Control is on the inside

[Esponja]

Ok I’ll bravely start a thread😬

I’d like to discuss ‘control’.

With everything that is going on in the world, I keep coming back to ‘the only control we have is on the inside’.’ So to me, if we have to go down this path of surveillance and forced injections, we should accept ‘what is’. Control what we can, us.

For me, the line is blurred, how do we know when we should stand against something or speak out?

I could explain further but think I’ll leave it there to gather differing opinions.

[Gopal]

Feb 10, 2021 0:08:22 GMT Esponja said:

Ok I’ll bravely start a thread😬

I’d like to discuss ‘control’.

With everything that is going on in the world, I keep coming back to ‘the only control we have is on the inside’.’ So to me, if we have to go down this path of surveillance and forced injections, we should accept ‘what is’. Control what we can, us.

For me, the line is blurred, how do we know when we should stand against something or speak out?

I could explain further but think I’ll leave it there to gather differing opinions.

We are dreaming the entire physical world like our nightly dream, not even a dust would hit us unless we create that experience for us.  So we have complete control over the dream but unfortunately we don't have the conscious control over it, or you can't change any of the dream sequence through your actions. We can change the unfolding events through our clarity. For an example, when we continue chase a particular experience(Desire for), we will never get it. But once we accept our current condition as it is, this inner acceptance drastically brings our desired experience which we have been chasing so far. But the important thing is, we can not expect secretly when we accept it, that would not be a real acceptance. Once after the real acceptance, we can not really expect anything beyond what we have.

[Esponja]

Feb 10, 2021 3:21:04 GMT Gopal said:

Feb 10, 2021 0:08:22 GMT Esponja said:

Ok I’ll bravely start a thread😬

I’d like to discuss ‘control’.

With everything that is going on in the world, I keep coming back to ‘the only control we have is on the inside’.’ So to me, if we have to go down this path of surveillance and forced injections, we should accept ‘what is’. Control what we can, us.

For me, the line is blurred, how do we know when we should stand against something or speak out?

I could explain further but think I’ll leave it there to gather differing opinions.

We are dreaming the entire physical world like our nightly dream, not even a dust would hit us unless we create that experience for us.  So we have complete control over the dream but unfortunately we don't have the conscious control over it, or you can't change any of the dream sequence through your actions. We can change the unfolding events through our clarity. For an example, when we continue chase a particular experience(Desire for), we will never get it. But once we accept our current condition as it is, this inner acceptance drastically brings our desired experience which we have been chasing so far. But the important thing is, we can not expect secretly when we accept it, that would not be a real acceptance. Once after the real acceptance, we can not really expect anything beyond what we have.

I always get stuck here because when you look at the quantum laws it seems we do indeed have a lot more say than we realise, yes that means feeling whole not in lack and chasing the dream.

[Andrew]

Feb 10, 2021 0:08:22 GMT Esponja said:

Ok I’ll bravely start a thread😬

I’d like to discuss ‘control’.

With everything that is going on in the world, I keep coming back to ‘the only control we have is on the inside’.’ So to me, if we have to go down this path of surveillance and forced injections, we should accept ‘what is’. Control what we can, us.

For me, the line is blurred, how do we know when we should stand against something or speak out?

I could explain further but think I’ll leave it there to gather differing opinions.

For me, it's always about the path of least resistance.

Obviously I value Abe-Hicks, and their whole thing is ''focus on your desires and ignore what you don't like or don't want'',   and I 'get' that totally.  But, for me, if there is tension or conflict in the ignoring, then I will engage or address whatever is bothering me. That's the path of least resistance. 

The other aspect for me, is that I am drawn to talk to, and connect with people sometimes. That's part of being in joy at times. But again, the path of least resistance for me in that communication is to engage in a way that is at least somewhat 'true' for me. I can't just 'ignore' if one of my friends was to say, 'Ah, Bill Gates, what a hero!' lol. That doesn't mean I then jump on them in rage, but I might feel moved to provide an alternative view. There's even an enjoyment for me to an extent,  in the challenge of trying to find a way to offer a perspective that questions but doesn't alienate (I don't often see value in alienating people).

