он Аферист, Обманщин и Проходимец.Вышла шестая книга Теуна Мареза
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
-
DJUBAL
- Воин
- Сообщения: 110
- Зарегистрирован: 07 янв 2004, 02:37
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
Вот текст отрывка:
Introduction: The Seven Stages of Learning
The only true learning there is, is learning about the self, for man is the microcosm of the macrocosm. The true Scholar has known for ever that it is insanity to assume that we can understand life, and therefore the world around us, unless we acknowledge that we too are a part of this ineffable mystery we look upon as being life, and which we are wanting to fathom and understand. But, being part of this mystery, our every action, our every thought and our every feeling, affects our perception of our experience. And what is knowledge, if it is not that which we perceive as being our experience within life? Therefore, the act of learning, like every action we take within life, must and does have a direct influence upon our perception of the knowledge which arises from having taken that action. It follows that the act of learning directly affects how we perceive the knowledge gained in the process of learning. The profound truth that emerges from this is that, in learning, we create the answers we seek, according to our perception of what is revealed to us during the process of learning. In other words, we create our own reality, whether we are aware of this or not. So the question facing everyone who wishes to learn is; “How do we know that the reality we have created is in fact the truth we are seeking” or, more precisely; “How do we corroborate the subjective reality, when the only reality we can measure it against is our perception of the objective reality to which we bear witness by virtue of being alive, for is it not this very perception we are questioning when we set out to learn?”
This difficulty in learning is a conundrum for which there is no logical solution, other than to start the process of learning from the premise that whatever we experience within life; that is, whatever we perceive to be factual, is not necessarily the objective reality to which we bear witness, but merely the subjective reality which causes us to look upon our experience as being the factual reality we are dealing with. This, however, does not presuppose that the subjective reality which arises from experience is any less true than the objective reality we are witnessing. Instead it serves to confirm that the subjective reality, being dependent as it is upon our perception, is what we are experiencing, whereas the objective reality, which exists independently of our perception of it, must at best be witnessed without judgement, until such time as we have gained the necessary knowledge with which to bridge the gap that exists between our subjective experience and an objective reality that transcends the limitations of perception. It is this gap between our perception and the objective reality being witnessed that instills in us, the Observers, the desire to gain the needed skill with which to fill the gap between the subjective and the objective.
If we, as the Observers, are to fill the gap existing between the subjective and the objective, then it is vital that we bear in mind that the subjective, by definition, implies the purely personal, whereas the objective, also by definition, implies that which is transpersonal, and therefore existing independently of the purely personal nature of our perception. It follows that the Observer is not only the point at which perception is being assembled in relation to the experience of the Observer, but that for there to be any experience at all, the Observer must of necessity also be the catalyst that brings into existence the experience he is having of the objective reality to which he bears witness. Consequently, although the Observer starts off by being an impartial witness to life around him, the moment he starts to interact with the world he has the choice of either seeing himself as being the victim of circumstance, or else seeing himself as being the catalyst that causes objective reality to start imposing itself upon the subjective reality he has created according to his perception. The first option is clearly antithetical to learning anything of real value, which means that the true Scholar has no option other than to see himself as being the creator of his reality.
Once we are clear on this much, it becomes perfectly possible to acquire skill in the technique of learning, for all that is required in order to gain this skill, is to remember that the Observer is both the Witness of objective reality, as well as the Experimenter directing the process entailed in learning how to relate perception of that objective reality to the reality underlying his subjective experience of it. This is the theory, and if one adheres to the theory it appears that this should be a relatively simple exercise to accomplish, given the required time and the due diligence. However, in practice it is not quite as simple as the theory would have us believe, for although gaining the skill to learn is undoubtedly within the grasp of any man or woman, achieving this skill is nonetheless the task of a lifetime. The reason for this, as Toltecs have discovered in mapping out the process of learning, is that acquiring skill in learning entails conquering seven distinct areas of expertise.
Toltecs have given to these seven areas of expertise the term “the seven stages in learning,” because although each area does require expertise, the expertise gained in the first area automatically leads the apprentice into the second area, and the expertise gained in the second area again leads the apprentice into the third area, and so on. Therefore, although each of these seven areas of learning demand expertise, they are more like stages in learning rather than areas of expertise existing independently of each other. Furthermore, as with anything else in life, there are no real divisions as such within the seven stages of learning, for one stage blends seamlessly into the next. So although, for the sake of clarity, we delineate, demarcate and speak in terms of one area versus another, in reality the seven stages in learning overlap one another in a seamless manner.
