

Simon L:
I understand that in a PCE or in AF, there are no feelings at all. So I really don't know what to do with the feelings associated to felicity.

once you are feeling felicitous, don't do anything about those feelings. just activate sensuousness instead - pay exclusive attention to the senses. sight, sound, touch, each one as detailed as possible, yet each one as wide + panoramic as possible at the same time. more felicity allows more sensuousness allows more felicity allows more... until a PCE happens of its own accord.


Makes perfect sense, thanks a lot!

Another question: I can't remember a PCE. Since Richard says that he believes that everyone has had one, but that it's often difficult to remember, I'm trying to find out if I in fact had one.

Any tips on remembering a PCE?
thumbnail
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem, modified 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 12:35 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 12:34 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 2227 Join Date: 10/27/10 Recent Posts
Simon L:
Another question: I can't remember a PCE. Since Richard says that he believes that everyone has had one, but that it's often difficult to remember, I'm trying to find out if I in fact had one.

Any tips on remembering a PCE?


i think there is a large spectrum of experiences that are close to a PCE. as my mode of attention became more sensuous, i started recalling times in my childhood and in the past, experiences that had a different 'flavor' than usual, yet that i didn't notice being out of the ordinary at all at the time. examples:

* swimming in swimming pools
* being at the beach
* hiking
* being on vacation
* being in romania (i was born there, moved to US when I was 5 or so)

i don't know whether i had PCEs, then, but there were definitely instances of an overall crisper way of living.

the thing to realize is there is nothing 'special' about them, in the emotional sense of the word. no bliss, nothing amazing - feeling-wise - happening, except the relative absence of them, which the self-influenced-mind isn't used to remembering as anything special cause there is a relative lack of self during them.

so i would say, focus as much as you can on sensuousness, as your day-to-day experience will definitely improve if you do it consistently throughout the day. as you do that, perhaps you will start getting impressions like "you know, this way of seeing the world is somehow familiar to me..." and take it from there.

at some point i was even convinced that most of my time as a child i spent in some such state or other, but now i'm not so sure. perhaps that is the case for most people, and as we get more + more entangled in a mesh of beliefs and identity-view, the experiences slowly stop happening, which is why so many people seem to get unhappier as they get older.
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 12:43 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 12:43 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:
Simon L:
Another question: I can't remember a PCE. Since Richard says that he believes that everyone has had one, but that it's often difficult to remember, I'm trying to find out if I in fact had one.

Any tips on remembering a PCE?


i think there is a large spectrum of experiences that are close to a PCE. as my mode of attention became more sensuous, i started recalling times in my childhood and in the past, experiences that had a different 'flavor' than usual, yet that i didn't notice being out of the ordinary at all at the time. examples:

* swimming in swimming pools
* being at the beach
* hiking
* being on vacation
* being in romania (i was born there, moved to US when I was 5 or so)

i don't know whether i had PCEs, then, but there were definitely instances of an overall crisper way of living.

the thing to realize is there is nothing 'special' about them, in the emotional sense of the word. no bliss, nothing amazing - feeling-wise - happening, except the relative absence of them, which the self-influenced-mind isn't used to remembering as anything special cause there is a relative lack of self during them.

so i would say, focus as much as you can on sensuousness, as your day-to-day experience will definitely improve if you do it consistently throughout the day. as you do that, perhaps you will start getting impressions like "you know, this way of seeing the world is somehow familiar to me..." and take it from there.

at some point i was even convinced that most of my time as a child i spent in some such state or other, but now i'm not so sure. perhaps that is the case for most people, and as we get more + more entangled in a mesh of beliefs and identity-view, the experiences slowly stop happening, which is why so many people seem to get unhappier as they get older.


This is very helpful. At this point I have enough great advice to continue my practice. Will report back in my own practice thread.
thumbnail
Harry Potter, modified 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 1:02 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 1:00 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 84 Join Date: 5/20/11 Recent Posts
Simon L:

Another question: I can't remember a PCE. Since Richard says that he believes that everyone has had one, but that it's often difficult to remember, I'm trying to find out if I in fact had one.

Any tips on remembering a PCE?


