Tuesday, August 15, 2006

“HOW CAN I HANDLE LOSS?” Part Four

Table of Contents

Today's Considerations
Recent Posts and Archives
Tools for Realization
Author's eBooks
Author's Paperback Books
Free eBooks
Received yesterday from a site visitor: “In this mornings entry on your site you said, ‘Even when certain ego-states had been generating levels of suffering that were beyond description, people mourn when their false (but familiar) roles can no longer be played.’ Youre wrong about suffering. Maybe Im playing the role of father and husband, but those are not making me suffer. I love everything about them.”

F.: So what you’re really admitting is that you love your self and you love your false roles. You’re also admitting that you love not being authentic and you love living an illusion. So be it.

Now, the discussion continues for those who would be free of self, of disingenuousness, and of belief in illusion. Whether the ego-state being assumed is “father,” “husband,” or any other, it is an illusion that will generate misery, if not now then at some point. Also, some persons who are absorbed in their false identities are already miserable but haven’t a clue. Depressed people often claim that they are not depressed because they have been depressed for so long that it has become their “norm.” Similarly, persons who are totally bored with their job will say “I love my job” since they have been bored for so long that their monotony "feels normal." Likewise, those who are trapped in their phony roles can claim that they’re happy and free while not being truly happy or truly free at all. It’s called “distortion” and “delusion” and it’s always about “self-deception”…about a false self that is using distortion to try to provide continuity for a phony image or for false images. Some never tire of the act; some do. For those who think they’re enjoying their play-acting, act on. Phoniness does exact an internal toll on persons with any consciousness at all, but for those who are totally asleep, no “effects” are noted. Conversely, for those who do tire someday of their phony performance, an avenue for change is offered.

That said, all ego-states are rooted in distortion, and one distortion is that ego-states and role-playing can be played without any relative effect (whether noted or not). That’s another lie. There’s always a relative cost, and the relative costs of assuming ego-states range from financial woes to serious illness to death, and that has been proved scientifically. Yes, role-playing kills. (Ask the detectives who investigate murders. They always look to “The Spouse” or “The Lover” as their first suspect because in the majority of cases, that is the one who killed as a result of being driven by the illusion that they were under attack when only an ego-state was disappearing.)

Research conducted by Dr. T.H. Holmes resulted in an exact method for measuring the effects of mental distortion, the effects of assuming ego-states, and the suffering that role-playing produces. Using his “Social Readjustment Rating Scale,” he assigned numeric values to different stressful situations and was able to show the correlation between assuming or forfeiting roles and the various levels of suffering that follow. His research proved that in each case where an ego-state was assumed or forfeited during a given time period, illnesses resulted that ranged from serious to life-threatening. Here are some of the point values assigned to various situations as a result of his research:

100 points if a spouse dies (resulting in the forfeiting of one or more of the survivor’s ego-states)
73 points if a divorce occurs (again, ending the playing of a role)
63 points if a marital separation happens (again ending the role of spouse)
63 points if one is sentenced to a jail term (thus assuming the role of “prisoner” and forfeiting other roles that could only be played if not in jail)
63 points if a family member dies (forfeiting another role in that instance)
50 points if marrying and
45 points if reconciling (thereby gaining or re-gaining certain false identities)

So the visitor who wrote the above wants to claim that roles don’t generate suffering, but scientific research proves otherwise. He might notice something about that role of “husband” which he claims that he loves to play: assuming the role of “spouse” has almost the same impact as going to prison! Note too that “getting back together” (re-assuming false roles that will have to be played once again) is almost as stressful as “getting separated” (and forfeiting roles that were being played).

The doctor’s research showed that if a person assumes or forfeits roles that total 250 points in a two-year period, the person is very likely to die. If persons assume or forfeit roles that total 150 points in that period, they are very likely to develop a serious illness. And to claim that “the effect of those changes only lasts for a short period” is to ignore other relevant statistics such as a 62% divorce rate in the U.S. and a 50% murder rate on average among persons whose relationships (and false identities) are ending.

So a pointer that has been offered before in several postings has been proved scientifically: (1) persons suffer when they assume ego-states, (2) they often don’t even have a clue that they’re suffering, and (3) when persons play roles, their game-playing often results in serious illness or death. Can all of that be dismissed as “relative existence stuff”? Of course, but as long as the I-Amness continues, why should one be "content" with it being marked by suffering and misery and illness and murder? WHO wants to set forth a defense for delusional living when its track record is beleaguered with those kinds of results, relativistic as the results may be? Please enter the silence of contemplation. [To be continued]

Recent Posts and Archives

Tools Used by Other Seekers of Realization

WATCHING an Advaita Vedanta Retreat: Watch a Downloadable computer file version of the Four-Day Advaita Retreat (Downloadable on PC only, not Apple.)

