alchemy How does it work?

[Apotheose]

13 hours ago, Neirong said:

Classical example of discussions here.

"Hey, guys I got completely scammed and this practice is a waste of time"

- "Yeah, how?"

"I bought this stupid device for 1500 euros, and it is less effective than a 2 euro tool from a local shop"
"Can't you all see that 2 euro hammer is much better at hitting nails in the wood, than this stupid iPhone device?"
"Only delusional people waste so much time and resources to acquire iPhone, when they can get a simple hammer, and have all they need in life, in real world"

Whole next year arguing what is better at hitting nails and why factual evidence of nail piercing the wood is the only thing that can prove value of a tool.

 

Well, this is a forum about spirituality, right? There are many levels of spirituality, not only the level you are currently in.
If you are not tolerant with others, you’ll certainly lose your patience in this forum.
 

People are free to discuss whatever that is in their ‘perception reach’, and also to be skeptical about mysticism. A “mystic” who even tries to convince others of what he has seen in his path is not a real mystic, but a deluded person. And his credentials must be doubted, in my opinion.

[-ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ-]

24 minutes ago, Apotheose said:

 

Well, this is a forum about spirituality, right? There are many levels of spirituality, not only the level you are currently in.
If you are not tolerant with others, you’ll certainly lose your patience in this forum.
 

People are free to discuss whatever that is in their ‘perception reach’, and also to be skeptical about mysticism. A “mystic” who even tries to convince others of what he has seen in his path is not a real mystic, but a deluded person. And his credentials must be doubted, in my opinion.

He’s not wrong though. On this forum there is too much discussion, not enough practicing. If people practiced as much as they argue on here, maybe things will make more sense. 
 

When someone here tries to talk about something higher than entry level, most often than not they are ridiculed instead of listened to with an open mind.

 

Learn how to use the iPhone, not discuss hammers.

Edited February 4 by -ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ-

[Apotheose]

21 minutes ago, -ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ- said:

He’s not wrong though. On this forum there is too much discussion, not enough practicing. If people practiced as much as they argue on here, maybe things will make more sense. 
 

When someone here tries to talk about something higher than entry level, most often than not they are ridiculed instead of listened to with an open mind.

 

Learn how to use the iPhone, not discuss hammers.

 

“Real iPhone” cannot be talked about. It transcends human mind and language. It’s pointless to discuss.

 

Let the people talk about whatever they want. Tolerance is the minimum.

[ChiDragon]

26 minutes ago, -ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ- said:

Learn how to use the iPhone, not discuss hammers.

 People do change subject and derailed the thread. It does waste energy and cyber space. IMO A new subject should start with a new thread. It was just too much rubbish in one simple thread. Sorry, I have to say that.

[snowymountains]

2 hours ago, Apotheose said:

 

Well, this is a forum about spirituality, right? There are many levels of spirituality, not only the level you are currently in.
If you are not tolerant with others, you’ll certainly lose your patience in this forum.
 

People are free to discuss whatever that is in their ‘perception reach’, and also to be skeptical about mysticism. A “mystic” who even tries to convince others of what he has seen in his path is not a real mystic, but a deluded person. And his credentials must be doubted, in my opinion.

 

It's called big hat no cattle 😁

[Mark Foote]

21 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

The best way to understand the Pali is via a teacher, I don't intend to enter the process of citing the sources in the Pali, like I did for Anapanasati 🙂.

 

It's exactly the sort of discussion to find a teacher for and discuss with them.
 

Cite translations that accord with the Pali Text Society renditions, and we're good.
 

You are here on Dao Bums to better your own understanding, are you not?  

You can disregard the quote from Koun Franz in my last post, doesn't change the rest.  I only quoted him because I like his explanation of "one-pointedness", as the mind that moves away from the head.  I think it's easier to find the "one-pointed" mind in the moments  before falling asleep--I describe that in "Waking Up and Falling Sleep". 

 

Quote

snowymountains

Posted 21 hours ago

 

The Nimitta covering everything with a *momentary* stop of the breath is 1st Jhana.