The first stage encountered in the process of learning is the concept of learning. Any concept is an idea or, more accurately, a thought form which, for the sake of brevity, we can simply term a form that the apprentice is utilizing in the beginning stages of learning. Thus to begin with the apprentice simply has an idea concerning learning; meaning that he holds within his focus everything he knows at this point in time about the concept of learning. This includes everything he believes he will learn, as well as what he believes will be his rewards for what he will be learning.
However, as the apprentice begins to work with the concept of learning, whether he is aware of this or not, he begins to evolve his understanding of what it is to learn, with the result that it is not long before he begins to find that his personal concept of learning also needs to be expanded if it is not to become a limiting factor to his learning. Technically speaking, the apprentice has seen the need to expand his view of the world, and in attempting to do this, the apprentice is beginning to acquire expertise in breaking free from the fixation brought about by the form, by learning how to adapt the form into a more suitable vehicle with which to further explore the act of learning. At this point though, the apprentice is still very much involved in gaining the required expertise in order to mould, shape and modify the purely personal confines of the form constituting his subjective reality. This is to say that, although the apprentice is gaining expertise in being able to recognise the limitations of the form, he nevertheless still needs to work with a form, in order to make sense out of what he is learning.
Once the apprentice gains proficiency in being able to modify and adapt his concept of learning, he begins to see that no matter to what extent he modifies, adapts or re-arranges his concept of learning, he is still firmly caught within the confines of his subjective reality. Having seen this much, the apprentice can now also begin to see the futility of continuing to expand his view of the world - for irrespective of how broad his view of the world becomes, it is this very view that keeps his perception of life intact. Technically speaking, the apprentice now has first-hand experience of what is meant by the madness of the dream, and he begins to wonder what it would be like to have the required knowledge to break free from any constraints upon his perception. It is at this point within the process of learning that the apprentice begins to pay careful attention to everything he thinks he knows or, more precisely, he begins to work consciously at questioning his concept of what it is to learn.
The only way at this point in which the apprentice can question his concept of learning is to measure everything he thinks he knows, that is, his subjective reality, against what he perceives to be the transpersonal nature of the objective reality to which he bears witness. Technically speaking, the apprentice has started to apply his subjective knowledge to life around him in the sense of wanting to prove this knowledge right or wrong. In other words, the apprentice has come to the realisation that he can only prove or disprove his subjective knowledge by acting upon it, and thereby learn from the results achieved. The result of this is that the apprentice begins to stand detached from the results of his experiments in applying his subjective knowledge, for it is only in this way that he can view the results achieved in an objective manner.
It is only once the apprentice to learning has achieved a modicum of proficiency in being able to question his subjective reality, that it becomes possible for the apprentice to start taking the approach to learning as delineated in the Toltec Teachings in a purposeful way, for until then the apprentice is still too caught up in the fixation of his perception to allow for that perception to be questioned by anyone other than himself........
Introduction: The Seven Stages of Learning
The only true learning there is, is learning about the self, for man is the microcosm of the macrocosm. The true Scholar has known for ever that it is insanity to assume that we can understand life, and therefore the world around us, unless we acknowledge that we too are a part of this ineffable mystery we look upon as being life, and which we are wanting to fathom and understand. But, being part of this mystery, our every action, our every thought and our every feeling, affects our perception of our experience. And what is knowledge, if it is not that which we perceive as being our experience within life? Therefore, the act of learning, like every action we take within life, must and does have a direct influence upon our perception of the knowledge which arises from having taken that action. It follows that the act of learning directly affects how we perceive the knowledge gained in the process of learning. The profound truth that emerges from this is that, in learning, we create the answers we seek, according to our perception of what is revealed to us during the process of learning. In other words, we create our own reality, whether we are aware of this or not. So the question facing everyone who wishes to learn is; “How do we know that the reality we have created is in fact the truth we are seeking” or, more precisely; “How do we corroborate the subjective reality, when the only reality we can measure it against is our perception of the objective reality to which we bear witness by virtue of being alive, for is it not this very perception we are questioning when we set out to learn?”