So for me, there's a general navigating all of this. On one hand, I very much do pay attention to my 'vibe' and focus. On the other hand, if there is conflict and energy required to maintain that vibe, then sometimes it's better for me to just accept that it's time to engage and get a bit messy. 

[Esponja]

Feb 10, 2021 10:07:51 GMT Andrew said:

Feb 10, 2021 0:08:22 GMT Esponja said:

Ok I’ll bravely start a thread😬

I’d like to discuss ‘control’.

With everything that is going on in the world, I keep coming back to ‘the only control we have is on the inside’.’ So to me, if we have to go down this path of surveillance and forced injections, we should accept ‘what is’. Control what we can, us.

For me, the line is blurred, how do we know when we should stand against something or speak out?

I could explain further but think I’ll leave it there to gather differing opinions.

For me, it's always about the path of least resistance.

Obviously I value Abe-Hicks, and their whole thing is ''focus on your desires and ignore what you don't like or don't want'',   and I 'get' that totally.  But, for me, if there is tension or conflict in the ignoring, then I will engage or address whatever is bothering me. That's the path of least resistance. 

The other aspect for me, is that I am drawn to talk to, and connect with people sometimes. That's part of being in joy at times. But again, the path of least resistance for me in that communication is to engage in a way that is at least somewhat 'true' for me. I can't just 'ignore' if one of my friends was to say, 'Ah, Bill Gates, what a hero!' lol. That doesn't mean I then jump on them in rage, but I might feel moved to provide an alternative view. There's even an enjoyment for me to an extent,  in the challenge of trying to find a way to offer a perspective that questions but doesn't alienate (I don't often see value in alienating people).

So for me, there's a general navigating all of this. On one hand, I very much do pay attention to my 'vibe' and focus. On the other hand, if there is conflict and energy required to maintain that vibe, then sometimes it's better for me to just accept that it's time to engage and get a bit messy. 

Yes, I think I am doing that naturally. Lately, I find myself avoiding people who I know are really of opposing opinions if I’m in a frustrated or agitated state myself. That is helpful actually because I was struggling to see that control is an illusion, I think we always have the power to choose how we respond but actually sometimes we don’t.

[Andrew]

Feb 10, 2021 15:09:15 GMT Esponja said:

Feb 10, 2021 10:07:51 GMT Andrew said:

For me, it's always about the path of least resistance.

Obviously I value Abe-Hicks, and their whole thing is ''focus on your desires and ignore what you don't like or don't want'',   and I 'get' that totally.  But, for me, if there is tension or conflict in the ignoring, then I will engage or address whatever is bothering me. That's the path of least resistance. 

The other aspect for me, is that I am drawn to talk to, and connect with people sometimes. That's part of being in joy at times. But again, the path of least resistance for me in that communication is to engage in a way that is at least somewhat 'true' for me. I can't just 'ignore' if one of my friends was to say, 'Ah, Bill Gates, what a hero!' lol. That doesn't mean I then jump on them in rage, but I might feel moved to provide an alternative view. There's even an enjoyment for me to an extent,  in the challenge of trying to find a way to offer a perspective that questions but doesn't alienate (I don't often see value in alienating people).

So for me, there's a general navigating all of this. On one hand, I very much do pay attention to my 'vibe' and focus. On the other hand, if there is conflict and energy required to maintain that vibe, then sometimes it's better for me to just accept that it's time to engage and get a bit messy. 

Yes, I think I am doing that naturally. Lately, I find myself avoiding people who I know are really of opposing opinions if I’m in a frustrated or agitated state myself. That is helpful actually because I was struggling to see that control is an illusion, I think we always have the power to choose how we respond but actually sometimes we don’t.