The simplest way to see that it is not the 4th Jhana this can happen via metta or mudita or karuna while neither of these 3 can offer access to the 4th jhana.
 

Can you quote passages in the first four Nikayas, as sources for these statements?  Or, are they your experience, or your teacher's experience?

So far as I know, the concentrations that involve the extension of metta, mudita, and karuna are the further concentrations, and although Gautama doesn't explicitly say that the fourth concentration is a prerequisite to the further concentrations, he usually lists them after the fourth concentration.  About those extensions, I have written:

 

The first of the further states was “the infinity of ether”. Gautama identified the state with “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of “the mind of compassion”. He described a particular method for the extension of the mind of compassion, a method that began with the extension of “the mind of friendliness”:
 

[One] dwells, having suffused the first quarter [of the world] with friendliness, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; just so above, below, across; [one] dwells having suffused the whole world everywhere, in every way, with a mind of friendliness that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence. [One] dwells having suffused the first quarter with a mind of compassion… with a mind of sympathetic joy… with a mind of equanimity that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence.

(MN I 38, Pali Text Society volume I p 48)

 

The second of the further states (“the infinity of consciousness”) Gautama identified with “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of “the mind of sympathetic joy”, and the third (“the infinity of nothingness”) he identified with “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of “the mind of equanimity”.

(The Early Record)

I'm familiar with action of the body that depends on the extension of the mind of friendliness throughout the room and to the other side of the wall, but that's about it.

 

[Mark Foote]

18 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

 

OR 

 

' Genetic memory'  ?

 

[  " Neuroscientific research on mice suggests that some experiences can influence subsequent generations. In a 2013 study,^[3][4] mice trained to fear a specific smell passed on their trained aversion to their descendants, which were then extremely sensitive and fearful of the same smell, even though they had never encountered it, nor been trained to fear it.

Changes in brain structure were also found. The researchers concluded that "the experiences of a parent, even before conceiving, markedly influence both structure and function in the nervous system of subsequent generations".^[5]

Scientists speculate that similar genetic mechanisms could be linked with phobias, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorders, as well as other neuropsychiatric disorders, in humans.^{[citation needed] "}

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_memory_(psychology)

 

 

Too bad, about that lack of citation.  I'm removing my "like", ha ha!

Then again, even if they had provided a citation:
 

Nature

12 December 2023

More than 10,000 research papers were retracted in 2023 — a new record

The number of articles being retracted rose sharply this year. Integrity experts say that this is only the tip of the iceberg.
 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03974-8

Edited February 4 by Mark Foote

[snowymountains]

4 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

Cite translations that accord with the Pali Text Society renditions, and we're good.
 

You are here on Dao Bums to better your own understanding, are you not?  

You can disregard the quote from Koun Franz in my last post, doesn't change the rest.  I only quoted him because I like his explanation of "one-pointedness", as the mind that moves away from the head.  I think it's easier to find the "one-pointed" mind in the moments  before falling asleep--I describe that in "Waking Up and Falling Sleep". 

 

Can you quote passages in the first four Nikayas, as sources for these statements?  Or, are they your experience, or your teacher's experience?

So far as I know, the concentrations that involve the extension of metta, mudita, and karuna are the further concentrations, and although Gautama doesn't explicitly say that the fourth concentration is a prerequisite to the further concentrations, he usually lists them after the fourth concentration.  About those extensions, I have written:

 

The first of the further states was “the infinity of ether”. Gautama identified the state with “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of “the mind of compassion”. He described a particular method for the extension of the mind of compassion, a method that began with the extension of “the mind of friendliness”:
 

[One] dwells, having suffused the first quarter [of the world] with friendliness, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; just so above, below, across; [one] dwells having suffused the whole world everywhere, in every way, with a mind of friendliness that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence. [One] dwells having suffused the first quarter with a mind of compassion… with a mind of sympathetic joy… with a mind of equanimity that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence.

(MN I 38, Pali Text Society volume I p 48)

 

The second of the further states (“the infinity of consciousness”) Gautama identified with “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of “the mind of sympathetic joy”, and the third (“the infinity of nothingness”) he identified with “the excellence of the heart’s release” through the extension of “the mind of equanimity”.

(The Early Record)

I'm familiar with action of the body that depends on the extension of the mind of friendliness throughout the room and to the other side of the wall, but that's about it.

 

 

As I said in my first response, I'm not interested in copying again my notes from my teacher and providing the citations.

 

If you want citations for definitions finding a teacher and asking them to provide citations is the way to go.

Otherwise you draw your own conclusions on the definitions and stay with these.

 

[Mark Foote]

10 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

As I said in my first response, I'm not interested in copying again my notes from my teacher and providing the citations.

 

If you want citations for definitions finding a teacher and asking them to provide citations is the way to go.

Otherwise you draw your own conclusions on the definitions and stay with these.

 

You're saying that I simply have to accept what you say, or what your teacher has said, end of subject. 

Aren't we on Dao Bums to debate, to question, to provide what experience and resources we have to one another?  

Sometimes we lean on an understanding, we lean on a path and a teacher, I get that.  Just seems odd, if that's the case, that you would be here at all.

As I said somewhere, ChiDragon, the real alchemy to me is in according with my own nature--that is true immortality to me, and it's immortality that is the object of the internal alchemy, is it not?
 

Gautama taught that zest ceases in the third concentration, while the feeling of ease continues:
 

(One) enters & remains in the third (state), of which the Noble Ones declare, ‘Equanimous & mindful, (one) has a pleasant abiding.’

 

(Samadhanga Sutta, tr. Thanissaro Bhikkhu, AN 5.28 PTS: A iii 25; Pali Text Society, see AN Book of Threes text I,164; Vol II p 147)

 

 

That’s a recommendation of the third concentration, especially for long periods. Nevertheless, I find that the stage of concentration that lends itself to practice in the moment is dependent on the tendency toward the free placement of attention. As I wrote in my last post:

 

When a presence of mind is retained as the placement of attention shifts, then the natural tendency toward the free placement of attention can draw out thought initial and sustained, and bring on the stages of concentration.

 

Shunryu Suzuki said:

 

To enjoy our life– complicated life, difficult life– without ignoring it, and without being caught by it. Without suffer from it. That is actually what will happen to us after you practice zazen.

 

(“To Actually Practice Selflessness”, August Sesshin Lecture Wednesday, August 6, 1969, San Francisco)

 

 

I practice now to experience the free placement of attention as the sole source of activity in the body in the movement of breath, and in my “complicated, difficult” daily life, I look for the mindfulness that allows me to touch on that freedom.

("To Enjoy Our Life")

 

 

[Apotheose]

31 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

It's called big hat no cattle 😁

 

It seems so, my friend… but I definitely don’t want to be rude to others here. We all should cultivate Love, all the time.

 

I’d say the biggest red flags that a supposed ‘mystic’ can carry are pride and lack of tolerance. They are - per se - an indicative of disturbance, which means we must be very cautious and suspect their credentials.

 

There’s no such thing as a need to talk about “deep” instead of “shallow” things. I’d expect to hear that from a person who is faking a ‘sage persona’ in this website, honestly.

 

In the end of the day, it’s not the depth that matters. I recognize that the Saints of the Catholic Church did have success in their path, although I find Catholicism quite shallow. The path does not matter more than the results. So, ultimately, you could be more correct than me to say that everything from mysticism is in the mind, and I’d definitely be happy to discover that experimentally, as I’m not attached to ‘paths’, but only to the Truth.

 

That’s why I think every opinion is valid. And since everyone is at different levels of perception, it is quite obvious that the opinions on this website are going to be dissonant.

[snowymountains]

6 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

You're saying that I simply have to accept what you say, or what your teacher has said, end of subject. 

Aren't we on Dao Bums to debate, to question, to provide what experience and resources we have to one another?  

Sometimes we lean on an understanding, we lean on a path and a teacher, I get that.  Just seems odd, if that's the case, that you would be here at all.

As I said somewhere, ChiDragon, the real alchemy to me is in according with my own nature--that is true immortality to me, and it's immortality that is the object of the internal alchemy, is it not?
 

Gautama taught that zest ceases in the third concentration, while the feeling of ease continues:
 

(One) enters & remains in the third (state), of which the Noble Ones declare, ‘Equanimous & mindful, (one) has a pleasant abiding.’

 

(Samadhanga Sutta, tr. Thanissaro Bhikkhu, AN 5.28 PTS: A iii 25; Pali Text Society, see AN Book of Threes text I,164; Vol II p 147)

 

 

That’s a recommendation of the third concentration, especially for long periods. Nevertheless, I find that the stage of concentration that lends itself to practice in the moment is dependent on the tendency toward the free placement of attention. As I wrote in my last post:

 

When a presence of mind is retained as the placement of attention shifts, then the natural tendency toward the free placement of attention can draw out thought initial and sustained, and bring on the stages of concentration.

 

Shunryu Suzuki said:

 

To enjoy our life– complicated life, difficult life– without ignoring it, and without being caught by it. Without suffer from it. That is actually what will happen to us after you practice zazen.

 

(“To Actually Practice Selflessness”, August Sesshin Lecture Wednesday, August 6, 1969, San Francisco)

 

 

I practice now to experience the free placement of attention as the sole source of activity in the body in the movement of breath, and in my “complicated, difficult” daily life, I look for the mindfulness that allows me to touch on that freedom.

("To Enjoy Our Life")

 

 

 

What I said is that I'm not interested in copying my notes and citations again.

You can accept what I wrote about the Nimitta or not accept it, either way is fine 🙂.

The only way to understand the Pali Canon is by working with a teacher though.

 

We're running in circles here though, so I'll have to respectfully decline for the final time 🙏

[Mark Foote]

19 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

What I said is that I'm not interested in copying my notes and citations again.

You can accept what I wrote about the Nimitta or not accept it, either way is fine 🙂.
 

 

You miss my point.  I believe that what you said, and if that's what your teacher said then what your teacher said, misrepresents the teaching in the first four Nikayas.  That is why I have asked you to defend what you said, from Gautama's sermons in the four Nikayas, not from Buddhaghosa.

 

Quote

The only way to understand the Pali Canon is by working with a teacher though.
 

Again, you misrepresent the teaching:

 

Therefore… be ye lamps unto yourselves. Be ye a refuge unto yourselves. Betake yourselves to no external refuge. Hold fast to the Truth as a lamp. Hold fast as a refuge to the Truth. Look not for refuge to any one besides yourselves. And how… is (one) to be a lamp unto (oneself), a refuge unto (oneself), betaking (oneself) to no external refuge, holding fast to the Truth as a lamp, holding fast as a refuge to the Truth, looking not for refuge to any one besides (oneself)?

 

Herein, … (one) continues, as to the body, so to look upon the body that (one) remains strenuous, self-possessed, and mindful, having overcome both the hankering and the dejection common in the world. [And in the same way] as to feelings… moods… ideas, (one) continues so to look upon each that (one) remains strenuous, self-possessed, and mindful, having overcome both the hankering and the dejection common in the world.

 

(Digha Nikaya ii 100, Pali Text Society DN Vol. II pg 108)

 

 

Quote

 

We're running in circles here though, so I'll have to respectfully decline for the final time 🙏
 

 

 

"Do now what it is time for you to do", as somebody once said.

 

 

Edited February 4 by Mark Foote

[Nungali]

13 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

Telekinesis, flying ( without an f35 😁) etc, they're impossible, so no, I don't believe in them.

 

Other things which are internal , not physical phenomena, need interpretation, eg above I've said a few things of past life memories.

