Action ...

is pure. It needs of no rationalization.

Note that i said "action" not "will" ... quite intentionally. Apparently "will" names the cause and/or motivation of the action ... as such it may well be some mong of thought, and feeling, and habit, and external force. It varies all over the palce, from person to person, and from time to time. That does not obtain with action, it just exists as pure happening.

I recorded this thought because i noticed that frequently i judge my actions are far superior to the thought, feelings, habits, forces and motivations which precede them. Frequently i just do something and then judge it in relationship to its motivation ... which judgement best precedes from the actual deed as pure backward to all the horseshit which preceded or followed it.

And no i do not "poo-poo" effortless power ... that happens when action is in sync with though, feeling, and external event ... no commanding required. Great suff indeed !

"it is interesting to grok that action needs of no semiosis" ...

... which can also be known as the zen of action.

Comments

Seth says

... 2015-06-18 10:01:43 18422

no thoughts necessary

yep

.

thought can be quite useful before the fact predicting consequences, and even after the fact in preparation for subsequent actions ... time being not strictly linear and binary.

... says

Lectures on this by you are worthless to me. There is very little that one does with pure will even though LL says I,44

source: ... For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect.

... consider the sequence of encounter in most any moment one is conscious & focus & one will find some prior factors from similar moments that fall into the process i.e. thoughts & feelings.
Bozo once poo-poohed PR's notion from The Art of Effortless Power

ChengHsin: ... What is meant by the correct method of body and function? The answer is the consciousness commands and the body obeys.

... I have played some sports that get close, still not perfect - Raquetball & swimming. Action is usually a munge of thought, feeling & will.

Seth says

Anyway "action is pure" , "It needs of no rationalization". It happens or not and just is.

Note that i said "action" not "will" ... quite intentionally. Apparently "will" names the cause and/or motivation of the action ... as such it may well be some mong of thought, and feeling, and habit, and external force. It varies all over the palce, from person to person, and from time to time. That does not obtain with action, it just exists as pure happening.

I recorded this thought because i noticed that frequently i judge my actions are far superior to the thought, feelings, habits, forces and motivations which preceed them. Frequently i just do something and then judge it in relationship to its motivation ... which judgement always preceeds from the actual deed as pure and that which exists backward to all the horshit which preceeded it.

And no i do not poo-poo effortless power ... that happens when action is in sync with though, feeling, and external event. Great suff indeed !

Seth says

source: mark

There is very little that one does with pure will

... yep

.

But you either do it or you do not ... that is the purity of action.

It necessarily is the standard against which all else is related.

Seth says

said with different words which amount to the same thing on G+

Seth says

Obviously i am struggling here to express something the first time ... not just copying a previously expressed cultural meme for which the language is well established.

The essence of my elevation of action is my choice of attitude and orientation of myself to rest of you'all.

That attitude bears with it no judgement whatsoever about your orientation ... for that is your choice ... which freedom I choose to also respect. The apparent fact that you have oriented yourself differently presets us with the possibility of some extremely creative interactions.

Not much more to say here assuming that you have the same kind of distinctions that i have between thinking and feeling and doing and sensing.

... except to tell you that i do not appreciate any obstructing of my expression or of projecting it in a shitty frame of reference ... and ask you not to do that.

Seth says

seth 2015-06-20 04:44:08 18422

... 2015-06-20 01:12:54 18422

thoughts are pure you either think them or not; feelings are pure you either feel them or not; smells are pure you either smell them or not .....

true.

so now what is the nature of our association of the English word "pure" with action ... and now, with mark thinking with us here, with thought and feeling and sensing as well ?

well to put more bones on this. there is a indication a person gets about a thought that signals them that it is true or not. when an action is performed a similar indication can signal a similar signal of truth. the same for a feeling. the same for a sensation.

fictional thoughts do not yield these indications of truth. but if you actually do something, you will certainly get an indication that you are doing it. in that sense the indication would normally be true. in that sense it is pure. to get this distinction try to do something fictionally or falsly or false. notice the difference. notice how easy it is to think a false thought (or lie) versus do a false action.

