Cheltenham Group Meeting, 12/11/09 - Life.

Meeting reports, papers and discussions from Cheltenham Group. All Society members are welcome to join in the discussion here.

Moderator: ADMIN2016

fiona
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 10:22 am

Cheltenham Group Meeting, 12/11/09 - Life.

Postby fiona » Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:58 am

Cheltenham Group Meeting: 12.11.09
We studied the first page of the attached paper (Life, from the C & E Pewsey Group, 18th October '09)
Focussing on the System's clarification of A, B and C influences, here are the main responses/questions that arose:
* In regard to B influences, particular composers/music were mentioned, while someone gave football as an example of an A influence. A member suggested that perhaps we might be falling into the area of subjectivity and preference when attempting to make such classifications.
* The question was raised: Now that we are in the Work and are open to influence C, do we need B? An answer was that we need B in daily life to remind us, to help us remember. The questioner felt that B and C were intermeshed. Someone added that the potency and inspiration of B can take us beyond it to C. A response was that the key is to give attention. An example was given of experiencing a full day and evening without electricity in the house and how one noticed the quiet, for example, no hum from the fridge. It was as if the loss had removed many influences.
* Relating to the Shankaracharya (C influence), the questioner said that it is up to us to use our discrimination, Buddhi. We can be detached and enjoy what might be classed as 'influences'. We don't need to classify them. There was agreement about discrimination and that effort was required. H.H. has told us to regulate the senses, not deny them.
* Someone asked why nature had not been mentioned in the System's examples of influence B. Everyone agreed that was a very salient point. A member reminded us that some of the best naturalists in the past were also clergymen.
* Someone, puzzling over the clarifications in the paper, said that he knew when an influence had a spiritual quality if it 'woke him up'. He felt that wakefulness was good, although if that influence fell into being commonplace then it could lead him away. Discrimination was the answer. Someone agreed, adding that it was like a light waking you up inside. You remember it, she said. It almost lifts aspects of your brain. You share your particles with it. Another member said that it lights up everything in life and asked the question - Where does it all come from?
An answer was that it came from Love, giving a recent example. Having been invited to do research at the Royal Star and Garter Home at Richmond, a Home that has cared for both severely injured military personnel from the First and Second World Wars, the member was overwhelmed by its influence as soon as she entered the building, feeling that its fabric and the welcome of the people in it were guided by Love. 'It was a profound experience'. She doesn't believe you can compartmentalise influences - it is a lot to do with how particular facets within the individual receive an influence. Discrimination is the key. Another agreed, adding that it is as if something has been given.
* A final comment was that we should try to do everything with Love.
Attachments
Paper_09_23.pdf
(72.91 KiB) Downloaded 498 times

User avatar
Rumpelteazer
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:30 pm
Group: Cheltenham
Location: Gloucestershire, UK

Re: Cheltenham Group Meeting, 12/11/09 - Life.

Postby Rumpelteazer » Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:54 pm

After the meeting I had a further discussion over tea with one member of group who felt that this paper was too much about 'head' and not enough about 'heart'.

I feel intuitively that both are necessary on the path towards self-realisation and that it is essential to incorporate both types of activity in my life (which I try to do). Therefore, it is logical that we need both types of material to study.

We had agree to differ on this. It would be interesting to hear what other people think.

Gerald
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:44 am

Re: Cheltenham Group Meeting, 12/11/09 - Life.

Postby Gerald » Fri Nov 13, 2009 10:04 pm

One way to look at the idea of three influences is to see it is connected with the advice from HH that we DO very little. All the energies of Param-Atman and the Creation flow through us as power and fuel for the wonderfully complex human being that we are.

But most of it works unconsciously, and needs to do so without our interference. The conscious element, the four parts of the antakharan, can reflect either the consciousness of the Atman, like the ‘mirror of the soul’, or the ever-changing array of limited consciousnesses arising from the energies which maintain the human organism. The mind is subject to what HH calls upadhi’s, limiting adjuncts, and it becomes identified with the world it perceives at a particular level of energy — “I am convinced I am my body” — for instance.

If attentive self-observation is the name of the game, then one needs to silently discriminate between influences that make us less conscious and those that lead to more sattva, light and freedom.

If one does get into the habit of watching oneself in a friendly kind of way, the exercise soon gets emotional as one bumps up against habitual stuff so ingrained we never notice it. Conscience shines in this moment — and the whole object of the work is ‘to bring man to Conscience”. It’s then a question of how much we can bear to stand in the light.

Meditation, genuinely entered into is C influence, and gives us energy to be in the light.

One can in another way, think simply of three influences as three gunas — in terms of consciousness; A influence—tamas, dark, keeps us asleep, B influence—rajas, fire, exciting but still dreaming and C influence—sattva, leads us to the light of the Atman.

Discriminating between these influence which create our lives every day and night can only help. Particularly in regard to the feeling of ‘I’. Am ‘I’ running too hot, too cold, or just right. ‘Just right’ is said to be when the influence of the Atman runs through us without any hindrance, ‘no personal thoughts at all’ and everything is blissful.

bobs
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 11:35 pm

Re: Cheltenham Group Meeting, 12/11/09 - Life.

