| home | links | notes | asemanari | impreuna | perfect | e.mail |
| cartea 1 | cartea 2 | cartea3 | cartea4 | cartea 5 | cartea 6 |
cartea 7 | cartea 8 | cartea9 | cartea 10 |
cartea 11 | cartea 12 |
cartea13 | cartea 14 | cartea 15 | cartea 16 | cartea 17 | cartea 18 |
cartea 19 |
cartea 20 | cartea 21 |
| cartea 22 | cartea23 | cartea24 | cartea 25 | cartea 26 |
cartea 27 | cartea 28 |
cartea 29 | cartea 30 | cartea 31 | cartea 32 |
cartea 33 | cartea 34 | cartea 35 | cartea 36 | cartea 37 |
cartea 38 |
cartea 39 | cartea 40 | cartea 41 |
| cartea 42 | cartea 43 | cartea 44 | cartea 45 | cartea 46 |
| cartea 47 | cartea 48 |
The Teachings Tape #11
Audio
What is Initiative-Resistance-Form-Result
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two frequent ideas in the teaching is that of "what is." "What is," is whatever one sees as fact, and the other idea that is frequently used is what "ought to be," or the "ideal."
This is what one sees as "good."
Now frequently one sees some fact and decides that it is not "good", that it has no value and of course, then there begins the struggle to change "what is" into something that one would see as "good", and, of course, this becomes conflict, struggle and resistance.
Now the teaching says "what is" has a value, now to be able to see that value, one might see that the "self" has many "ideals" or many ideas of what "ought to be," or many ideas of what is "good" or valuable, and that unless these two (what is and value) are seen in the same light, one has not seen TRUTH.
Now a fact is not what is referred to as TRUTH. It is a true state of affairs, it may be true what one sees; but it is not considered TRUTH with a capital T.
TRUTH with a capital T means that one sees what is and sees the value of "what is." And that, of course, is the ending of conflict, struggle and resistance; because when one sees "what is" and the value of it, X acts upon it; but as long as one sees "what is," something as being a fact, and the self suggests that that is not good, that "what is" ought to be something else, then comes the struggle, the conflict and the resistance.
Begin today to write down on two sheets of paper, one is headed "WHAT IS" and the other "WHAT OUGHT TO BE." Now we will see many things today that are "what is," facts.
We do not see that fact as having any value; we might see it as having a very negative value, it is something as being bad. Then we will see that the "self" begins to work as to that what is becoming "ought to be."
Write down under the "WHAT OUGHT TO BE," what we consider to be "good." In other words what "ought to be's" are considered to be illusions of what was "good," we haven't seen the good of "what is."
A child in school is given an assignment and he doesn't want to do the assignment. Now he knows "WHAT IS," but he doesn't see it as good, so he will procrastinate, he will fret, he will complain. He will make all manner of noise, say it is impossible, say the teacher is an old "meany" for having given him the assignment. Another child may see the assignment as being very worthwhile, in having value, in becoming proficient in the subject of whatever the assignment is concerned with, and he will find interest in doing the assignment, and very quickly the assignment is done. He has a very great sense of satisfaction in doing it. X operated upon the assignment because it was seen, of course, as "WHAT IS," which both agree on, and it is very difficult to argue with a fact, but is very easy to contend with the value of that fact; and also seen to be a VALUE and thereby come to TRUTH.
Now under the "WHAT OUGHT TO BE," we are going to write many of the things that we feel would be "good." The first thing that we probably feel would be "good" would be that I should always be comfortable. The "what is" possibly is that one is not comfortable. Now that has a value because being uncomfortable is a signal that one is struggling toward an illusion, that one is in some form of stress, then one can look for the stress. There are four possible ways of being in stress:
1. From the environment. There is sudden changes in temperature, there are jars, jolts and falls; toxicity in the air. If one is in a state of discomfort, it is telling one that it is in one form of stress, and one can then look for which form it is.
