The Fact of Death

One year on how is your view on death. The same or different?This message has been edited by iano, 06-May-2006 12:47 AM

In that case the best thing I can think of to do at this moment is to pray for you.G'Night Robin..

I remember my Dad talking to me about life being a series of opening and closing doors. Each era (I say that for simplicities sake) held open the prospect of accomplishing in areas of life optimally belonging to that era. His example was waking up one day only to realise that he would never again run an athletic mile. He was no athlete but there was a time when he had the frame of mind which would be able to accomplish this physical challenge. To run just as fast as he could for one mile. Life moved on and the prospect of doing such a thing left him without his being aware it was leaving - until one morning he realised that it was gone. That it had been gone for a number of years.His physical condition would allow him to run a mile alright - but no longer an athletic one (athletic, he wryly defined, was "where the pleasure of accomplishment far outweighed the pain involved"). He could always run a non-athletic mile ("where the pleasure of accomplishment would fall far short of the pain that would be involved!"). This door was now shut to him.As we live our lives we pass from one era to another. Doors closing behind us, that being extracted by way of accomplishment achieved to a greater or lesser degree. The record of accomplishment being frozen forever. But then another door opens (the process isn't as abrupt as this; there is overlap and gradual transition in fact - I’m simplifying here).Disappointment doesn't come in those earlier days. Then, one door closing doesn't matter much, for a new door has just opened. And it has opened onto fresh, new pastures. The accomplishment of doing well in ones final school year contains a barer, autumnal-like potential for achievement when compared to the springtime of ones fresher year at an away-from-home university. There is too much to accomplish at this moment to worry too much about what was not accomplished in the last. Accomlplishment is the name of the game then.Disappointment does come at some point - and in twofold fashion. Firstly, we become aware (if not necessarily consciously)that life is in fact about old doors closing and new doors opening. We realise too that doors to fresh, new pastures have dried up. Running out (or having run out) of a resource makes us acutely aware of how precious the stuff actually is and how wasteful of it we were at the time. "If only I had known, I would have extracted the maximum out of it - I would have played my hand far better". This wastefulness of ours allied to the impossibility of trully rectifying it, leads to disappointment in ourselves. "You fool" I have often said to myself.Then there is that which refines and intensifies the disappointment. It is the fact that the new doors open to us (for there are many still) are doors behind which lies not freshness and newness, but decay and death. Not springtime doors, not summer doors but doors into autumn and winter.Little wonder that 40 is around the age that many have a mid-life crisis. It is then that a first glimpse of the transition from life doors to deaths door might be obtained. A view that curiously, motivates us go out and buy powerful, red sports cars. A vain attempt to have a second bite of the cherry(ing), to accomplish in this era what wasn’t in the era now closed to us. An attempt to claw back the unclawbackable.The more objective one is about ones life the more disappointed one will be. The more the desire to rectify the wrongs, the more acute the pain of not being able to do so. It can be a powerful tool.Jesus did say "Blessed are the poor in spirit for they shall inherit the earth" Disappointment is poverty of spirit made manifest.This message has been edited by iano, 06-May-2006 12:42 PM

---

"A Christian is just one beggar telling other beggars where to find bread."

Only if ones view is that life is about accomplishment. See if you can guess who this is...

quote:

---

All he ever really wanted in life was more. He wanted more money, so he parlayed inherited wealth into a billion-dollar pile of assets. He wanted more fame, so he broke into the Hollywood scene and soon became a filmmaker and star. He wanted more sensual pleasures, so he paid handsome sums to indulge his every sexual urge. He wanted more thrills, so he designed, built, and piloted the fastest aircraft in the world. He wanted more power, so he secretly dealt political favors so skillfully that two U. S. presidents became his pawns.

​

All he ever wanted was more. He was absolutely convinced that more would bring him true satisfaction. Unfortunately, history shows otherwise. He concluded his life emaciated; colorless; sunken chest; fingernails in grotesque, inches-long corkscrews; rotting, black teeth; tumors; innumerable needle marks from his drug addiction.

​

Howard Hughes died believing the myth of more. He died a billionaire junkie, insane by all reasonable standards.