This difficulty in learning is a conundrum for which there is no logical solution, other than to start the process of learning from the premise that whatever we experience within life; that is, whatever we perceive to be factual, is not necessarily the objective reality to which we bear witness, but merely the subjective reality which causes us to look upon our experience as being the factual reality we are dealing with. This, however, does not presuppose that the subjective reality which arises from experience is any less true than the objective reality we are witnessing. Instead it serves to confirm that the subjective reality, being dependent as it is upon our perception, is what we are experiencing, whereas the objective reality, which exists independently of our perception of it, must at best be witnessed without judgement, until such time as we have gained the necessary knowledge with which to bridge the gap that exists between our subjective experience and an objective reality that transcends the limitations of perception. It is this gap between our perception and the objective reality being witnessed that instills in us, the Observers, the desire to gain the needed skill with which to fill the gap between the subjective and the objective.
If we, as the Observers, are to fill the gap existing between the subjective and the objective, then it is vital that we bear in mind that the subjective, by definition, implies the purely personal, whereas the objective, also by definition, implies that which is transpersonal, and therefore existing independently of the purely personal nature of our perception. It follows that the Observer is not only the point at which perception is being assembled in relation to the experience of the Observer, but that for there to be any experience at all, the Observer must of necessity also be the catalyst that brings into existence the experience he is having of the objective reality to which he bears witness. Consequently, although the Observer starts off by being an impartial witness to life around him, the moment he starts to interact with the world he has the choice of either seeing himself as being the victim of circumstance, or else seeing himself as being the catalyst that causes objective reality to start imposing itself upon the subjective reality he has created according to his perception. The first option is clearly antithetical to learning anything of real value, which means that the true Scholar has no option other than to see himself as being the creator of his reality.
Once we are clear on this much, it becomes perfectly possible to acquire skill in the technique of learning, for all that is required in order to gain this skill, is to remember that the Observer is both the Witness of objective reality, as well as the Experimenter directing the process entailed in learning how to relate perception of that objective reality to the reality underlying his subjective experience of it. This is the theory, and if one adheres to the theory it appears that this should be a relatively simple exercise to accomplish, given the required time and the due diligence. However, in practice it is not quite as simple as the theory would have us believe, for although gaining the skill to learn is undoubtedly within the grasp of any man or woman, achieving this skill is nonetheless the task of a lifetime. The reason for this, as Toltecs have discovered in mapping out the process of learning, is that acquiring skill in learning entails conquering seven distinct areas of expertise.
Toltecs have given to these seven areas of expertise the term “the seven stages in learning,” because although each area does require expertise, the expertise gained in the first area automatically leads the apprentice into the second area, and the expertise gained in the second area again leads the apprentice into the third area, and so on. Therefore, although each of these seven areas of learning demand expertise, they are more like stages in learning rather than areas of expertise existing independently of each other. Furthermore, as with anything else in life, there are no real divisions as such within the seven stages of learning, for one stage blends seamlessly into the next. So although, for the sake of clarity, we delineate, demarcate and speak in terms of one area versus another, in reality the seven stages in learning overlap one another in a seamless manner.
The first stage encountered in the process of learning is the concept of learning. Any concept is an idea or, more accurately, a thought form which, for the sake of brevity, we can simply term a form that the apprentice is utilizing in the beginning stages of learning. Thus to begin with the apprentice simply has an idea concerning learning; meaning that he holds within his focus everything he knows at this point in time about the concept of learning. This includes everything he believes he will learn, as well as what he believes will be his rewards for what he will be learning.
However, as the apprentice begins to work with the concept of learning, whether he is aware of this or not, he begins to evolve his understanding of what it is to learn, with the result that it is not long before he begins to find that his personal concept of learning also needs to be expanded if it is not to become a limiting factor to his learning. Technically speaking, the apprentice has seen the need to expand his view of the world, and in attempting to do this, the apprentice is beginning to acquire expertise in breaking free from the fixation brought about by the form, by learning how to adapt the form into a more suitable vehicle with which to further explore the act of learning. At this point though, the apprentice is still very much involved in gaining the required expertise in order to mould, shape and modify the purely personal confines of the form constituting his subjective reality. This is to say that, although the apprentice is gaining expertise in being able to recognise the limitations of the form, he nevertheless still needs to work with a form, in order to make sense out of what he is learning.
Once the apprentice gains proficiency in being able to modify and adapt his concept of learning, he begins to see that no matter to what extent he modifies, adapts or re-arranges his concept of learning, he is still firmly caught within the confines of his subjective reality. Having seen this much, the apprentice can now also begin to see the futility of continuing to expand his view of the world - for irrespective of how broad his view of the world becomes, it is this very view that keeps his perception of life intact. Technically speaking, the apprentice now has first-hand experience of what is meant by the madness of the dream, and he begins to wonder what it would be like to have the required knowledge to break free from any constraints upon his perception. It is at this point within the process of learning that the apprentice begins to pay careful attention to everything he thinks he knows or, more precisely, he begins to work consciously at questioning his concept of what it is to learn.
