roger

I've found (after about twenty five years of exploring it) that the meditative mind isn't so much, "just be aware," or even, "just be," but more like, "just be yourself."

Survive what?

Not go extinct.

The greatest threat to humankind's survival is definitely war, weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, etc.

Karl, some of the evidence for my perspective is: near-death experiences, channeled material, answered prayers, the phenomenon of spiritual enlightenment, angelic appearances (which my mom had when she was six just before her dad died), and miracles.

Now, I can't "prove" these things to you, but I can honestly say that I fully believe that, based on everything I've read, experienced, and even my own reason and self-honest logic, I have a QUALITY of certainty that these things are basically correct, valid, and legitimate, that an individual CAN'T HAVE in the idea that they're NOT valid and legitimate.

I won't get into further detail, but I think you see where I'm coming from.

Peace.

If you were me - self-love could not be false.

Exactly. That's why it's not really "self-love," but a poor substitute for it.

I don't mean YOU, but the many people who attack and do unloving things in guise of "self-love."

What you give, you receive.

This is utilitarian, not retributivist, justice. It's what works, not punishment.

An incredible thing is, this justice can only be really and truly taken comfort in lovingly, but not unlovingly.

You can't hatefully enjoy justice- you won't feel better, you'll get no significant relief.

"You're gonna pay for it! It'll come back to you!" This kind of attitude doesn't give one real satisfaction.

"Well, you were wrong, and you have to deal with the consequences of your cruelty, but I love you and I wish you well." In this case, justice can comfort a person.

Thanks Karl.

Always a pleasure exchanging ideas with you.

Karl,

Your words contain much profound truth.

ACIM echoes your idea that "attacking" is physical in nature: "Only bodies, not minds, can attack."

And your statement that, "One can't 'unlove' someone," has great validity imo. It's the same as the idea that "lack of love" and "attack" aren't "personal". To say that they're personal is saying that the individual being unloved is the REASON for the lack of love on the part of the one that's not being loving. But the truth that it's always the CONDITIONS the one being unloved is failing to meet that's the reason for the lack of love. In other words, it's never BECAUSE IT'S THEM.

An example is that I don't like my brother-in-law (true story), not because it's HIM, but because he's a been a complete jerk to my mom, and my sister (his wife), my other siblings, and to his children (my nephews and niece).

You see, the reason I don't like him isn't at all because it's HIM- it's because of his behavior. If another man engaged in the same behavior, I wouldn't like him either.

So lack of love isn't personal because it's CONDITIONAL.

Conditional love isn't personal because it's conditional; unconditional love isn't personal because it's unconditional.

You see, both conditionality and unconditionality are IMPERSONAL.

When it comes to love, it's really the Universal you're loving, it's the person's "divine nature". Therefore love is suprapersonal.

There was something about my waiter tonight at a restaurant I frequent. He made a facial expression that seemed to reveal a subtle shame, and he did that the previous time he was my waiter also.

On my way home, something came to me very strongly, a intuition about what his issue might be.

He's young, maybe 25 or so, and the thing is, the kind of pressure a person that age can feel to succeed in life, in relationships, in work, and in many other ways, is absolutely enormous.

I think we ALL feel that pressure to some extent. Think about it. The people at this website may feel great pressure to succeed spiritually, to find enlightenment, or in any number of other ways the typical person may or may not feel.

You can't fully get around it. If you're human, you feel a kind of pressure. You want to "be somebody", to make something of yourself, to "get it right".

To an extent, it's unavoidable.

BUT, we can cut ourselves a lot of slack, we can go easy on ourselves. We can know that, if we "fail", or if our lives don't turn out the way we wanted them to, that's OKAY.

I'm in a place in my life where I want to do that- to not place such a strong demand on myself to succeed, to know that it's okay if I don't always get it right, to just enjoy my life without being so obsessed with my life and my path.

In fact, it's ironic, but I feel that cultivating that kind of attitude IS a success in itself. In other words, not being so concerned with succeeding, is succeeding.

Attack others ? As in the initiation of physical force against another person ?

By "attack", I just mean any unkind or unloving word or behavior. To mistreat someone.

The meaning of life is life, and it is meaningless. If x=x it is a tautology ( philosophical speaking ),and if life is life ( suchness in zen ) וt is what it is, empty from meaning. When you ask what the meaning of life ,it like asking what outside life can give meaning to life.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts my friend.

Peace.

The Bible says, "There is a way that seems right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death."

That way is to attack others in the guise of self-love, strength, and power.

The truth is it's weakness, and only an illusion of power.

You see, people think they're really doing what they need to do for themselves, really being strong.

It's a lie.

To attack another is to attack yourself. What you give, you receive.

Love is strength.

Only the loving are truly powerful.

Every choice matters.

Take special care.

sbhhe,

I enjoyed checking out your website and ordered your book, Internal Elixir Cultivation. It had three very good reviews on amazon (as I'm sure you know). I look forward to reading it.

Karl,

I've enjoyed this conversation. Thanks for sharing your perspective, I honor it and it's never been my intention to make you change your mind, just to share my thoughts in a respectful way.

Peace and joy to you.

Gods are omnipotent and omniscient which I am certainly not.

 

From that perspective there is no necessity to add something into the mix that you cannot prove and is unnecessary to it.

A PART of you is omnipotent and omniscient- your Universal Self.

The journey requires that we "forget" that Ultimate Self so as to be in a position to "remember" it. Without this forgetting, there would be no journey, no such thing as learning, as growth, as healing, forgiveness, reconciliation, enlightenment, and a massive amount of experience of love, joy, and truth. Therefore, our "Self" has deliberately taken an apparently finite form as human beings to make all this possible. It's really very simple and easy to understand.

The idea that there's "no necessity" to conceive of God, because we can't "prove" it and because the idea of God is unnecessary anyway, is really profoundly illogical imo (and I don't mean that against you at all).

If God exists, He/She/It would probably like to be known, experienced, and believed in, and there are many good reasons for that. The idea that there's no necessity to conceive of God would perhaps be true IF, and ONLY IF, there IS no God.

Another thing is that, God doesn't need to be "proven". It's a matter of faith. Even channeled entities have taught that there's neither a way to prove God nor a need to.

It's not possible to DISPROVE God either, but it doesn't logically follow that God exists. And the fact that it's not possible to prove His/Its existence equally doesn't imply that He/It doesn't exist.

Steve,

I enjoy interacting here, and hope I'm a blessing. The people here definitely are to me.

You said, "The meaning of life becomes clear and expressed in a very simple word- love."

That's simple and profound, and probably very true imo.

Thanks for your kindness and sharing your thoughts.

Hi guys,

 

I just began studying Acupuncture at University and although I've been a huge fan and practitioner of Taoism since 2012, I'm starting to get a bit "oversaturated" with Chinese medicine and the sheer amount of theoretical knowledge in our curriculum.

 

I'm halfway through my first semester and I'm starting to get sick to the stomach at the thought of having to memorize all the theory. With all due respect, a lot of it (TCM) seems to be slapped together in a kind of non-chalant way, is completely subjective and is at the end of the day, moderately effective at best. I find it bland and boring as hell. At least with science you get the excitement of discovering something new, but with TCM it's like studying religion.

 

Yes, I'm viewing the pessimistic side of the coin, but I am wondering if I should just commit and/or revivify my relationship with TCM or choose another career path altogether...

 

This is coming together with a deeper longing of abandoning all these so-called ancient traditions; ALL the religions, all philosophies, and dream up something much bigger and more embracing of our current times.

Daimai,

I feel that if I help another person to make a choice, rather than telling them what I think they should do, I should help them make their own choice.

Here are some ways to make choices that I've found helpful:

1. Follow your heart.

2. Follow your bliss.

3. Do what you WANT to do, not just what you think you "should" do.

4. Do what gives you peace and joy.

5. If you can't figure out what you want, and what would give you peace and joy, GUESS- you'll probably be right.

I hope this helps and gives you some valuable ways of making the right decision.

Karl,

ACIM and other channeled material teach that people are uncomfortable with, and rebel against, the idea of being "created" by God. AND RIGHTLY SO.

