To: K-list
Recieved: 2003/09/22 12:21
Subject: [K-list] Philosophical question
From: elargonauto
On 2003/09/22 12:21, elargonauto posted thus to the K-list:
> Precesely all the logic of "spending an amount of energy
> to achive something" is a fake. If you don´t enjoy the trip
> you are not going anywhere.
*So you're stating that the logic saying that if I spend an
*amount of energy to lift up the stone from the ground I would
*eventualy lift it is fake?
Nope. You haven´t got the idea. I´m telling that if you live for
achive things instead for enjoying it, you are losing the point.
> *If the direction of your mind is bringing you to
> *the place of your choosing how can you call it 'serious
> *limitation of freedom'?!
>
> Then you are not directing your mind. Then you are not
> limitng yourselve.
*Let me rephrase the question: "If the direction of your mind
*commisioned by the power of your own will is bringing you to
*the place of your choosing how can you call it 'serious
*limitation of freedom'?!"
Your mind doesn´t need to be "comisioned" by the power of anything. It
just
do it´s duty as best as it can.
> Are you trying to tell me that "lettting the mind goe
> freely" is artificial?
*I didn't say anything about anything being or being not
*artificial. What I'm saying is that "lettting the mind goe
*freely" would be going down in the proces of evolution of life
*and concioussness.
So, do you think that stop being a slave from ideas that keep you split
and dumb is "going down in the proces of evolution of life and
conscioussnes"?.
> *If you can read the book absolutely focused and concentrated
> *without paying attention to concentration and focus at all
> *I'd say it's a bad material for the practise of the two if
> *you wanted it, and not only that -the 'pissed of thing' is
> *actualy the result of not having motivation to do it because
> *the necessity doesn't exist so it's a bad example.
> If I can read the book focused during four days it
> means that my mind is in harmony with my body. and the system
> works well.
> Where I can find motivation in doing something I don´t
> like and I´m not obligated to do? ( Answer. In lies or self-lies)
*I said "...if you _wanted_ it..." (in case there was a book beyond
*your understanding) and you're asking me for the motivation for
*something you don't like and not being obligated to do? Answer:
*In wanting or choosing. You could have simply deduced the answer
*yourself had you allocated more focus to what I was writing -but
*you didn't choose or want to.
Okey. I´ll refocus my question. How are you going to "choose" or
"want to" do something "you don´t like and you are not obligated to do"?
> > It´s like you are telling to me that you are not enough
> > intelligent to do what you think is correct and so you need to do
> > another thing.
>
> *No, I actually haven't yet chosen anything different from
> where *I'm now.
>
> That´s good. :)
*Like -its the first thing you agree with? :) LOL
I must agree that this the best part of the conversation. :).
> *And how did you conclude that the pain in a leg means it's
> *impossible to solve the problem?
>
> You should admit is going to make it more dificult.
*Maybe, but that doesn't make difficult equal impossible.
No, indeed. :).
> Everything that affects making a decision is related
> with thinking. The body is not giving you information for you
> to resolve this situation but is stoping you from doing so.
*It affects making a decision and you should listen to it -why do you
*have the need of labeling the 'listening of your body feedback' with
*'thinking with your body' -it only makes things more complicated and
*confused -what value do you see in that? Isn't it 'playing with
*details'?
If you wan to be "intelligent" you should do it.
> *How can you know the stomach was saying it was a bad thing
> to *do and how do you know he's right?
>
> How do you know when you are hungry or thirsty, when
> you are in love or when you can´t be with one person in the
> same room? Because you feel it.
*If you simply feel what is right and wrong why would you then
*complicate and 'use your body' to think about accepting or not
*a proposition anyway?
Precesely is your body the one who feels.
> *This should be the example of not being able to think with your hart?
>
> In a relationship, brain ( reasoning) doesn´t worth
> too much. There a lot of things in play, and lot of them
> doesn´t have to be very coherent. If you don´t let your
> sensations and feelings guide you, you are only going to fake it.
*Or not have it.
You can fake it the same if the relationship haven´t started yet.
> *This one is the same as the second example.
>
>
> Well more or less it is. But has little more thing.
> When you "force" your mind and your body to do things as
> "focus" or "concentrate" you go on storing tension and once
> your each a moment you get stucked. Your strategy thinking is
> leser and you start going in circles. Einstein knew something
> about it.
*My practical experience seems to show otherwise -namely, I was
*circling my whole life and now that I've 'focused', I've stopped.
*I don't go in no particular direction but I've stopped circling and
*believing I'm going somewhere, which I find better.
You can become focused naturally. Being "focused" and "go in
circles" doesn´t have to go together.
> *And you concluded that the mind is easier to manipulate than
> *the other organs because you see it easier for the society
> to *convince you in something in a decade than it is to your
> self *to convince your body to go exercising in 1 minute?
>
> What they do is convince you that you have to
> convince your body. When your body doesn´t have to be
> convinced of anything. It knows perfectly well what has to be done.
*Yes it does.
*It takes a a decade for the society to convince your mind and you
*say that mind is easier to be convinced then the body and then you
*say that your body doesn't need to be convinced at all.
*That's very inconsistent.
It have taken two thousand years ( a far more ) to create the
situation where we live now. And in all this time the body have remained
pure and true where the mind is loose in all kind of fantasies. Where is the
"inconsistence" now?
> I think you are trying to tell that the brain have
> a lower resistence intensity in a long term and the body high
> resistance intensity in a short term. So they are the same.
*It's like saying 50 hours of chill-out music and 10 seconds of
*techno are the same -well, think what you want ;)
Then we have understood each other. :).
> I think that´s not correct. I can convince you that
> agresivity is needed for having a good life, that discipline
> is what is need when you are going through a dificult time or
> that life is a long and ardous effort. ( All of them a lie,
> of course).
*It's only that you haven't included 10 years the society has
*already invested to make you a dumb ass not capable of thinking
*for himself (although the truth of convictions is arbitrary).
I think this is already answered at the "inconsistence" paragraph.
Chao!
elargonauto.
To get a reminder of your password or adjust your subscription, visit:
http://www.kundalini-gateway.org/mailman/listinfo/k-list_kundalini-gateway.org
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.