2. From the inner feeling.
3. Improper nutrition. One is not providing the fuel or seeing as good the fuel that is required for the body.
4. Unusual activity. Seeing as desirable some stressful activity, such as sitting at a desk for many months, etc., and then suddenly go out and go skiing or mountain climbing, etc.; one would find that this would bring about some sort of ache, pain or misery.
However, we have been conditioned. The "self" sees all discomfort as something bad and does not see it as a value and begins to look for some way to achieve the "ideal" of what "ought to be," so it uses drugs or many other methods to make one insensible so that one no longer receives the signal. One is only interested in what one sees as "good." Now, in beginning to observe the "self," one of the more valuable areas is to see what the "self " has considered to be "good." We have seen that it considers to be "good" to be totally nondisturbed physically, that it has been "good" to have attention.
Now one can gain attention by driving down the street at an excessive rate of speed or by doing unusual things.
And one can gain approval from certain people by agreeing with them, which may or may not be to one's advantage. One can gain approval by doing certain acts of daring, by performing very unusual feats, or by attempting to do them, to show that one is not chicken, that one is brave. And sometimes we see people do very foolhardy actions by trying to gain attention and approval.
One may feel important by lording it over other people, by gaining some means of control over others, either by suggestion or force or threats or by withholding or giving certain values that the one receiving sees.
As one observes, one sees there are many unusual values placed, and that in order to be conscious and to live in a different "state of being", that what he has held out as being "good," what one has accepted as being valuable or "good" is possibly one of the greatest areas of confusion.
When one sees something as "true", but some other "state" as being of value, there is conflict, there is struggle and resistance; which is the disintegrating factor. The struggle toward an illusion, an illusion that "what is" can be changed into fitting what the "self" has agreed is valuable or good.
Now very little effort is spent on seeing if "what is" is "good", on an entirely different viewpoint, one looks at it differently. We have suggested that there are four possible forces in the world.
INITIATIVE: Something I do; something one wants to originate, and then there is always RESISTANCE against that; whether it be gravity, distance or weather, whether it be someone or whether it is a given event. So second force comes along to obstruct in someway or resist what the origination was. But without this second force there wouldbe no strength or power. It is the same as if you tried to mold a ceramic dish without a moldof resistance to pour the liquid ceramic in so it could harden into the shape one wanted. Then one would have a FORM, so with initiative and resistance comes about the form and then the form provides a use, so we have four forces: INITIATIVE, RESISTANCE (which may be either active or passive) then the FORM and then the RESULT.
Now most of us see all second forces as something frustrating, something that interfered with the "ideal" of things being like I wanted them to be, like they "should be," and of course sees second force as misfortune, as evil, as something bad; and of course, the person resists that second force and thinks it "ought to be" without it, and this is one of the things that brings about the idea of what "ought to be," the "ideal."
Another ideal one would probably have is that one should know the future and could avoid every unpleasant situation. But if you know the future, the future is complete and includes oneself, so you see, if one could know the future, that a given accident was going to occur, one would have to go ahead and do it; otherwise, one only knows probabilities, and don't we already know probabilities?
There is a probability that if I take up thieving as a means of livelihood that I will be apprehended and thrown in prison; but I would have to go ahead, if I knew the future, I couldn't stop it, because otherwise I would not know the future, I would only know the probability.
Frequently, we hear someone in a given situation, they have been tied up in a snowstorm on the highway, and they say, "If I had only known this, I would not have left home," but if they would have known it, they would have had to leave home, and they would have gone on.
So one of the "ideals" would be to know the future; but possibly, if we reevaluate that, we would see that to know the future, would be the most painful hell anyone could ever experience. From the day you were born you knew every event that would happen and you knew exactly when it would happen and all the circumstances about it. You could do nothing to stop it or nothing to speed it up or nothing to slow it down. It would be a movie that you had already seen in advance and the movie was going to be run again. Could you imagine any more horrifying existence?
So we have seen that "what is," is we do not know the future, but we have seen that as bad; that we ought to be able to know the future, and then of course, only giving it a casual look, we felt we could change the future. But if we could foresee a given event and then change it, one wasn't knowing the future.
