|
|
Post by theo on Jan 27, 2013 11:01:51 GMT -8
enigma wrote :
" While happiness is dualistic, defined by our experience of unhappiness, inner peace is not."
Now, can we be in innerpeace while unhappy ?
|
|
|
|
Post by beingist on Jan 27, 2013 11:10:23 GMT -8
'Inner peace', per se, is the Self, just being what it is.
The 'I' can be happy or unhappy, at any given moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2013 11:22:57 GMT -8
enigma wrote : " While happiness is dualistic, defined by our experience of unhappiness, inner peace is not."Now, can we be in innerpeace while unhappy ? Yup. Mind/body identification is also identification with feelings, so if there is 'feeling unhappy', it's interpreted as 'I am unhappy', and naturally something has to be done about that so that you can be something else, like happy. Thoughts and feelings contain the full range of what one can be as a mind, and even inner peace is turned into a thought/feeling. Mind hears 'inner peace' and imagines a feeling brought about by certain thought conditions. However, feelings, just like thoughts, are not what you are, just happening appearing to you. It's not 'I AM unhappy', but rather 'Unhappiness is happening'. What I am is the Peace within which that happening is observed. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2013 11:31:10 GMT -8
'Inner peace', per se, is the Self, just being what it is. The 'I' can be happy or unhappy, at any given moment. Yes, happy/unhappy are still mutually defining polarities that continue to happen, but they are not the same thing as suffering, which is why I see it as important to identify the precise point of suffering. Those who believe that these experiences are replaced with permanent joy are still relying on conditional feelings for their freedom. (the one-ended stick) Freedom cannot have any conditions or it is not freedom. |
|
|
|
Post by theo on Jan 27, 2013 11:36:24 GMT -8
So, unhappyness can happens although not identified with it ?
So, unhappyness can happens while in inner peace ?
|
|
|
|
Post by beingist on Jan 27, 2013 11:40:45 GMT -8
So, unhappyness can happens although not identified with it ? Yep. Yep. |
|
burt
Member
Posts: 198
|
Post by burt on Jan 27, 2013 11:54:02 GMT -8
So, unhappyness can happens although not identified with it ? So, unhappyness can happens while in inner peace ? In the article, the distinction is made between happiness that's defined by unhappiness and happiness that's realized. To the mind's ear this sounds like a one-sided stick, that's because the mind, in defining absence, defines something that isn't an absence. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2013 12:08:10 GMT -8
So, unhappyness can happens although not identified with it ? So, unhappyness can happens while in inner peace ? Yes. The only thing that makes negative feeling seem like suffering is the identification with it; the projection of the 'me' into the feeling as the one who IS unhappiness. Feelings rise and fall and parade across your field of awareness just as objects, thoughts and sense perceptions do. You don't suffer because a tree parades across your field of awareness because you don't identify yourself as the tree. You don't suffer when a branch breaks off and you're not proud about your new set of spring leaves. Feeling is just another tree parading around in front of you. Many will turn feeling into something almost sacred because that's what they see as the bottom line to their freedom from suffering. They don't know that what they are is already Peace, Love and contentment, and that these are not dualistic feelings. |
|
|
|
Post by theo on Jan 27, 2013 12:19:24 GMT -8
So, unhappyness can happens although not identified with it ? So, unhappyness can happens while in inner peace ? Yes. The only thing that makes negative feeling seem like suffering is the identification with it; the projection of the 'me' into the feeling as the one who IS unhappiness. Feelings rise and fall and parade across your field of awareness just as objects, thoughts and sense perceptions do. You don't suffer because a tree parades across your field of awareness because you don't identify yourself as the tree. You don't suffer when a branch breaks off and you're not proud about your new set of spring leaves. Feeling is just another tree parading around in front of you. Many will turn feeling into something almost sacred because that's what they see as the bottom line to their freedom from suffering. They don't know that what they are is already Peace, Love and contentment, and that these are not dualistic feelings. Let's be specific and factual: Within (my) nobody-nothingness, these days a terrible sadness. I don't feeel identified with it. It is not the whole of the content of my individual experience. Still it is there unmovable and i am not different from it although not identified with it. actually i'm not quite sure i can say anything right to the point. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2013 12:25:17 GMT -8
So, unhappyness can happens although not identified with it ? So, unhappyness can happens while in inner peace ? In the article, the distinction is made between happiness that's defined by unhappiness and happiness that's realized. To the mind's ear this sounds like a one-sided stick, that's because the mind, in defining absence, defines something that isn't an absence. Yeah, there's obviously a language problem involved in trying to bridge the gap between feeling and being. That is, between feeling happy as a way of avoiding suffering and being what one is as a way of not suffering. In this distinction, the dualistic feeling of peace is not what one is as Peace. Likewise, the dualistic feeling of love is not the being of Love. The being of Peace and the being of Love merge into one by virtue of being it. From Being, Love, Peace and Self are the same. There is no distinction. |
|
burt
Member
Posts: 198
|
Post by burt on Jan 27, 2013 12:40:04 GMT -8
I will specifically refrain from asking how one communicates without making distinctions!
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2013 13:36:35 GMT -8
I will specifically refrain from asking how one communicates without making distinctions! I didn't really mean to say anything about that. |
|
burt
Member
Posts: 198
|
Post by burt on Jan 27, 2013 14:21:59 GMT -8
That was my impression ... which is why, of course, I refrained from asking that question.
|
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jan 27, 2013 14:40:37 GMT -8
That was my impression ... which is why, of course, I refrained from asking that question. Okay, then.....well done!  |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jan 27, 2013 20:08:08 GMT -8
That was my impression ... which is why, of course, I refrained from asking that question. Yet you still put it on the table.  |
|