Ramp up felicity and innocuity first, and then the chances of PCE will greatly increase.

http://actualfreedom.com.au/richard/listafcorrespondence/listaf75a.htm#04Mar06

RESPONDENT: Richard ... I have a question. How do I induce a PCE?
RICHARD: The most simple (and thus mnemonical) answer to your question is: by allowing it to happen.
RESPONDENT: I ask and ask myself how it is I’m experiencing this moment of being alive and still there is no pure consciousness experience. I haven’t had one yet. How can I go about bringing one up?
RICHARD: It takes the felicity and innocuity of naiveté to bring about a PCE: where one is happy and harmless a benevolence and benignity which is not of ‘my’ doing operates of its own accord ... and it is this beneficence and magnanimity which occasions the PCE.
The largesse of the universe (as in the largesse of life itself), in other words.
RESPONDENT: Should I try and focus on what my senses are experiencing (i.e. paying attention to colours, noises, smells, textures, and such) and ignore feelings?
RICHARD: As what you are asking is, in effect, whether a PCE can be induced by focussing on sensate experience with a bored, nervous, scared, regretful, and etcetera, attentiveness the answer is: no.
RESPONDENT: Because when I ask myself how it is I’m experiencing this moment of being alive, I am always experiencing this moment of being alive through some feeling, usually a strong feeling (i.e. being bored, nervous, scared, regretful, etc.) and so I pay full-attention to my internal state and what’s going on in my psyche and I get all caught up in what’s going on in there so much so that I am not able to ‘live as these senses’.
RICHARD: The essence of the actualism method is to minimise both the ‘good’ feelings – the affectionate and desirable emotions and passions (those that are loving and trusting) – and the ‘bad’ feelings – the hostile and invidious emotions and passions (those that are hateful and fearful) – by nipping them in the bud as soon as, if not before, they start to occur via the explanatory article I copy-pasted for you, in response to your very first e-mail to this mailing list, a little over ten months ago.
This enables one to (initially) feel good, to (then) feel happy and harmless, to (eventually) feel perfect for 99% of the time (a virtual freedom) ... and by thus deactivating both the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ feelings, and therefore activating the felicitous/ innocuous feelings (happiness, delight, joie de vivre, bonhomie and so on), then with this freed-up affective energy maximised, in conjunction with sensuousness (delectation, enjoyment, appreciation, relish, zest, gusto and so on), the ensuing sense of amazement, marvel and wonder can result in apperceptiveness (unmediated perception).
In short: it is the on-going felicitous/ innocuous sensuousness which ensures a win-win situation.
RESPONDENT: Thus, I wonder that maybe I should switch my focus from paying attention to my internal state of affairs when asking myself how I’m experiencing this moment of being alive, to exclusively focusing on what is happening externally (sensately).
RICHARD: As what you are wondering is, in effect, whether apperception (unmediated perception) can be brought about by focussing on sensate experience with a bored, nervous, scared, regretful, and etcetera, attentiveness your wonder is entirely misplaced.
RESPONDENT: Any thoughts on that approach?
RICHARD: Just this: the more one enjoys and appreciates simply being alive – to the point of excellence being the norm – the greater the likelihood of a PCE happening ... a bored, nervous, scared, regretful, and etcetera, person has no chance whatsoever of allowing the magical event, which indubitably shows where everyone has being going awry, to occur.
It really is as straightforward as that.
thumbnail
Harry Potter, modified 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 1:05 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 1:05 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 84 Join Date: 5/20/11 Recent Posts
Simon L:
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:
Simon L:
Another question: I can't remember a PCE. Since Richard says that he believes that everyone has had one, but that it's often difficult to remember, I'm trying to find out if I in fact had one.

Any tips on remembering a PCE?


i think there is a large spectrum of experiences that are close to a PCE. as my mode of attention became more sensuous, i started recalling times in my childhood and in the past, experiences that had a different 'flavor' than usual, yet that i didn't notice being out of the ordinary at all at the time. examples:

* swimming in swimming pools
* being at the beach
* hiking
* being on vacation
* being in romania (i was born there, moved to US when I was 5 or so)

i don't know whether i had PCEs, then, but there were definitely instances of an overall crisper way of living.

the thing to realize is there is nothing 'special' about them, in the emotional sense of the word. no bliss, nothing amazing - feeling-wise - happening, except the relative absence of them, which the self-influenced-mind isn't used to remembering as anything special cause there is a relative lack of self during them.

so i would say, focus as much as you can on sensuousness, as your day-to-day experience will definitely improve if you do it consistently throughout the day. as you do that, perhaps you will start getting impressions like "you know, this way of seeing the world is somehow familiar to me..." and take it from there.

at some point i was even convinced that most of my time as a child i spent in some such state or other, but now i'm not so sure. perhaps that is the case for most people, and as we get more + more entangled in a mesh of beliefs and identity-view, the experiences slowly stop happening, which is why so many people seem to get unhappier as they get older.