So what is, is reporting "what is" to X and seeing "what is" as good or valuable or worthwhile and X operated upon it. In this way man recognizes his oneness with X, with Spirit. If he could foresee, could change the future and change all the events in it, he would have no comprehension of X, he would never realize his oneness with X, that he was a function of X.
So "what is" is so designed by an Almighty, Loving Creator, that one would be given every opportunity to discover one's oneness with X.
One never knows the future. But regardless of what happens, if one sees "what is"and sees its value, X operates upon it. One then sees that one does not need to know the future, that everything is an ever changing, ever loving panorama of change, and one could be comfortable with change, comfortable with the unknown and recognize the oneness with X, the union with X.
If one could do what the "ideal" says, what "ought to be," what one has valued, one would be in a horrible state of existence; the most boring, the most tedious, the most fretful situation one could be in. One could see the whole panoramic future and see everything and know that it was coming. You know on a given day you are going to get burned, you are going to receive news that a loved one has passed away, there is nothing you can do if you know the future. Wouldn't that be horrible?
So as we begin to observe, we begin to reevaluate what the "self" has said is "good". Now the "self" is based upon the four dual basic urges, that the whole purpose of living is to be nondisturbed, to avoid all pain. But pain is the great signal that one is not reporting accurately to X, that we are walking into something that is destructive to the organism, to the entire state of being; destroying the awareness, the whole union of X and body and function, casting it asunder, and pain is the announcer that one is headed on that way.
Without that pain one would be totally insensible to everything that is destructive to the body, to the awareness, to existence even. So one begins to see that the "self " has accepted as "good" something that would be very damaging, and this is called RE-EVALUATION.
Another thing that the "self" has set up as "good" is that one should never be ignored or rejected. But one of the great teachers in the scriptures says that one should leap for joy when one is falsely accused and mistreated by other people.
Now if one sees this, then it gives one the "awareness" the opportunity to see where "one" is. It gives "one" a chance to see what "one" is valuing. It gives "one" a chance to see whether one is caught in the valuing of what "ought to be" or (the illusion), "one" has set up an "ideal".
It shows "one" that "one" is setting up an "ideal" of what is "good" and that "one" is seeing no value practically in "what is," but only in the "illusion."
As one follows this, one sees that a certain amount of "disapproval" is also very wonderful. Isn't it wonderful we can't control people. Because if we did, what kind of a creature would we be, that if we had the power to control every other person, we would be setting "self" up as a god.
"One" has set itself up as a god, the god of Darkness, MAMMON! That says what "ought to be" (the 'ideal") being what the "self" from the infant decision (the four dual basic urges) from Mammon says is "good."
When one sees what is, is true--the fact, but one then feels that what "ought to be," what would be "good," would be for a different fact to be in existence, one is then in a state of mental conflict, mental struggle, mental resistance, emotionally all torn up, and of course, reported to X one is in a terrible shape, an emergency.
X, then, prepares the body to fight or run, and of course, there is nothing to fight or run from. It is only because the "self" says that "what is," is not good and that what"ought to be" would be "good". So what we have got to do is to change "what is" into something that I call "good," and this is the world of the "self."
As I sees this, it also sees that it is necessary to totally dis-identify from the "self" and to begin to see value for I (the observer),
I begins to see the value of "what is."
Now before I can begin to see value in "what is" and begin to remotely operate the "self" entirely, it must be cleansed as we have seen. So the first thing it will do is write down all the things that the "self" reports as being "good."
Now in general terms, it would be good to be nondisturbed, to have pleasure and comfort and to escape pain; that I would have approval and escape all disapproval and that I would have lots of attention and escape being ignored and rejected, and that I am important, that everybody is controlled by me and I am not inferior because nobody fails to obey me, and then, of course, that complaining would change "what is" into something that would suddenly be what the one sees as "good." That sticking up for rights would change "what is" and that pleasing people would change "what is," and that believing and doing what I am told by authorities would change "what is" into something that I knew "ought to be," or that appearing to be different on the surface, putting on a different mask would change "what is," or that by blaming something, that it would change "what is."
