Fwd: Personality

[Guest guest]

TheWayStation, " Omkara " <coresite@h...> wrote:

 

The below sounds like a serious overcomplication of the fact

that " personality " or " self image " is discontinuous, based on memory

and is in fact an illusion, just conditioning responding

to 'situations' as required.

 

But it could be a good way to explore the fact and eventually realize

the truth of it, if some attention was actually given to it.

 

The whole " buffers " thing sounds ridiculous though, because it

assumes the existence of time, and also of a possible " third person

perspective " to observe the " various I's " which in fact are *never*

the same -- there is no " fixed set of I's, " each one is produced by

memory in response to situations.

 

Since each time the situation is very different, each assumed " I " is

also very different, coming also with its own set of " buttons " that

can be pushed. Realizing this clearly is not only the end of

continuity, but the end of the " buttons " too.

 

Namaste,

 

Tim

 

---------------------

 

Kathleen Riordan Speeth, author of " The Gurdjieff Work "

writes,

 

" .....each person who says " I " assumes that he or she

speaks as an entity that persists hour after hour, day

after day. That is how we represent ourselves to others

and what we generally accept as self-evident truth....

 

It may be, however, that human psychological structure

function are better explained by looking at behavior in

terms of many " I's " , rather than one, a concept of self

more akin to the Buddhist view than to Western psycho-

logical thought.......According to Gurdjieff each adult

has many selves, each of which uses the word " I " to

describe itself. At one moment one " I " is present

and at another there is a different " I " who may or may

not be in sympathy with the previous " I " . This " I " may

or may not even know the other " I " exists - for inbetween

" I's " there are often relatively impenetrable defenses called

'buffers'. "

 

 

What Speeth (on behalf of G) describes above is

very much in line with my own observations of

multiplicity.

 

Just the other day, while attending a banquet, I

observed the 'shifting' of " I's " in a very discernable

way. The " I " that expressed itself was very shy

and uncomfortable around people she knew quite

well, and had joked with only weeks earlier.

 

While observing this 'energetic' I also noted the

difference in posture and body movement. I was

also aware that I could 'put on' another 'face', one

more comfortable in social settings. But I simply

allowed the expression that arose naturally, and

appreciated very much the opportunity to not only

observe 'her', but observe people's responses to 'her'.

 

It was quite an eye opener. :-)

 

All this, I'm aware, sounds rather Sybil-ese,

but it has been my observation that we are all

'multiple-personality'. It only becomes a disorder

when there are so many buffers between aspects

as to disallow that sense of 'continuity' that Speeth

wrote about above - that leads Westerners to the

mistaken sense of a singular, continuous 'self'.

 

It would seem, from here, that the concept of

multiplicity 'creates the space' for people to

easily see that they are not their 'selves', that there

is the possibility of being Witness to each and every one

of their expressions.

 

Melody

--- End forwarded message ---