The only way at this point in which the apprentice can question his concept of learning is to measure everything he thinks he knows, that is, his subjective reality, against what he perceives to be the transpersonal nature of the objective reality to which he bears witness. Technically speaking, the apprentice has started to apply his subjective knowledge to life around him in the sense of wanting to prove this knowledge right or wrong. In other words, the apprentice has come to the realisation that he can only prove or disprove his subjective knowledge by acting upon it, and thereby learn from the results achieved. The result of this is that the apprentice begins to stand detached from the results of his experiments in applying his subjective knowledge, for it is only in this way that he can view the results achieved in an objective manner.
It is only once the apprentice to learning has achieved a modicum of proficiency in being able to question his subjective reality, that it becomes possible for the apprentice to start taking the approach to learning as delineated in the Toltec Teachings in a purposeful way, for until then the apprentice is still too caught up in the fixation of his perception to allow for that perception to be questioned by anyone other than himself........
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
DJUBAL писал(а):угу
Не хочется вступать в дискуссию "чей нагваль круче", но меня в таком отношении поражают две вещи:
1 - Каким должен быть настоящий Толтек, что бы местная братия сказала: "Даа, базара нет, этот точно настоящий"? Если он будет сильно похож на Кастанеду, то он будет плагиатором, а если он будет не сильно похож, то будет не Толтеком. Как-то черно-беленько все у вас.
2 - Кем себя надо считать, что бы выносить такие оценки другим людям?
-
Ляксей
- Новичок
- Сообщения: 11
- Зарегистрирован: 14 мар 2006, 22:01
-
selen
- Воин
- Сообщения: 865
- Зарегистрирован: 18 апр 2005, 04:39
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
selen писал(а): Это какой-то подарочный вариант в кожаных переплетах с золотым теснением.
Других изданий я пока не видел.
Максим Музыка обещал выполнить перевод на русский язык предидущих книг, но где-то потерялся. Его сайт nagal.ru необновляется с октября 2005 г. Так что, думается мне, в русском издании мы эту книгу увидим не скоро. Софии Марез перевод своих книг больше не доверяет.
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
Ляксей писал(а):хз, нагваль ли он, но толтек полюбому
Что-то есть в книгах Кастанеды такое, что заставляет нас считать, что Знание, описанное в них есть нечто такое универсальное, общее для любого воспринимающего его человека. А между тем, в книгах КК описано не само Знание, а только его аспекты. Причем аспекты только те, с которыми имела дело линия Дон Хуана. Более того, только те аспекты, с которыми сталкивался Дон Хуан и два его прешественника. И все остальное за кадром. За кадром для нас остальные Нагвали его линии, за кадром другие параллельные линии Толтеков Америки, Европы, Африки, Азии. Кто из нас, что знает про них? Про то с какими аспектами Знания сталкиваются они, в каких битвах учавствуют?
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
Чтобы было удобно это воспринимать я выбрал для себя такую модель: Знание - шар, которой освещается прожекторами различного размера, цвета и интенсивности. Прожектор - восприятие Знания отдельным человеком, он освещает на поверхности шара небольшое пятно. Так Кастанеда освещал одно пятно, Марез другое, есть зона, где эти пятна пересекаются, но есть и области которые освещаются только одним из прожекторов. Есть еще чисто субъективное ощущение, что прожектор Мареза больше по размеру, а у Кастанеды ярче, но это так к слову.
Мы должны намеривать восприятие в полном объеме. Выбирая воспринимать только ту часть знания, которую воспринимал Кастанеда, мы делаем себя слабее, мы отказываемся от нашей силы.
Мы должны намеривать восприятие в полном объеме. Выбирая воспринимать только ту часть знания, которую воспринимал Кастанеда, мы делаем себя слабее, мы отказываемся от нашей силы.
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
Кастанеда был трехзубцовым нагвалем, так что знания, связанные с его спецификой, скорей всего, малодоступны для Т. Мареза. Тем более, что, походу, предназначение трехзубцовых нагвалей - разрушение существующий линий Толтеков. Если трехзубцовый Нагваль выполняет свое предназначение, то линия разрушется, а из её остатков появляются (или не появляются) новые линии.
То что стало мне известно по этой теме из книг Т. Мареза, плохо пока укладывается в голове. Может кто из Вас лучше с ориентировался в этом?
Когда четырёхзубцовый Нагваль становиться Нагвалем, он навсегда лишается каких-то связей со своим тоналем. Трёхзубцовый Нагваль, становясь Нагвалем лишается связей не только с тоналем, но и с нагвалем. Как так?
То что стало мне известно по этой теме из книг Т. Мареза, плохо пока укладывается в голове. Может кто из Вас лучше с ориентировался в этом?
Когда четырёхзубцовый Нагваль становиться Нагвалем, он навсегда лишается каких-то связей со своим тоналем. Трёхзубцовый Нагваль, становясь Нагвалем лишается связей не только с тоналем, но и с нагвалем. Как так?
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
Из субъективных ощущений от прочтения книг Мареза, явно выделяется ощущение уравновешенности. Возможно оно вытекает из темы взаимозависимости и взаимосвязанности всего живого, которая проходит красной нитью через все повествование. Обратите внимание, например, на посты людей, которые читали и Кастанеду и Мареза. Это взвешенные и спокойные высказывания. В противовес истеричным и нервным постам поклоников творчества только Кастанеды.
Далеко не надо ходить за примером. Почитайте тему "Не плогиат, но неизмеримо хуже". И сравните посты.
Далеко не надо ходить за примером. Почитайте тему "Не плогиат, но неизмеримо хуже". И сравните посты.
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
И ещё. Марез, на мой взгляд, больше подходит людям, которые нацелены на работу над собой. Его книги это руководство к действию. В работе над собой мало романтики и это делает книги для большинства людей скучными. Кастанеда - это сказка, сказка захватывающая, но мало практичная. Она создаёт иллюзию. Прочитав ее, мы начинаем думать, что зайдя в форум под ником Anonimus, мы стираем, тем самым, свою личную историю, мы думаем, что, ведя себя как безумные подростки в период полового созревания, тем самым практикуем неделание. Кастанеда прав: мы обезьяны, мы будем держать банан до последнего.
-
selen
- Воин
- Сообщения: 865
- Зарегистрирован: 18 апр 2005, 04:39
Intuition писал(а):Кастанеда был трехзубцовым нагвалем, так что знания, связанные с его спецификой, скорей всего, малодоступны для Т. Мареза.
Марез пишет, что он тоже трехзубцовый. И правило 3-х дает. А у Кастанеды его нет, только упомянуто, что Кэрол Тигс ему его рассказала в последний день магов на земле.
Intuition писал(а):Тем более, что, походу, предназначение трехзубцовых нагвалей - разрушение существующий линий Толтеков. Если трехзубцовый Нагваль выполняет свое предназначение, то линия разрушется, а из её остатков появляются (или не появляются) новые линии.
Линии существовали, чтобы донести знания до всех людей к тому времени, когда они будут готовы его воспринять. Так что взгляни с этой стороны.
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
selen писал(а):Марез пишет, что он тоже трехзубцовый.
Где пишет???
Нигде такого не встречал. Может читал невнимательно.
Вот, что вроде бы понял Кастанеда из Правила трехзубцового Нагваля. http://castaneda.dzr.ru/cc/books/pravilo.zip
-
selen
- Воин
- Сообщения: 865
- Зарегистрирован: 18 апр 2005, 04:39
Intuition писал(а):Где пишет???
Нигде такого не встречал. Может читал невнимательно.
Кажется в предисловии первой книги. Он, потому и публикует учение, что это входит в функции трехчленистых:) нагвалей.
Intuition писал(а):Вот, что вроде бы понял Кастанеда из Правила трехзубцового Нагваля. http://castaneda.dzr.ru/cc/books/pravilo.zip
Так это по типу: "я оперу не видел, но мне Мойша насвистел мелодию":)
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
-
Intuition
- Воин
- Сообщения: 299
- Зарегистрирован: 17 май 2006, 15:39
selen писал(а):Кажется в предисловии первой книги. Он, потому и публикует учение, что это входит в функции трехчленистых:) нагвалей.
Скорей всего это не так, найду книгу уточню. В функции трехзубцовый Нагвалей, походу, не входит задача публикации Учения Толтеков. Они для разрушения вертикальных линий Толтеков. А то, что Ксатанеда опубликовал свои заметки, это скорей исключение, чем тенденция.
-
selen
- Воин
- Сообщения: 865
- Зарегистрирован: 18 апр 2005, 04:39
Кто сейчас на конференции
Сейчас этот форум просматривают: нет зарегистрированных пользователей