That's pretty close to my experience too (it all unfolds naturally for me too). i don't see many people offline, most of my conversation is online or on whatsapp, but on twitter or facebook, there's a certain kind of person that I steer clear of, it's usually someone that I feel is so deeply locked into their world view that saying anything at all will serve nothing. I only engage with people who I think might be slightly amenable to seeing things differently. I get pretty decent results too sometimes, and I think it's a lot to do with the years of practice on these forums. I have no interest in belittling people or making them feel bad. I don't even need to be right. I'm just coming from a place of, 'is there a little room in this person's mindset for a change'.  And it might not be a radical change. For example, I see VERY little point in engaging in the vaccine debate on twitter, because the viewpoints are already so cemented. But what I can do is show the pro-vaxxers about the other medicines out there. Then I look a sensible and normal person, not a crazy tin foil hat type (though obviously I am a bit of a crazy tin foil hat type lol)

My biggest challenge is with my friends on whatsapp. That's where I might experience some level of emotion (e.g annoyance), and I have to tread carefully. But then I guess that's because I've known them 30-40 years and have a deep affection for them. I have to really consider what it is I'm attempting to do when I talk with them. I have to consider what's in their best interests. I'm not sure what they really need in their life right now is me talking about the 'reset' or vaccine injuries etc. Sometimes I feel they just need to see the version of who I was at the age of 15 in a way. 

[muttley]

Feb 10, 2021 0:08:22 GMT Esponja said:

Ok I’ll bravely start a thread😬

I’d like to discuss ‘control’.

With everything that is going on in the world, I keep coming back to ‘the only control we have is on the inside’.’ So to me, if we have to go down this path of surveillance and forced injections, we should accept ‘what is’. Control what we can, us.

For me, the line is blurred, how do we know when we should stand against something or speak out?

I could explain further but think I’ll leave it there to gather differing opinions.

This is an ancient cultural wisdom, and as far as I can tell it's source is the Greek stoics: first understand that you ultimately have exactly zero actual total control over any externality, and it's only ever your internal state that you can influence, regulate, and make actual, hard choices about free of any influence other than your own. People wise to this benefit from the wisdom in many ways, especially if they act on the advice to still do their best to make good choices about externalities.

But beyond that benefit, isn't this an existential question: "what is it, that I control"? Seems to me it's a question that philosopher's, artists  and theologians have pursued over thousands of years, and still pursue to this day. Isn't this the nature of existential questions, that they are, ultimately, unanswerable?

Now, I'd opine that the material perspective on this question, the practical, day-to-day implication of how you answer it, is very much related to your ongoing experience of life. Personally, I'd say there are many many more people out there who have accomplished various feats and attained various states who are far more qualified than myself to comment in this regard.

But there is an alternative perspective on the question to the practical perspective. I'd say this: most people (like by a wiiide margin) take for granted an error at the root of the question's premise. The question is ultimately related to self-inquiry. It translates directly into self-inquiry. Self-inquiry, unlike the philosophical question, or even, really, the practical version of the question, does have an ultimate answer, but it's one that can't be found with either the head, or the heart, that is, with reason, or emotion.

[Esponja]

Feb 10, 2021 20:19:37 GMT muttley said:

Feb 10, 2021 0:08:22 GMT Esponja said:

Ok I’ll bravely start a thread😬

I’d like to discuss ‘control’.

With everything that is going on in the world, I keep coming back to ‘the only control we have is on the inside’.’ So to me, if we have to go down this path of surveillance and forced injections, we should accept ‘what is’. Control what we can, us.

For me, the line is blurred, how do we know when we should stand against something or speak out?

I could explain further but think I’ll leave it there to gather differing opinions.

This is an ancient cultural wisdom, and as far as I can tell it's source is the Greek stoics: first understand that you ultimately have exactly zero actual total control over any externality, and it's only ever your internal state that you can influence, regulate, and make actual, hard choices about free of any influence other than your own. People wise to this benefit from the wisdom in many ways, especially if they act on the advice to still do their best to make good choices about externalities.

But beyond that benefit, isn't this an existential question: "what is it, that I control"? Seems to me it's a question that philosopher's, artists  and theologians have pursued over thousands of years, and still pursue to this day. Isn't this the nature of existential questions, that they are, ultimately, unanswerable?

Now, I'd opine that the material perspective on this question, the practical, day-to-day implication of how you answer it, is very much related to your ongoing experience of life. Personally, I'd say there are many many more people out there who have accomplished various feats and attained various states who are far more qualified than myself to comment in this regard.