Postby bobs » Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:54 pm

Most of the time we (well me at any rate) are in ordinary society doing ordinary things and there's an interesting paradox between (1) seeing everything as consciousness or seeing the Param Atman in everything and (2) being in the whirl with the consequent need to discriminate. In my world at least, there are things in ordinary society, books, music, art, certain people that can take me from (2) towards (1). Then sometimes natural phenomena do the job. Why?

There is a rich vein of ideas about this in the System and in Ouspensky's own writings, and we are exploring some of these. The main point of it seems to be to move one's perception towards seeing things with the eye of the Param Atman.

fiona
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 10:22 am

Re: Cheltenham Group Meeting, 12/11/09 - Life.

Postby fiona » Fri Nov 20, 2009 3:27 pm

Cheltenham Group Meeting. 19/11/09
Before focussing on the second part of this paper, we referred to last week's report and the two comments that followed it (see above). Points - some individual and some agreed with - were:
* Careful discrimination was seen to be extremely relevant in regard to influences and their effects.
* Nature as an influence - it depends on the individual's response, on how clean your mirror is. Some people can be oppressed by nature. Yet once you are awake, everything around you is lit up. A member gave an example of how looking out and seeing a bird splashing in the pond, or a deer caring for her young can cause a wakening and bring things into perspective. Another example was given of how individuals respond to nature - of inviting friends to look at the heavens through a telescope - how some relate enthusiastically to the experience while others don't.
* This prompted a reminder of H.H.'s words: of how we can contribute what we are naturally best at - at what inspires us.
We moved on to the second part of the paper.
*The passage on the 'True Self', referring to the feeling of 'expansion of the body' and of 'only watching what is happening' was reminiscent of a piece by Ninette De Valois in the current, anniversary edition of Contact (p. 13, "The Happiness of Knowing Dr. Roles"), where she talks of how a dancer gives his/her attention to the body.
*Referring to the Philokalia and nepsis, watchfulness, examples were given of crisis situations where the observer has appeared - when flying a glider and running out of thermals and needing to find a suitable landing place, there was a feeling of having 'all the time in the world' - of having complete attention but being aware of the observer. It was agreed that it is often when you are feeling frightened that time appears to stand still. Reference was made to the wartime flying accounts of Saint-Exupery and how beauty can be experienced in the face of danger.
* In relation to observing and self-remembering, a member suggested that she finds that easier when something doesn't require all her attention (e.g. going into a shop), yet, for example, when she is playing a challenging piece on the piano, the observer isn't there. 'When it's easier, the observer floods in and I play the wrong bits!' When asked what she meant by the observer in this context, she explained that, rather than being totally absorbed, it is when she suddenly becomes aware of herself playing the instrument, of becoming aware of her fingers, etc. The questioner said that when the observer is present, it is a whole state of being. There is wholeness and no separation - one is wholly present.
* In regard to Mr. Ouspensky's System, someone felt that the most helpful and relevant aspect she could relate to was self-remembering (and forgetting!). Someone agreed - that this was practical - and we were reminded that at his first meeting with the Shankara, when H.H. referred to remembering yourself, Dr. Roles felt he had found the source of the System. One member explained that he found the Laws of 3 and 7 very helpful.

User avatar
Rumpelteazer
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:30 pm
Group: Cheltenham
Location: Gloucestershire, UK

Re: Cheltenham Group Meeting, 12/11/09 - Life.

Postby Rumpelteazer » Sat Nov 21, 2009 12:52 pm

I would like to thank Gerald and Bobs for giving a further explanation of some of the ideas in this paper. For me, at least, it is a lot clearer and has brought into focus the close connection between Ouspensky's teaching and the Shankaracharya's teaching. The explanation of how to apply these ideas in our ordinary lives has been a particularly helpful reminder. We are a very small group in Cheltenham and have limited (or in some cases no) direct contact with other members of the Society. So it's very helpful to have fresh ideas and dialogue with other members. Sometimes we just need to hear the same things expressed differently to encourage us to apply it in our ordinary lives ...

I particularly related to the following:

Gerald wrote:If one does get into the habit of watching oneself in a friendly kind of way, the exercise soon gets emotional as one bumps up against habitual stuff so ingrained we never notice it. Conscience shines in this moment — and the whole object of the work is ‘to bring man to Conscience”. It’s then a question of how much we can bear to stand in the light.


I'm not at all sure about equating the three influences with the gunas. For me, it tends to be rajassic influences that keep me asleep, identified, and in the dark. e.g. getting angry about some injustice or agitated because I can see someone making mistakes which will lead to unhappiness, and am unable to persuade them to change the way they are behaving - all things which are either nothing to do with me or which would benefit from a cool head and a warm heart rather than vice-versa. So those sort of rajassic influences would certainly get me excited but would take me very far from the light and would not equate to the B influences that bobs mentions.

However, I can see that there are some influences that give rise initially to rajas but then lead to sattva. When out walking at dusk yesterday, I caught sight of a barn owl in an area where I hadn't seen one before. It was initially very exciting but after the initial rush of mental activity confirming its identity and trying to see where it had landed, there was just a quiet and happy enjoyment of the evening light and the rest of the walk.

I wondered whether the common ground between the two ideas - the gunas and three types of influence - was connected with the law of three forces?


Return to “Cheltenham Group”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests