Karl

Yes, that's the sad side of this.  But China is making billions of dollars investments in wind and solar power.  They are way ahead of the USA with this.

Big, expensive, mistake with poor use of scarce resources. Nuclear and gas are far more effective options. Individual purchase of solar cells/wind power for those who can utilise them is fine. No subsidy for those purchases.

, well it works for me,

but only for small change! 

go figure.

LOL

I remember that one well. Always pick up the abandoned pennies to show you want money.

There is some truth in it. If you are the sort of person that hopes to win the lottery instead of working, then you get engaged with the practical effort of expending energy to gain energy. If you are the sort of person that sees money as 'the route of all evil' then it can train your mind to obliterate that thought by repetition.

Nope, I'm suggesting that the Spanish Inquisition, the divine right of Kings, and the rape of little boys have nothing to do with Christianity. They are manifestations of human ignorance and depravity. The opposite of all genuine spiritual teachings.   Many people identify religions with their political institutions, I choose to identify religions with their core teachings and [what I consider to be] credible commentaries and teachings. That's my prerogative, my choice. I acknowledge Osho's limitations and corruption but something he once said stuck with me - 'religion is an individual's internal search for the truth, everything else is politics.'  Here's a beautiful little story told by Anthony Demello that helped to guide me towards seeking truth in religion rather than settling for something less, no matter what "religious leaders" might prefer. It addresses quite nicely your legitimate disillusionment with "religion" and demonstrates his own. "There was a man who invented the art of making fire. He took his tools and went to a tribe in the north, where it was very cold, bitterly cold. He taught the people there to make fire. The people were very interested. He showed them the uses to which they could put fire: they could cook, could keep themselves warm, etc. They were so grateful that they had learned the art of making fire. But before they could express their gratitude to the man, he disappeared. He wasn’t concerned with getting their recognition or gratitude; he was concerned about their well-being.  He went to another tribe, where he again began to show them the value of his invention. People were interested there too, a bit too interested for the peace of mind of their priests, who began to notice that this man was drawing crowds and they were losing their popularity. So they decided to do away with him. They poisoned him, crucified him, put it any way you like. But they were afraid now that the people might turn against them, so they were very wise, even wily. Do you know what they did? They had a portrait of the man made and mounted it on the main altar of the temple. The instruments for making fire were placed in front of the portrait, and the people were taught to revere the portrait and to pay reverence to the instruments of fire, which they dutifully did for centuries. The veneration and the worship went on, but there was no fire.Where’s the fire? Where’s the love? Where’s the freedom? This is what spirituality is all about. Tragically, we tend to lose sight of this, don’t we? This is what Jesus Christ is all about. But we overemphasized the “Lord, Lord,” didn’t we? Where’s the fire? And if worship isn’t leading to the fire, if adoration isn’t leading to love, if the liturgy isn’t leading to a clearer perception of reality, if God isn’t leading to life, of what use is religion except to create more division, more fanaticism, more antagonism? It is not from lack of religion in the ordinary sense of the word that the world is suffering, it is from lack of love, lack of awareness. And love is generated through awareness and through no other way, no other way. Understand the obstructions you are putting in the way of love, freedom, and happiness and they will drop. Turn on the light of awareness and the darkness will disappear."

Yep, all of that. Now you have made a credible choice in that you are searching for truth and not blindly following a star. Now, you see there, you began using reason, but you still depend on an instruction book somebody else wrote. Good though that book may indeed be, it is still someone else's ideology which you have subscribed to with some discrimination, but it is not the whole of them, it's an abridged edition. You don't want to be them of course and so you apply the individual that is Steve. When you are ready you can throw away that crutch and begin making your own book from scratch. It will be an unabridged Steve and entirely whole. You will then be able to go places and understand things in an independent way. You will have assumed full responsibility for your life and actions which will free you from plagerism and self doubt.

All I can say is that position and conclusion you are taking is incredibly limited and imprisoning. I am not trying to deny the intellect at all, only trying to directly point to an aspect of your experience which the intellect can't pin down, can't dominate.