Seth says

interesting google zen of action

Seth says

source: mark

That's because it is more like a feeling-awareness. See ZBB - section on Intent, Impulse & Feedback ~ pg. 27 of the Kindle ed.

Oh sure, i can feel myself doing things. Learning to become acutely aware of the qualia of doing, as per PR, might lead me somewhere ... i'll pay more attention to that.

But that does not change the direct experience that i told you about above. I cannot tell myself to act, anymore than i can tell you to act. If you think about what i said in that context, perhaps you will hear it as said.

Seth says

Though does not motivate action.

It just does not do it.

Try as I might,

i cannot shout myself into action.

There is no part of will that is thought.

Seth says

M 2015-06-24 08:52:54 18422

Just because YOU can't do it doesn't mean anything except ........

YOU can't do it!

true.

Can you do it? For example given something that you already have judged that you need to do, given all the prerequisites to do it are present in the present moment, given a reluctance to actually do it, can you always just tell yourself to do it and then you will do it?

Notice that you cannot take away any of the given circumstances and answer my question honestly.

Now i actually do a lot of stuff ... even stuff that qualifies for all the givens above. My thoughts and feelings can provide most of the givens above, yet they cannot get over that one pesky circumstance: a reluctance to actually do it. Telling myself to do it will not get me over the hump. My way over the hump is to just do it ... and not to rely on my thoughts and feelings to think me into its action.

I seem to remember discovering this in my late 30's ... once discovered, I stopped wasting energy by continually telling myself to do things thinking that would motivate me to get them done.

I am interested in your actual experience and learning in these specific situations.

Seth says

... 2015-06-24 18:11:54 18422

seth 2015-06-24 10:18:28 18422

M 2015-06-24 10:07:10 18422

seth 2015-06-23 15:38:20 18422

Though does not motivate action.

It just does not do it.

Try as I might,

i cannot shout myself into action.

There is no part of will that is thought.

Same picture - different message here. I like the message in this one better:
https://www.facebook.com/thespiritscience/posts/1055822484458240 - #3 is very intresting.

Well yes of course

, it is very similar whether you are trying to change your feeling or change your action. Notice none of the advise given there sounds anything like, "Just tell yourself to feel differently!". No, we need to cooperate with these parts of ourselves ... just barking commands at them will not work. At least that has been my actual experience with this directly.

Barking doesn't work for other people unless they are afraid of you. I can't imagine why one would try that on oneself & not expect failure. None of your attempts are tzu ZBB.

you focused on my use of a exaggerated expression ... that was not the essential question. Try just thinking about telling. Can you tell yourself to do something and you will always do it? I did not ask you about tzu zbb. I asked you if you could tell yourself to do something and then you would do it even if you had a reluctance to do it. Now telling another person to do something rarely works ... that is a common human experience ... i claim the same situation obtains with telling myself to do something ... and i was curious if you found the same thing in regard to yourself. And hey if you don't want to tell me, just don't ... no problem. But changing the subject to another question ... well that is just a silly lack of focus.

Seth says

... 2015-06-25 08:34:53 18422

seth 2015-06-25 07:56:29 18422

source: mark

I didn't realize until now that fastblogit is just you & other opinions that you agree with: not about truth, ontology, or anything else except the Bozo as of late.

Well of course it is not --

.

How did you arrive as such a contra factual judgement? Why would you publish it here in response to a unrelated direct question?

You ignore what I write most of the time or contradict it & repeat or philibuster the same old stuff over & over again like 18422 . I left the military 44 years ago & since then nobody tells me or demands what I have to say or respond to. Right now twitter & other social media is a cesspool of Egoo - not the first or penultimate place I care to look for unsolicited stuff to think about. I thought we had a fairly nice blog going here until recently.