However, "what is" is the fact--and a fact is very difficult to argue with. You see that the person wants to be a magician and change "what is" into something different that "one" would call "good", and as one observes, one knows very little about good and valuable in living experiences. One sees challenges as bad and sees lack of challenges as good. But if those are looked at, all challenges are good and every "what is" is a challenge. One would appreciate every changing "what is". Each one is a challenge, an opportunity for one to be more conscious and more aware and to further show up the fallacy of the "self," the "what ought to be."
As we have seen, when we see something for an illusion, we are no longer tempted to get involved or to identify with that illusion.
When you were a little child you probably heard the story that there was a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow; and if you ever lived in certain areas, possibly the foot of the rainbow looked like it was just a few feet away. It looked as though you could rush out and get the pot of gold, and wouldn't that be wonderful. But if you ever tried to chase a rainbow you always find it is a little further on the next hill. When you get to the next hill, it is on the next one and pretty soon you see the whole thing disappears.
And if someone should ever see that the ideas of the "self," of what "ought to be," are just as illusionary as that rainbow, one would cease to be tempted to identify with the ideas of the "self;"--that what "ought to be" is "good," and that "what is" is "bad," that it should be changed so that it would be "good".
Now the attempt to change a fact is the most impossible thing man knows, but it is very possible to re-evaluate the value of that fact, and one which did see the fact as being bad and wrong and everything concerned with it, can suddenly begin to see that it is good, it is a challenge, it gives me an opportunity to grow, to evolve, to be more conscious and to arise in conscious awareness and to be more obedient to one's nature, to report "what is" and its value.
You see X doesn't operate upon anything just because you say it is, we also must see its value, then you are reporting the truth to X.
Now if one reports that something is, but that it is bad, X, of course, doesn't operate upon it, and then one reports that what would be valuable would be to attempt to change "what is" into what it "ought to be," and that is the conflict, struggle and resistance that most everyone is in.
So in our sheet of paper we will see "what is" and then we will see on the other side what the "ideal is," what would be "good," and as we observe these, we can look at them and see the "illusion".
You'll find the re-evaluation begins to come about very easily. In fact, one is to begin to see the humor in the whole situation and begin to laugh at all the "ideals," all the "ought to be's," all the struggle that one has been through, through the years, trying to change "what is" into something that I could say is "good" and valuable. I don't see the challenge as being "good," "self " is totally upset with "what is."
Now most everyone sees what is true or the fact, that a given event is taking place, but let's observe that the "self" immediately evaluates that event; and very frequently says it is"bad," it is "not good", and then comes the struggle to change that "what is" into what "ought to be".
We can also see that the "self" is in a constant state of "expectation" that "what is" will be what the "self" calls "good" Then when "what is" comes along to give one an opportunity to solve--immediately there is the "self" judging it as "bad."
I will observe this; and we will write and carefully observe this all through the week, how "what is" is so frequently seen as bad, and how seldom it is seen as valuable or good.
Only as a man sees what is true and what is good does he see the truth, and they are always in agreement. There is never a conflict in truth.
"What is" does have a value when one is awake and sees it.
| cartea 1 | cartea 2 | cartea3 | cartea4 | cartea 5 | cartea 6 |
cartea 7 | cartea 8 | cartea9 | cartea 10 |
cartea 11 | cartea 12 |
cartea13 | cartea 14 | cartea 15 | cartea 16 | cartea 17 | cartea 18 |
cartea 19 |
cartea 20 | cartea 21 |
| cartea 22 | cartea23 | cartea24 | cartea 25 | cartea 26 |
cartea 27 | cartea 28 |
cartea 29 | cartea 30 | cartea 31 | cartea 32 |
cartea 33 | cartea 34 | cartea 35 | cartea 36 | cartea 37 |
cartea 38 |
cartea 39 | cartea 40 | cartea 41 |
| cartea 42 | cartea 43 | cartea 44 | cartea 45 | cartea 46 |
| cartea 47 | cartea 48 |
| home | links | notes | asemanari | impreuna | perfect | e.mail |