---

Life is not about accomplishing things. If we insist that it is we will either be disappointed or become helpless junkiesEvery spring new life emerges in nature, new hope, new things to be accomlished. And every winter, a disappointed creation dies - coming up against the same failure we do. Death is the star of the show.Nature mirrors the course of our lives exactly. Intentionally so.How does one learn lessons.? By repeatedly coming up against the same problem again and again and again. Neither natures disappointment nor our own should be left unexamined. I think the purpose of disappointment is to teach. Teach us that we cannot accomplish what our knower(ing) knows is accomplishable

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with accomplishment Schraf. I was responding to Robins statement: I was taking it that he meant "accomplishment is how you measure" as a raison d'etre. I take the view that if that were the case then, objectively, either:Disappointment: I have not accomplished enough given what I know I could have...orAccomplishment-junkieism (no one can never accomplish what one is able to, but one can chase, like a junkie, after the wind).Naturally, if one is totally subjective about it then the Slob will not be disappointed (he's doing his best) and the Accomplisher won't feel themselves hooked (their still busy so the jury is out. Delay the disappointment (assuming again that accomplishment is lifes raison d'etre)Level of disappointment I said, was a measure of the objectivity with which one measured themselves - according to the standard for life, to whit: accomplishEdit to clarify.This message has been edited by iano, 06-May-2006 04:25 PMThis message has been edited by iano, 06-May-2006 06:59 PM

If we can all do better all the way down the line, how can we wonder on our dying day whether we have "done our best"? Patently we haven't - since we have known all along we could have done better.The only escape from that that I can see, is to consider all the circumstances and factors as stuff beyond our control. I am selfish, impatient, arrogant and cruel. If I consider those as mere "circumstances and factors" then on my dying day I can doubtlessly consider myself as having done my best. Given the circumstances.I'm a wriggler Phat, but there are limits beyond which even I won't thread...

Is there some way you could give that plain English hands and feet Lfen. In other words, something with which to propel oneself along the path towards the idea. Take my knowledge of the fact (more evidence of it that ToE) that I am insensitive, impatient, arrogant and cruel.Accepting it seems to me (weak) to allow myself to continue in it. But I would suspect there is more (strong) behind what you say - that accepting it would somehow dissolve it.How so?This message has been edited by iano, 06-May-2006 11:52 PM

I'll go through your post piece by piece Ifen... I am proud, kind, loving, deceitful, selfish, compassionate, boastful,humorous,ambitious, complex, deluded, confident, arrogant, (hang on a sec..kettles boiling) greedy, attentive, inattentive, ugly, helpful, generous, beautiful, simple...is it THAT late?Don't get me too wrong Lfen. That was topic-specific brevity. I'm a person like any other. No more, no less. Okay...but no weight attached because of it (I won't say "God says" in return..I promise) The latter. I'm working my way down to what (I think) the essence of your post is but on the way I'm just answering questions. Probably not...but it is plain English constuct - so there is a potential for that, granted. Okay, lets look... The errors will be compounded in this problem "What is a human being?" presumably. Fair enough. The 'I' sits at the root of it all Most all of what you have said can be granted (should we desire not to argue) on the basis of everyman-experience. This last point diverges from plain English and plain experience (to me at least). Could you clarify in plain English?I'll delay dealing with the rest as it is here that the wires are getting crossed

Drug are the same the (eternal) world over Lfen. They seek and gain entry via the pride in a man.I'm heading to bed but will have a fresh read tomorrow.G'Night

My reference to drugs was a propensity to write evangelical rethoric and not focus on the gospel. Pride is the drug which causes that. Thinking I can save a man by writing rethoric. I cannotAnyway. It is this bleeding edge where the crux most certainly lies and I am going to attempt to understand your viewpoint. Again piece by piece Okay I get the basic idea. It seems to describe the central attribute of consciousness.. Okay. There is this consiousness. I can't prove mine to you nor you yours to me. But we assume for the sake of arguement that we both know that we have one and that they are more or less similar - before we start assigning a potential source Okay. "I" is the issue. Pity about the plain English divergence but if you'd like to try perhaps we can continue a little Now we better slow down a little for my sake. The Buddha, initially was a person like you or me presumably. He wondered about the 'I' too. But what is 'mind' firstoffI see your here at the moment so will post this and look at the rest while I wait for a response

..continued 'Awakened' is obviously something which would be next to be examined for mechanism or process Is there an 'and' missing here? It doesn't read well. Again we would have to get to this more slowly and methodically. Many paths to the summit as it were but all containing some trancedent idea making the route irrelevant. The idea we'll be probably investigating Could you give a simple working definition of non-dual for the sake of clarity. Its a new term for me and I don't want to cross wires here Again probably this needs expansion. I don't see the 'I am' as the body either. The body is a vehicle for the 'I am' (does that mean I'm not not-dual but dual?)The root of the problem. What was the problem he was addressingForgive the ignorance Lfen but this stuff is new to me. I read Zen and the Art once but tended to skip to the motorcycle bits Also, if you can think of a step wise approach so that this is kept manageable then I'd appreciate it. You can see that all I can do is ask questions. But if your answer will mean I have to ask a bunch more then I won't be able to follow.What is the critical issue - like say salvation is in Christianity - and spread from there? I don't know if this lends itself to such an approach

I was doing what I suppose the Buddha was doing only last night. I was lying dozing off to sleep when suddenly a thought occurred in my 'mind'. It would be classified in the Christian context as a temptation. Just a notion, just a brief snapshot, a 3 second piece of video. For all intents and purposes "out of the blue".I bolted awake. I refused to allow my thoughts to pick up the thread of the snapshot and to run off down the direction of developing and expanding on the initial idea. Instead I directed my thoughts elsewhere - namely to going back to sleep. Thoughts were a vehicle which I could steer. Separate to 'I'Having been here before I know to keep my hand on the steering wheel. And sure enough, once awake to the notion, my thoughts took a wander over to the verge for a second bite of the cherry (attempted cherrying?). Again I steered them away. Now I am fully alert to my mind in action. I direct my thoughts away and let them meander along. My mind initially seemed happy to whistle innocently, looking anywhere but at this while I was paying close attention. No sooner have I relaxed the observation and direction and its Whoops! there it goes again. Trying to raid the cookie jar! Yanked back this time with a firm "No!" and a prayer.Three strikes and it was out, on this occasion and I dozed off again.Point being, Lfen. I was observing my mind at work. But 'I' wasn't my mind or my thoughts. I was observing my mind at work. It had a life of it own. I was acting like a 'parent' to 'its child'This message has been edited by iano, 08-May-2006 03:44 PM

Dealing with the first half of this paragraph. From the story above it seems clear that 'I' is independant of (and sits 'above') my thoughts. 'I' is not what I think. 'I' can observe thinking going on. 'I', it appears to me, is the consciousness. If so, then it cannot leave consciousness (itself). Unless there is some other division to cleaved in this 'I' level.If we can figure out what/how this occurs then we could perhaps be able to deal with the second half of the paragraph. Evangelical rhetoric you mean! Kettle Pot Black Lfen. Kettle, pot, black! I was right just to read the motorcycling bits then... That's about it. Although I'm not a Calvinist. I get the paralell. Dealing with the same issues but arriving at a different conclusion. Good. At least the thinking attempts to be complete.Lets take a look at prior to awakening. Can we safely take it at this point that the invidi(dual!) is not thoughts, emotions, body etc. That the individual can be boiled down to the 'I' as I described in my last post. In that case we can reword what you say above as:

quote:

---

The individual wakes up and realises it is not the individual but the source of the individual

---

I has asked yesterday about both 'mind' and 'awakening'. Perhaps it is time to look at this awakening. How an 'I' awakens to realise it is not an 'I' but the source of the 'I'. Ramana seemed to have arrived at this place. One would presumably want to know where this 'I' came from. How the jump to this realisation. We shouldn't pre-suppose that because someone lost the sense of self that the self was actually gone anywhere. We need to arrive at this conclusion slowly.Although I agree with the mischief and suffering bitThis message has been edited by iano, 08-May-2006 11:37 AM

Me too...

I(sic) have. I was bitching to myself about my mother one time when POW!. A few minutes of something happening through me that wasn't from me. It manifested itself as Total, Complete, Overwhelming Love for my mother. Not love I was capable of, but me observing (being shown) just how lovable my mother is.It lasted a couple of minutes IIRC. Something similar a few months later w.r.t. my father though Less intense.I forgot about it as soon after it happened and carried on my not-so merry way.This message has been edited by iano, 08-May-2006 12:30 PM