Anyway back to my inquiry. I am trying to work up a context where i can ask Denise whether she can just tell herself stuff and it will get done regardless of her reluctance. Perhaps i will also ask Nathan that same question, if i am able to form a pertinent context with no ambiguity. I expect that, even when people understand the specific question, they will still come out with different answers. It is those differences which are of interest to me.

Anyway back to your diversion. FYI i intentionally ignore things that you write which i judge to be your egoo. I have no intention of making them stink more. I think it is better to ignore somebody else's egoo rather than pointing it out to them ... especially when i make my own egoo in the process of the point

... says

On s integrity are a few clues especially those that point to Erhards stuff or here.
If there is chicken & egg haggling then this may help or not - an essay on the subject from BC1:

source: ...

Book Chameleon pgs 46 & 48 commentary at the bottom of the page.

C.F.Russell - 1940

Christ came for all & is not & cannot be the exclusive property of any nation, sect or personal body. No one can obtain a monopoly over the things which really count. Christianity is so differnt from "racial" religions that it is almost a misnomer to call it a "religion" at all. It is the "spiritual-sun" which shines alike for all who face it! Just as the Christ-event is unique in the history of the world, incomparable, consequently hard to understand, so this is a distinctive feature of Christianity that it cannot be forced upon anyone. Nor can it be purchased except by application of the first Rule of Art-- vis., "to buy the Egg without haggling"! It is not the money that buys such an Egg, but the "without haggling"!

The substance of Christianity is conferred freely only upon those who, of their own free will, ask for it & open their hearts to it. It is incompatible with slavery of any kind. Its essence is Freedom & Love, which is impossible without Freedom. Nothing can penetrate the Ego unless the Ego opens itself to it freely. Christianity is preeminently the "religion" which leaves the will free. It is indeed essentially the substance of the highest morality itself. It does not coerce, it does not persuade, it has no ulterior purpose; it is. It is the substance of what is truly human. It is the "Light of the World"!

... Not haggling is the first rule of art.

... says
I learned from a 10 week course on Integrity inspired by W.Erhard from LEC that my identity is my word (i.e. I am my word) . I gave my word that I would attend all 10 classes. In the middle of it I was transferred to GA & had to be somewhere else. I explained my commitment to my new bosses & they accommodated including all of the additional air fare etc. - none of this was expected.
Such integrity is both my word to myself as well as others & all the necessary tzu of being. The haggling & perfection frames are handled in the pdfs mentioned in the previous comment as links.

Seth says

... 2015-06-25 11:18:29 18422

Buy her some Nike shoes & induce the trance that they mean you must follow your integrity: "Say what you are going to do & do what you say" (cf. Werner Erhard & others)

Well thanks for mentioning the integrity of "Say what you are going to do, and do what you say" for that is what i am talking about here

. That is the ideal alignment and matching of doing and saying.

The inquiry here is which is to comes first, the chicken or the egg, .... which is to cause which, the saying impelling the doing, or the doing impelling the saying ... or both springing up simultaneous?

Now i am of an opinion that all saying, all thinking in language, is done with representations ... mere reflections of that which actually is ... mere shadows of being ... like a tigers tracks in the mud with no tiger there. Whereas the action of doing is that which is actually there. The tiger causes his foot prints ... the foot prints don't cause the tiger. So just telling myself to do something, does not motivate its doing. That combined with the experience that i have never been able to cause my action by merely telling myself to do it, leads me to believe that focusing on commanding my action with thought will never work for me.

Seth says

Well there need be no haggling with actually doing. When the moment arises, when the fruit is ripe, you just pick it. No need to tell yourself to pick it. In that moment your deed becomes being ... any symbolic representation of it is irrelevant to the deed itself.

So I don't understand your focus on haggling in this specific context ... especially since the Zen of just doing it is quite the opposite of haggling.

Personally I cannot find any use in telling myself to do something ... in "saying what i am going to do", except perhaps to feel pride if i actually do it, or disgust if i do not ...why present myself with even the possibility of that kind of "haggling" ... why invite that pride or disgust into my being?

Action ...

Tags

Comments

See Also