But there is an alternative perspective on the question to the practical perspective. I'd say this: most people (like by a wiiide margin) take for granted an error at the root of the question's premise. The question is ultimately related to self-inquiry. It translates directly into self-inquiry. Self-inquiry, unlike the philosophical question, or even, really, the practical version of the question, does have an ultimate answer, but it's one that can't be found with either the head, or the heart, that is, with reason, or emotion.

Yes, I assume when the personal I is finally seen through, then who is it that controls. No different to l.o.a work. It’s within the dream. That helps me clarify it. I’ll keep doing what I can to follow the path of least resistance and control my inner world whilst still practising mindfulness and self-enquiry.

[Figgles]

Feb 11, 2021 4:02:19 GMT Esponja said:

Feb 10, 2021 20:19:37 GMT muttley said:

This is an ancient cultural wisdom, and as far as I can tell it's source is the Greek stoics: first understand that you ultimately have exactly zero actual total control over any externality, and it's only ever your internal state that you can influence, regulate, and make actual, hard choices about free of any influence other than your own. People wise to this benefit from the wisdom in many ways, especially if they act on the advice to still do their best to make good choices about externalities.

But beyond that benefit, isn't this an existential question: "what is it, that I control"? Seems to me it's a question that philosopher's, artists  and theologians have pursued over thousands of years, and still pursue to this day. Isn't this the nature of existential questions, that they are, ultimately, unanswerable?

Now, I'd opine that the material perspective on this question, the practical, day-to-day implication of how you answer it, is very much related to your ongoing experience of life. Personally, I'd say there are many many more people out there who have accomplished various feats and attained various states who are far more qualified than myself to comment in this regard.

But there is an alternative perspective on the question to the practical perspective. I'd say this: most people (like by a wiiide margin) take for granted an error at the root of the question's premise. The question is ultimately related to self-inquiry. It translates directly into self-inquiry. Self-inquiry, unlike the philosophical question, or even, really, the practical version of the question, does have an ultimate answer, but it's one that can't be found with either the head, or the heart, that is, with reason, or emotion.

Yes, I assume when the personal I is finally seen through, then who is it that controls. No different to l.o.a work. It’s within the dream. That helps me clarify it. I’ll keep doing what I can to follow the path of least resistance and control my inner world whilst still practising mindfulness and self-enquiry.

Exactly.

If the LOA & Dispenza teachings are working & you are feeling mostly whole/complete, do you have a sense of why  there is still the interest to pursue what seems to be a path to awakening?

I honestly get the sense you are teetering on the edge right now....ripe fruit....

[muttley]

Feb 11, 2021 4:02:19 GMT Esponja said:

Feb 10, 2021 20:19:37 GMT muttley said:

This is an ancient cultural wisdom, and as far as I can tell it's source is the Greek stoics: first understand that you ultimately have exactly zero actual total control over any externality, and it's only ever your internal state that you can influence, regulate, and make actual, hard choices about free of any influence other than your own. People wise to this benefit from the wisdom in many ways, especially if they act on the advice to still do their best to make good choices about externalities.

But beyond that benefit, isn't this an existential question: "what is it, that I control"? Seems to me it's a question that philosopher's, artists  and theologians have pursued over thousands of years, and still pursue to this day. Isn't this the nature of existential questions, that they are, ultimately, unanswerable?

Now, I'd opine that the material perspective on this question, the practical, day-to-day implication of how you answer it, is very much related to your ongoing experience of life. Personally, I'd say there are many many more people out there who have accomplished various feats and attained various states who are far more qualified than myself to comment in this regard.

But there is an alternative perspective on the question to the practical perspective. I'd say this: most people (like by a wiiide margin) take for granted an error at the root of the question's premise. The question is ultimately related to self-inquiry. It translates directly into self-inquiry. Self-inquiry, unlike the philosophical question, or even, really, the practical version of the question, does have an ultimate answer, but it's one that can't be found with either the head, or the heart, that is, with reason, or emotion.

Yes, I assume when the personal I is finally seen through, then who is it that controls. No different to l.o.a work. It’s within the dream. That helps me clarify it. I’ll keep doing what I can to follow the path of least resistance and control my inner world whilst still practising mindfulness and self-enquiry.