The reason for this is because, you see, it gives God all the glory, it puts God in a position of superiority and we wouldn't exist had God not "created" us.

It paints an unloving, joyless, picture of both ourselves and God.

The truth is that God didn't "create" us out of NOTHING. We ARE God. We are FORMS, MANIFESTATIONS, of God. God didn't "create" us- He/She/It BECAME us. You are God in the FORM of you.

ACIM says, "Everything that is now, has always been."

You see, you have ALWAYS BEEN the "Universal"- and then you took FORM.

I love that video, thelerner.

I wonder who would have won if the lions had attacked.

I'm guessing the lions, but that guess isn't based on any real data or information.

I'm glad you found joy, Roger.

Thanks MH. I appreciate your kindness.

It's become increasingly clear to me with time's passing that you're a very loving person.

Sagebrush,

Well, I've noticed in myself that my own pride has often led me to do unloving things- things that were definitely not dignified.

Often when people have a lot of pride, that pride is very wounded. Extreme pride and wounded pride usually go together. When that's the case, self-defensiveness is almost always the resulting behavior.

I can easily look at my own life, at both myself and others, and see many instances of this.

On the other hand, feeling truly good about yourself and humility go together. I see many examples of that also from my own experience. Just look honestly at your past and you're bound to see examples of what I'm talking about.

Karl,

Some of the points you're making are not logically sound imo.

"We cannot ask questions beyond these primaries."

Why can't we? It's an assumption that we can only know what our senses reveal, or that that which cannot be PROVEN, cannot be KNOWN.

My sister has said, "Well, there's so many religions and different beliefs, how do we know who's right? We can't know for sure. No one knows."

She's assuming that truth can't be known based on insufficient data. That truth cannot be known DOES NOT logically follow from the fact that people believe different things. You see, it SEEMS logical, reasonable, rational, to her, that we can't know, but it IS an assumption.

Again, the popular philisophical idea that we "can't know" if God exists is also an assumption. YOU might not know, Bertrand Russell might not know, but it doesn't follow that it's impossible to know.

Consider the idea that it MIGHT be possible to know, but that you DON'T KNOW whether it is or not. Consider that you don't know whether or not it's possible to know.

Will humankind survive?

I had a thought I wanted to share with you all about the nature of love. I feel that it may have been inspiration, that the idea came from a higher source. The concepts seem to lead to the next one, and seem very correct to me.

Btw, most people tend to equate dignity with pride, rather than with humility. I feel that the opposite is true. Think of people you see as having great dignity- Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, or Mother Teresa- and they're persons of humility, rather than pride. If on the other hand, you observe someone you see as filled with pride, there's often a lack of dignity and respect for others.

Anyway, the idea was:

Love is integrity, integrity is honesty, honesty is humility, humility is dignity, dignity is self-love, self-love is joy.

Silent thunder,

Your words are very inspiring, thanks for sharing them.

You seem like you've really learned some very valuable lessons. Of course, pain is a great teacher, and it's through experience that we grow and acquire wisdom.

It's like you've seen the light, found the answer, through much experience and suffering.

You've really got a beautiful story.

This really resonates with me roger.

 

My process of late, is almost entirely based on radical release.

Complete acceptance of the now and letting go of all process, expectation and aversion.

 

In this complete release, illusions fall away as water flows downhill.  Effortlessly.

That which abides... pure being, clarity, bliss, these words come to mind, but it's nigh on impossible to describe it in words.

 

simple being.

pure awareness.

raw, potent beyond description

blissfully calm and centered

deeply grounded while floating free

 

all these words bring a tiny sense of the experiential awareness of it... yet they pale to the task of transmitting the experience.

few truer words for me in the TTC than " the tao that can be spoken, is not the eternal tao."

Thanks for sharing this, ST.

I feel like you've expressed the essence of Buddhism, the gist of the teaching.

Buddhist teacher Jack Kornfield sums up the Buddhist teaching as letting go.

You've masterfully articulated that imo.

It's also probably what I needed to hear, as I tend to cling and seem to avoid letting go.

You know, it really does take serious guts to do what you're saying.