Ignore it- that's the point of self inquiry. It shows you that you are already free. Neither Gods, Fate or luck control you. You have free will and intellect.

See, most people build a story about who they are, they build castles in the sky which revolves around mental attachment to false concepts. It builds a false ego which then becomes the person-an alter ego which is imbued with all sorts of ideologies. Now, meditation helps seperate out the thoughts, but sometimes they are so deeply entrenched it requires sterner stuff to get the separation necessary to see it. The problem is, the mind can often re attach to the method of trying to unlock the false ego. You think you moved on, but it was just transference to a new alter ego.

That is why I am now sceptical of the value of hard core practices. I'm not saying they can't be helpful, but they can hinder.

Once the alter ego is seen for what it is, then it serves no more purpose, but here's the thing. How can you know when you got there? So, now, back up a bit and realise that the only tool in the box to do this is the intellect. The wheel has to stop somewhere and something must be trusted. Deny intellect and you are ever denied.

You don't really answer any of the enquiries. What is it that thoughts arise within? What is its substance? What is its colour, nature, location, qualities? For something like a thought to arise it must arise within something in order for it to be differentiated. You can't answer the query because it is an area of experience which can't be grasped, defined, pinned down by the intellect or by thought, yet it is a ever present vital aspect of reality.

In the deepest stages of sleep there is nothing to be aware of, yet many people in the spiritual traditions say that it is possible to still be aware in deep sleep even though there is nothing to be conscious of. Awareness isnt the same as consciousness and awareness can be aware of itself. Which is the same thing that can be experienced in deep meditation, objectless awareness. The universe doesn't cease to exist when there are no objects to be aware of, awareness is primordial, it is prior to thought. Realising that has a dramatic consequences on your sense of self. But this is only something which can be experienced experimentally, it isn't something to be worked out and turned into a intellectual position.

Intellect is it. It has no location, or dimension. It is reality for the person thinking it, but it isn't an object apart from that person.

Awareness is the active part of consciousness, but it cannot be aware of itself, but it can be focuses on diffuse. It is the minds eye. They are two sides of the same coin. Awareness does not exist if there is no consciousness and as consciousness needs to be conscious of something, then awareness is that component that arises. There are subtle levels of both. Awareness is obviously prior to thought.

The universe exists independently of your conscious awareness of it.

You only have the one tool and that is intellect. You are using it to relate your experiences and integrate concepts. It's pointless to use the intellect to deny the intellect. What did you learn from self inquiry ? Didn't you discover there was no base to thoughts, no origin ?

Karl we are not discussing magic mushrooms here its being presented for medicinal purposes. Reishi,  lions mane, ADHCC, shiitake, etc are all species that have non hullucinogencic properties that can be beneficial to both body and mind. Havent watched the video but I would assume thats what its about seeing as he sells supplements based on the medicinal variety, I think thats where the benefits of the fungi can lie for long term purposes.

I'm sure they can.

Yeah, often not everyone changes cords at the same time.

 

It's fun at Bluegrass festivals sometimes when a flat back guitar player get up and does a Doc Watson tune.  They will almost always get their fingers tangled up in the strings.

 

The Guess Who is playing now here at my house.

Is it Doc Watson ?

I play guitar and drums but not very well.

I got a few meals and beers from ex band mates trying to get me back on the throne though so that's always a result, but the answer was always Nooooooo.....wild horses wouldn't make me do that again. I discovered that being John Bonham is much harder than it seemed on paper. Lead guitarists are sulky prima donnas that always want their amp to be louder than anyone else, bass players are authoritarian maniacs, singers always think they sound a thousand times better than they do, the rhythm guitarist is taken for granted and everything else is the drummers fault. Too fast, too slow, too many fills, not enough fills, playing too loud, playing too quietly-always first to arrive, last to leave and never an offer to help cart the kit in and out of the car which is parked 100 metres down the road and it's raining again.

From what I have read about the law of attraction, we can change our perception of the world and opportunities by feeling as if the thing that we choice(instead of want)is already present is more powerful as opposed to just pure visualization(which borders fantasy).

 

Wanting implies lacking, so our truth comes from the life of playground of choices.

 

Anyone have any practical tips and exercises on how to do this well?

 

I'm guessing that emotionally you got be at a more neutral position. For example if you are depressed and feel hopeless you first step has to get to anger to get the emotions jump started then to a feeling of maybe about the thing?

 

Back to my question how to you guys real put power behind the feeling of as if?

 

Is it through and special meditation?

 

I also understand once you have made choice on something, you need to let go of the attachment of the end result and just feel the moment as already reached?

There is a huge money making industry for people that believe in the law of attraction. Lots of people happy to take your money in exchange for hope. Affirmations, visualisations, circles of confidence, hypnotism are all used. In the war people wore lucky underpants and survived despite very low odds....so, it must have been the underpants ;-)

There is also the other side of mushrooms:

"The role of drugs in the exercise of political control is also coming under increasing discussion. Control can be through prohibition or supply. The total or even partial prohibition of drugs gives the government considerable leverage for other types of control. An example would be the selective application of drug laws permitting immediate search, or "no knock" entry, against selected components of the population such as members of certain minority groups or political organizations.

But a government could also supply drugs to help control a population. This method, foreseen by Aldous Huxley in Brave New World (1932), has the governing element employing drugs selectively to manipulate the governed in various ways."

~ Louis Jolyon West, Hallucinations: Behavior, Experience, and Theory. 1975. p. 298.

The evidence is in experientally examining your direct experience right now.

What do thoughts arise within?

What is its substance, where does it exist? Can anything be said about it using the usual analytical mind?

Where do thoughts come from and go to?

If your "reality" only includes thought then you are excluding what thought arises within. Many of the Indian originating traditions revolve around this basic enquiry.

Thoughts arise within the conscious awareness of them. No consciousness then no thoughts. No consciousness then no awareness.

Consciousness and awareness are bound up inseparably with the functioning, living material body.

If you are trying to examine thoughts then nothing will be found. It's a logical loop. Consciousness can never be conscious of itself. What you are doing is non relational self inquiry which leads to a belief in the primacy of consciousness as that from which all reality is created. In effect you believe that you are the creator of all that you perceive-for some that means they believe they are God.

Bud, What I'm getting at indirectly by saying, "what humans?" is that we are Spirits having human experiences, not the other way around - even if it seems so or if we try to insist upon such via limited experience... not unlike how our self-blinded buddy Karl is insisting upon and fanatically trying to sell his reality that we are only humans having only human based sensory experiences, and when time runs out for that aspect and format then the game is over.

Where are these independent spirits devoid of bodies ? Produce them or provide the evidence for their existence. I don't need to 'sell' reality. Reality is right in front of you. It is the method you use to try and prove your concepts.

Now you see Bud has gone a step further in the world of mystic ignorance. Not only does he not want to prove the 'plans of God' you talk about because it creates questions. Just like any good cult member he tells you that God is beyond any possibity of your knowing God. Just practice and believe, never question anything other than those that question your faith. In days gone by the next step would be to but the disbelieving heretic to death. Power of man, not power of God. You create your own prison with faith. Let it go.

When he gave his teachings.

 

 

Yes, in the same way.

 

 

I think there is great value in well-preserved teachings and lineage.

And there is the potential for great harm when the teachings are misappropriated and politicized.

 

We can look at religions as what the founders gave us through the clarity and compassion in their message, such as defining Christianity through the teachings of Jesus and Daoism through the teachings of Laozi and Zhuangzi.

Or we can look at religions as what has has evolved through centuries of interpretation and politicization.

My own preference is to look back to the source material as best I can, and to qualified teachers, and take the former approach. 

 

 

I agree and I am also open to learning from others.

Jesus did not create Christianity or the church, he expounded a philosophy and gathered disciples. Are you suggesting that the Spanish Inquisition, the divine right of Kings and the rape of little boys followed the teachings of Jesus ?

I haven't read the entire history of Buddah, but please show me where he specifically created an organised religion called Buddhism ?

That is not to say that the founding principles of their philosophies, or indeed the behaviour of their acolytes is entirely without merit, but it has certainly been entirely representative of exactly the kind of Poor moral standards that are distributed across the human race- however, the power wielded by many of these churches could create far more damage and misery than individuals could alone.