This is very helpful. At this point I have enough great advice to continue my practice. Will report back in my own practice thread.


Don't fall into the trap of trying to be sensuous whilst being (even slightly) a bored, nervous, scared, regretful, and etcetera persona. See my response above.
thumbnail
Harry Potter, modified 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 1:17 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 1:17 PM

Being a man

Posts: 84 Join Date: 5/20/11 Recent Posts
Tommy M:
Strangely enough, I tend to exhibit these patterns of behaviour; I too subconsciously "play the game of wanting to seem like I'm not uptight while in the company of women". For fear of seeming foolish (or a beta male)? Ah, need more of naivete!

Nice one. Maybe look at the feelings related to "being a man", not alpha or beta, just the social expectations of playing this role.


The "game" of wanting to seem like one is not uptight is a more general behavioral pattern that occurs regardless of gender.

Therefore, I should admit that I am not very clear as to what comprises my male identity.

I know that a "man" is expected to be tough, "no soft" but how does this translate to everyday behavior? That is an interesting question. I don't have a clear-cut answer with regards to my experience. I can guess, though. I generally perceive the females to be more soft and loving as evidenced by their mellifluous talking, whereas as a male I tend to not do that. I am just not like that (which doesn't imply I perceive myself to be tough).

What is the take away from this with respect to actualism practice? Why would this help with increasing felicity and innocuity?

I have tendency to get into argument with people (happens rarely), but I don't see how this is part of the "male identity" for, even though the females tend to exhibit it less than the males, it happens for them too.

There is the male libido (wanting to fuck ever more women), but that is instinctual reaction, not social identity.

What "male identity" is overlaying the instincts? I don't feel the "provider role" for I've long renounced the family life. What else is there?

What about your male identity? Have you discovered aspects worth sharing here?
Simon L, modified 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 1:46 PM
Created 10 Years ago at 9/25/11 1:46 PM

RE: My challenge

Posts: 214 Join Date: 8/17/11 Recent Posts
Harry Potter:
Simon L:
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem:
Simon L:
Another question: I can't remember a PCE. Since Richard says that he believes that everyone has had one, but that it's often difficult to remember, I'm trying to find out if I in fact had one.

Any tips on remembering a PCE?


i think there is a large spectrum of experiences that are close to a PCE. as my mode of attention became more sensuous, i started recalling times in my childhood and in the past, experiences that had a different 'flavor' than usual, yet that i didn't notice being out of the ordinary at all at the time. examples:

* swimming in swimming pools
* being at the beach
* hiking
* being on vacation
* being in romania (i was born there, moved to US when I was 5 or so)

i don't know whether i had PCEs, then, but there were definitely instances of an overall crisper way of living.

the thing to realize is there is nothing 'special' about them, in the emotional sense of the word. no bliss, nothing amazing - feeling-wise - happening, except the relative absence of them, which the self-influenced-mind isn't used to remembering as anything special cause there is a relative lack of self during them.

so i would say, focus as much as you can on sensuousness, as your day-to-day experience will definitely improve if you do it consistently throughout the day. as you do that, perhaps you will start getting impressions like "you know, this way of seeing the world is somehow familiar to me..." and take it from there.

at some point i was even convinced that most of my time as a child i spent in some such state or other, but now i'm not so sure. perhaps that is the case for most people, and as we get more + more entangled in a mesh of beliefs and identity-view, the experiences slowly stop happening, which is why so many people seem to get unhappier as they get older.


This is very helpful. At this point I have enough great advice to continue my practice. Will report back in my own practice thread.


Don't fall into the trap of trying to be sensuous whilst being (even slightly) a bored, nervous, scared, regretful, and etcetera persona. See my response above.


Good point, I'll keep that in mind.