N said that remembering to do the CHALLENGE once a day, everyday, was difficult, but he remembered one or two scenarios where he had wanted to do something, like maybe eat something he shouldn't, and then stopped himself from doing so.
Sometimes he had remembered the challenge, but nevertheless gone ahead with eating the thing. He had had a few Magnums that week, because it had been so hot, and he thought, I really shouldn't do that, because it's not doing me any good to eat this stuff, but also there was a part of him which said To hell with it! Enjoy it! You only live once! So he went through that process, and didn't feel a great deal of shame or remorse about it afterwards. He did not think that any events that had occurred during the past month were ones that would cause him any real sense of remorse.
L said remorse might be like a human sense we were gifted with, which can help guide us. If we knew we were going to feel remorse, it was very often the wrong thing to do, but sometimes it was programmed by society that we should feel remorse. If we arrived at work late, maybe that was a job we shouldn't be doing anyway, which we had sold our soul for. So there was the matter of remorse that was programmed by society, which meant it was not always a reliable guide. He had had the instance of it several times with eating. Sometimes he would not eat something which would have been bad for him, but generally he had eaten things, as N had described eating things, and it was much easier to read the ingredients after eating them - 90% sugar! It was best to read them first!
Responding to L, RM said he got confused very often about whether he felt remorseful because of social conditioning, or was it a genuine thing that he should or shouldn't have done? If he was very religious and went to church regularly, he would have all sorts of things that he should or shouldn't do, and which were good or bad. If he belonged to ISIS, he would have a very different view of what he would be guilty about or not - he could kill people quite happily and have no remorse at all, if they were against his particular religion. So where did his remorse have any validity? Where did it come from? GC said it was conditioning by society. If you looked at a young child, did they feel remorseful if they did anything wrong? Of course not! They had not yet been not told they needed to be remorseful or guilty. N remembered saying something judgemental years ago, which he later on regretted, and felt a lot of remorse about for a long time afterwards. He did not think his reaction had been socially conditioned. It was a personal thing, inherent in terms of conscience and consciousness, where underneath it all, there was some Wisdom about human relationships. There was a part of him which did recognise these things, and there was a part of him that had been very judgemental in that situation.
Further contributions and responses to these contributions were made but nothing more pertained to contributions relevant to the challenge. Following the responses to the contributions, the reading continued from Chapter 24 of Beelzebub's Tales.
... Man also is therefore only a consequence of some preceding cause and in his turn must, as a result, be a cause of certain consequences.
... whatever maleficent means had been prepared by those learned beings assembled there from almost the whole planet for the gradual transformation of the Reason of their descendants into a veritable mill of nonsense, it would not have been, in the objective sense, totally calamitous; but the whole objective terror is concealed in the fact that there later resulted from these teachings a great evil, not only for their descendants alone, but maybe even for everything existing.
D asked what was this great evil? J said it was, perhaps, the result you hadn't anticipated, and then you looked back retrospectively and said it was all a little bit wrong because of the result, rather than because the process had been so wrong. T said she thought that the evil was concretised religion telling people what to do. GC asked, what about Gurdjieff telling people what to do? S thought it was about the myths that carried through the generations, that sometimes we did not even know we believed.
... The remnants, that is to say, of those holy ‘consciously-suffering-labors’ which he intentionally actualized for the purpose of creating, just for three-centered beings, such special external conditions of ordinary being-existence in which alone the maleficent consequences of the properties of the organ Kundabuffer could gradually disappear from their presences, so that in their place there could be gradually acquired those properties proper to the presence of every kind of three-brained being, whose whole presence is an exact similitude of everything in the Universe.
GC said he had understood the last sentence of this paragraph. T said it was one sentence. L said the final phrase suggested as above so below, and that we were in some ways similar to the whole universe. S said there were three centres, and they did not co-ordinate, they did not agree. Knowing yourself truly was about knowing the different centres, and attaining those three characters. T asked if it was saying that the universe was a three-brained being.
|
Once a day, become aware that you are about to do something for which you will feel remorse, and therefore refrain from doing it.
|
L said remorse might be like a human sense we were gifted with, which can help guide us. If we knew we were going to feel remorse, it was very often the wrong thing to do, but sometimes it was programmed by society that we should feel remorse. If we arrived at work late, maybe that was a job we shouldn't be doing anyway, which we had sold our soul for. So there was the matter of remorse that was programmed by society, which meant it was not always a reliable guide. He had had the instance of it several times with eating. Sometimes he would not eat something which would have been bad for him, but generally he had eaten things, as N had described eating things, and it was much easier to read the ingredients after eating them - 90% sugar! It was best to read them first!
Responding to L, RM said he got confused very often about whether he felt remorseful because of social conditioning, or was it a genuine thing that he should or shouldn't have done? If he was very religious and went to church regularly, he would have all sorts of things that he should or shouldn't do, and which were good or bad. If he belonged to ISIS, he would have a very different view of what he would be guilty about or not - he could kill people quite happily and have no remorse at all, if they were against his particular religion. So where did his remorse have any validity? Where did it come from? GC said it was conditioning by society. If you looked at a young child, did they feel remorseful if they did anything wrong? Of course not! They had not yet been not told they needed to be remorseful or guilty. N remembered saying something judgemental years ago, which he later on regretted, and felt a lot of remorse about for a long time afterwards. He did not think his reaction had been socially conditioned. It was a personal thing, inherent in terms of conscience and consciousness, where underneath it all, there was some Wisdom about human relationships. There was a part of him which did recognise these things, and there was a part of him that had been very judgemental in that situation.
Further contributions and responses to these contributions were made but nothing more pertained to contributions relevant to the challenge. Following the responses to the contributions, the reading continued from Chapter 24 of Beelzebub's Tales.
... Man also is therefore only a consequence of some preceding cause and in his turn must, as a result, be a cause of certain consequences.
... whatever maleficent means had been prepared by those learned beings assembled there from almost the whole planet for the gradual transformation of the Reason of their descendants into a veritable mill of nonsense, it would not have been, in the objective sense, totally calamitous; but the whole objective terror is concealed in the fact that there later resulted from these teachings a great evil, not only for their descendants alone, but maybe even for everything existing.
D asked what was this great evil? J said it was, perhaps, the result you hadn't anticipated, and then you looked back retrospectively and said it was all a little bit wrong because of the result, rather than because the process had been so wrong. T said she thought that the evil was concretised religion telling people what to do. GC asked, what about Gurdjieff telling people what to do? S thought it was about the myths that carried through the generations, that sometimes we did not even know we believed.
... The remnants, that is to say, of those holy ‘consciously-suffering-labors’ which he intentionally actualized for the purpose of creating, just for three-centered beings, such special external conditions of ordinary being-existence in which alone the maleficent consequences of the properties of the organ Kundabuffer could gradually disappear from their presences, so that in their place there could be gradually acquired those properties proper to the presence of every kind of three-brained being, whose whole presence is an exact similitude of everything in the Universe.
The Three Body Problem has not been solved Source: Imgur |
No comments:
Post a Comment