ENROLLING in the Online Advaita Classes For information, visit Information on the Advaita Classes on the Internet To enroll visit Enroll in the Advaita Internet Course

ATTENDING an Advaitin retreat with Floyd and being guided through all seven steps. For details of the retreats offered, please visit the retreat information site.

ARRANGING a one-hour session via Skype or telephone with Floyd. (Skype is a free service.) Click the button to pay and you will be contacted to arrange a date and time for the call.

Five Free eBooks

Compliments of Andy Gugar, Jr.,
the following eBooks are available without charge for you or for friends:

I.
"GOOD vs. EVIL?" or "IGNORANCE, STUPIDITY, and INSANITY?"

The content of this eBook deals with one of the most common but erroneous beliefs that the non-Realized masses cling to and which they will fight about (and even kill over), namely, that there is a planet-wide duel going on between “the forces of good and evil” in the universe.

Either (1) the ancient view is spot on: that the "ills of the planet" are rooted in evil people, in people not being religious enough or spiritual enough, and are caused solely by bad morality; or, (2) the "ills of the planet" are rooted in ignorance, stupidity and insanity and "being good" or "being moral" does not put an end to ignorance, does not eliminate stupidity, and does not treat insanity in any way.

II.
"THE VISION"

Comments regarding the free eBook entitled “THE VISION”:

“My thanks to you and Andy.” – Andrew “Mac” McMaster

“Thanks so much for the book! And, by the way, it is brilliant and the most effective pointing that you have done. It has served to help clear the remaining blockages.” – Stan Cross

“Greatly appreciate having “THE VISION” added to my Henderson resource library that is situated on the right side of my bed for easy access! Eternally grateful for what was received and what was given.” – Robert Rigby

“‘THE VISION’ is such a well-written, condensed version of the Nisarga Yoga approach to understanding and enjoying Reality that I feel it can serve as a must-read ‘meditation guide’ for all earnest seekers.” – Andy Gugar, Jr.

III.
"Sapolsky, Maharaj, and the Non-Dual Teachings"

Dr. Robert Maurice Sapolsky is an American neuroendocrinologist; a professor of biology, neuroscience, and neurosurgery at Stanford University; a researcher; an author; and a Research Associate at the National Museums of Kenya.

There is much that a non-dualist or Advaitin or Nisargan can relate to by comparing and contrasting what Sapolsky reveals about the way certain troops of baboons live in Africa with the way that humans abide all around the globe.

This 152-page eBook catalogues the common, non-dual message shared by Sapolsky and Maharaj and reveals the ways that Sapolsky’s scientific research supports the non-dual pointers offered by Maharaj.

IV.
Seeking

In “PART ONE” it will be seen that most persons on the planet are not seeking, and most will never seek, but for those who are seeking, most will face several obstacles:

In “PART TWO” of this book, it will be seen why many criticized Maharaj for “changing his message in his later talks.” It will be seen that the changes were not about changing the message per se as much as about changing his methodology as he experimented with one version of the Ultimate Medicine after another in order to try to find an effective means for addressing the Ultimate Sickness.

He tried a religious version of the Medicine, a Spiritual version of the Medicine, and finally settled on a version which addressed to Sickness at its core . . . at the mental and emotional level.

V.
"THE MOST DANGEROUS BELIEF OF ALL"

“Dangerous” is a term that can only apply during the relative existence, but of those who do commit suicide, for example, how many shoot themselves in the foot over and over until they “bleed out”? None. They shoot themselves in the head. Why? In order to try to stop the noise - to try to stop the chatter of a thousand monkeys – to stop the noisy mind which is the area that stores the ideas, notions, concepts, mind-stuff, etc. which drives them into the depths of insanity.

And what are those ideas, notions, concepts, etc. called, collectively? "Their beliefs." The irony? They are not their beliefs at all. They are the beliefs of “others” that were set in place via programming, conditioning, etc. and which persons then think are their own.

And what are those beliefs rooted in, and what reinforces those beliefs and convinces persons that they are sacred and worth fighting over and even sometimes worth dying for? Blind faith.

This 337-page eBook discusses those issues in detail.

To read any or all of the free eBooks, please double-click the "FREEBIES" link at the top of this page