Can't speak to LOA practices myself, but in terms of seeking the truth, there can come a point with that seeking of no turning back, where your hair is on fire and you're in the tiger's mouth. This marks a limit of the dream/dreamer metaphor. During such a time one has one foot in the dream and the other on an existential banana peel. Whenever your include yourself in a description or a reflection, you entangle all of eternity, in limitlessness, and the LOA is certainly about you. Everything that appears to you is dream, but what you really are, isn't a dreamer.

[Esponja]

Feb 11, 2021 17:29:02 GMT Figgles said:

Feb 11, 2021 4:02:19 GMT Esponja said:

Yes, I assume when the personal I is finally seen through, then who is it that controls. No different to l.o.a work. It’s within the dream. That helps me clarify it. I’ll keep doing what I can to follow the path of least resistance and control my inner world whilst still practising mindfulness and self-enquiry.

Exactly.

If the LOA & Dispenza teachings are working & you are feeling mostly whole/complete, do you have a sense of why  there is still the interest to pursue what seems to be a path to awakening?

I honestly get the sense you are teetering on the edge right now....ripe fruit....

Because it feels like the truth. There is still suffering on this path, continuously having to meditate or align or control within. I enjoy it but I don’t believe that’s it.

I can see conceptually that there is no personal I and perhaps I’ve had enough moments of clarity.

[Gopal]

Feb 10, 2021 8:11:58 GMT Esponja said:

Feb 10, 2021 3:21:04 GMT Gopal said:

We are dreaming the entire physical world like our nightly dream, not even a dust would hit us unless we create that experience for us.  So we have complete control over the dream but unfortunately we don't have the conscious control over it, or you can't change any of the dream sequence through your actions. We can change the unfolding events through our clarity. For an example, when we continue chase a particular experience(Desire for), we will never get it. But once we accept our current condition as it is, this inner acceptance drastically brings our desired experience which we have been chasing so far. But the important thing is, we can not expect secretly when we accept it, that would not be a real acceptance. Once after the real acceptance, we can not really expect anything beyond what we have.

I always get stuck here because when you look at the quantum laws it seems we do indeed have a lot more say than we realise, yes that means feeling whole not in lack and chasing the dream.

That's the point but it's difficult to see this. I sometimes observes the truth that when I no longer wants that experience(desired experience), It would create that experience for us.Once upon a time, I was thinking when outer world is no longer torturing us, that's where the peace starts. But in truth, it's not outer, it's inner, when inner world is no longer pisses off, there where the Peace is and once we reach the level that nothing happens in the outer tortures us, that's where the outer world changes itself. Outer world is simply reflecting what is in our inner, it does so perfectly.

[Gopal]

Feb 10, 2021 10:07:51 GMT Andrew said:

Feb 10, 2021 0:08:22 GMT Esponja said:

Ok I’ll bravely start a thread😬

I’d like to discuss ‘control’.

With everything that is going on in the world, I keep coming back to ‘the only control we have is on the inside’.’ So to me, if we have to go down this path of surveillance and forced injections, we should accept ‘what is’. Control what we can, us.

For me, the line is blurred, how do we know when we should stand against something or speak out?

I could explain further but think I’ll leave it there to gather differing opinions.

For me, it's always about the path of least resistance.

Obviously I value Abe-Hicks, and their whole thing is ''focus on your desires and ignore what you don't like or don't want'',   and I 'get' that totally.  But, for me, if there is tension or conflict in the ignoring, then I will engage or address whatever is bothering me. That's the path of least resistance. 

The other aspect for me, is that I am drawn to talk to, and connect with people sometimes. That's part of being in joy at times. But again, the path of least resistance for me in that communication is to engage in a way that is at least somewhat 'true' for me. I can't just 'ignore' if one of my friends was to say, 'Ah, Bill Gates, what a hero!' lol. That doesn't mean I then jump on them in rage, but I might feel moved to provide an alternative view. There's even an enjoyment for me to an extent,  in the challenge of trying to find a way to offer a perspective that questions but doesn't alienate (I don't often see value in alienating people).

So for me, there's a general navigating all of this. On one hand, I very much do pay attention to my 'vibe' and focus. On the other hand, if there is conflict and energy required to maintain that vibe, then sometimes it's better for me to just accept that it's time to engage and get a bit messy. 