Teachings are fine if you are able to read them. I'm not talking here about the more simple kind of reading, but the in depth type of reading which discriminates and questions.

I would add to that - it not only defines us beyond the purely physical but beyond the physical and mental.

Then you would need to produce the evidence to support your statement. Until you can, then it isn't. When you can, it is.

Both cities are beautiful. It's hard to know where to begin. You are really going to be visiting living museums. There really isn't a place to turn without bumping into a cathedral, coliseum, fountain, architectural delights abound. You will be spoilt for choice. I think you might want to spend a bit of time chilling, people watching, eating, drinking, walking.....the food is fantastic(there is a famous ice cream parlour near the Trevi fountains-take an evening walk like the Romans do). Why not take in an Opera ? Bit different. Not sure about football as I don't really follow it.

Pick up a rough guide, but really, a city plan and your feet are all that is needed. I have never visited the Vatican as it's usually very busy with long queues and some fairly tacky plastic icons festoon every inch of the area surrounding the entrance. The coliseum is one of the highlights, but the whole city will keep you fabulously entertained.

Enjoy. Try not to eat just Pizza (good though it is).

Thus spake Icarus.

If you wish.

Feel free to choose your own definition if you care to answer.

While I may have the right to be argumentative, I find it tends to take me in a direction I prefer to avoid.

I would define it as that which defines a man beyond the purely physical. Values, virtues, beliefs.

The tree is known by the fruit it produces. Therefore man is known by his actions and nothing beyond that can be inferred.

If you don't allow Buddha to define Buddhism, what definition would you accept?

Your example of cat is not applicable as it is not at all comparable to the concept of Buddhahood.

When did Buddah define Buddhism ? Did Jesus define Christianity ? Organised religion sucks. Choose your own mind, be your own priest.

As a matter of fact, Buddhists are Buddha, by definition.

They are just in a state of confusion and delusion in their present manifestation.

That does not negate their Buddhahood, only obscures it.

Only by their own definition. I'm a cat but for my continual delusion that I'm human. Damned hair balls on the touch screen.

Hi Karl,

I don't mean to be argumentative but I am curious about what you think you can prove and how to go about that in the spiritual realm.

Warm regards,

Steve

Depends how you define spiritual realm Steve and you have every right to be argumentative :-)

Luckily they have several hundred coal fired power stations with which to charge them.

is that why you are here Karl for the sake of argument?  Take that away then what are you, "less than an animal"? 

Why are you asking me that question. That's rhetorical.

What I can prove I can prove. Everything else is learning. Despite what you might think I get a lot out of these arguments if they don't devolve into slagging matches, or posting other people's opinions as proof of concept.

You patently wish to persevere with your argument with me, so you are getting something out of the transaction.

Matters to whom?

Personally, I would say it matters not a whit what can be proven but rather what is. The former is a miniscule subset of the latter.

Same thing. What is = reality. That's why it's necessary that it is proven, otherwise it remains a theory and not reality and therefore not 'what is'.

I'm glad I'm never reminded of such things.

 

Right now I'm listening to Grand Funk Railroad.

Yeah, they don't make them like that anymore .......thank funk. :-)

That's the sort of thing my band makes would make me play for hours on end until they got ......their chord changes sorted out.

Karl, Your attempted shrink show goes on... and we have kindly and helpfully (and also critically) pointed out your particular forms of delusion to you which you refuse to even imagine seeing - yet you are welcome to beat your head against the wall mistaking such for reason and insight but a problem is that you're repeatedly splashing blood and grey matter all over the place which is at least unseemly - which any truly reasonable person would have seen by now !

You present no argument. All I hear is the bleating of a goat.

Ramana said not to be concerned with reincarnation and that seems to be the party line you are towing here.

Buddhists refer to the alaya, which continues from one life to the next.

It is obvious that you have not examined this topic closely.

Buddhists are not Buddah. They are an interpretation of what they think Buddah said. Buddah is also a man. All men are prone to error. Buddah was equally prone to the same errors as other men.