You can't ignore too! Accepting the current situation as it is actually brings the change.

I agree sometimes strong desire arises but after that you might have forgotten that(in that case, you can't exercise the resistance), it will automatically come on our way. Here is also our effort is not involved.

Whenever our effort is involved to bring anything(peace,love,free from anger...etc) into our life, it would not come or it would not come permanently.

Acceptance is the only way but we can't perform the acceptance also, that also involves the effort!

[Gopal]

Feb 10, 2021 15:09:15 GMT Esponja said:

Feb 10, 2021 10:07:51 GMT Andrew said:

For me, it's always about the path of least resistance.

Obviously I value Abe-Hicks, and their whole thing is ''focus on your desires and ignore what you don't like or don't want'',   and I 'get' that totally.  But, for me, if there is tension or conflict in the ignoring, then I will engage or address whatever is bothering me. That's the path of least resistance. 

The other aspect for me, is that I am drawn to talk to, and connect with people sometimes. That's part of being in joy at times. But again, the path of least resistance for me in that communication is to engage in a way that is at least somewhat 'true' for me. I can't just 'ignore' if one of my friends was to say, 'Ah, Bill Gates, what a hero!' lol. That doesn't mean I then jump on them in rage, but I might feel moved to provide an alternative view. There's even an enjoyment for me to an extent,  in the challenge of trying to find a way to offer a perspective that questions but doesn't alienate (I don't often see value in alienating people).

So for me, there's a general navigating all of this. On one hand, I very much do pay attention to my 'vibe' and focus. On the other hand, if there is conflict and energy required to maintain that vibe, then sometimes it's better for me to just accept that it's time to engage and get a bit messy. 

Yes, I think I am doing that naturally. Lately, I find myself avoiding people who I know are really of opposing opinions if I’m in a frustrated or agitated state myself. That is helpful actually because I was struggling to see that control is an illusion, I think we always have the power to choose how we respond but actually sometimes we don’t.

Rejecting the people will more of such actions. Just watch it, you will soon find yourself rejecting more of such people in your life.

Illusion of control has to be seen through. Control will soon attract lose of control and lose of control will attract control soon, this will go on in the rollercoaster until we the truth that we are not really controlling anything.

[Gopal]

Feb 10, 2021 20:19:37 GMT muttley said:

Feb 10, 2021 0:08:22 GMT Esponja said:

Ok I’ll bravely start a thread😬

I’d like to discuss ‘control’.

With everything that is going on in the world, I keep coming back to ‘the only control we have is on the inside’.’ So to me, if we have to go down this path of surveillance and forced injections, we should accept ‘what is’. Control what we can, us.

For me, the line is blurred, how do we know when we should stand against something or speak out?

I could explain further but think I’ll leave it there to gather differing opinions.

This is an ancient cultural wisdom, and as far as I can tell it's source is the Greek stoics: first understand that you ultimately have exactly zero actual total control over any externality, and it's only ever your internal state that you can influence, regulate, and make actual, hard choices about free of any influence other than your own. People wise to this benefit from the wisdom in many ways, especially if they act on the advice to still do their best to make good choices about externalities.

But beyond that benefit, isn't this an existential question: "what is it, that I control"? Seems to me it's a question that philosopher's, artists  and theologians have pursued over thousands of years, and still pursue to this day. Isn't this the nature of existential questions, that they are, ultimately, unanswerable?

Now, I'd opine that the material perspective on this question, the practical, day-to-day implication of how you answer it, is very much related to your ongoing experience of life. Personally, I'd say there are many many more people out there who have accomplished various feats and attained various states who are far more qualified than myself to comment in this regard.

But there is an alternative perspective on the question to the practical perspective. I'd say this: most people (like by a wiiide margin) take for granted an error at the root of the question's premise. The question is ultimately related to self-inquiry. It translates directly into self-inquiry. Self-inquiry, unlike the philosophical question, or even, really, the practical version of the question, does have an ultimate answer, but it's one that can't be found with either the head, or the heart, that is, with reason, or emotion.

It look like we don't have any control over external but we do have the control over internal but in truth or with careful observation, we can come to know we don't have the control even in our inner as well.