 

In the sense described above yes past life memories can definitely exist, but they may not be literal past lives, they could however potentially be a form of encoding for intergenerational trauma.

For me that's impressive on its own and connecting with these unconscious "memories" is a very interesting process. It's amazing stuff but not literally magical.

 

For me that is insignificant  ... meaning  ; it doesnt matter .

 

I am not interested in proving magic can work, but the results I get .  And I consider a LOT of 'internal' stuff ( eg. 'psychological skills' , image associations, symbolism, even drives  )  'magical' or maybe better said ; ' valid tools for magical practice'  .  Or conversely , a lot of magic seems a form of self psychology . Eg , I find tarot a very useful tool  for self analysis , getting through certain issues, etc  but NOT for 'divination' or anything like that . This has to do with how well I know the system , what type of system it is  ( visual / symbolic ) and I happen to learn well  within the visual / symbolic ' type of learning .  In short , I can use the Tarot (or the Qabbalah , or my own developed and more finely tuned system)    as a map to navigate through my psyche .

 

Some people that are into magic do not like this and feel it has been degraded to a mere psychological approach ... ie, purely generated from 'inside' one's own psyche  and personna .  Of course that is a significant  element , but I only see it as part of the  source .  For example,  merely by using the term 'personna ' we acknowledge the very significant input of outside forces  - on a 'material level ' ... that is , from our environment  both real and ideal  ( example the physical environment and people  and things like 'ideal' being morals, ethics, local psychology, religion, etc ) .

 

I go for the three option model ;  'Magic'  generated via our own psychology , as an outside influence that can be used  and a third option that is like a midway point between the two .  Which seems to suggest that the  first option can be so so strong  that it actually breaks through and effects changes in 'reality'  ..... as we perceive it .     (    ) 

 

[Nungali]

12 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

The part were past life memories can be something linked to ancestral experiences ( not the memories being the experiences themselves necessarily ), so intergenerational, is certainly interesting. Eg intergenerational trauma is something real, these experiences are encoded.

 

I've got some books on aboriginal cosmology, dreamtime, it's extremely interesting unfortunately haven't had the time to read most of them properly yet.

I hope one day I'll be able to visit them, I'm a junkie for stuff and info related to indigenous habits and cultures.

 

Consulting indigenous for the ecosystem they live in and know better than anyone makes sense.

Ecology is not area where I have expertise, I remember a documentary though which mentioned efforts by researchers to change the policies of governments around this and their point was simple, they know the ecosystem they live in better than outsiders, listen to them.

 

'Down here'   we have stared  consulting them and getting them to teach us about PROPER fire management  - 'Cultural Burning ' .

 

Unfortunately rule 1 seems to be ;   'Dont all congregate together in one huge space  and then allow the  surrounds to be overgrown in highly flammable material .

 

... and they wonder why we  dont 'get it ' . .... < sigh >

 

 

[snowymountains]

1 hour ago, Apotheose said:

 

It seems so, my friend… but I definitely don’t want to be rude to others here. We all should cultivate Love, all the time.

 

I’d say the biggest red flags that a supposed ‘mystic’ can carry are pride and lack of tolerance. They are - per se - an indicative of disturbance, which means we must be very cautious and suspect their credentials.

 

There’s no such thing as a need to talk about “deep” instead of “shallow” things. I’d expect to hear that from a person who is faking a ‘sage persona’ in this website, honestly.

 

In the end of the day, it’s not the depth that matters. I recognize that the Saints of the Catholic Church did have success in their path, although I find Catholicism quite shallow. The path does not matter more than the results. So, ultimately, you could be more correct than me to say that everything from mysticism is in the mind, and I’d definitely be happy to discover that experimentally, as I’m not attached to ‘paths’, but only to the Truth.

 

That’s why I think every opinion is valid. And since everyone is at different levels of perception, it is quite obvious that the opinions on this website are going to be dissonant.

 

Well, in some interactions Metta is appropriate, in others boundaries are more appropriate, there's no one size fits all.

Personally I don't agree with Metta everywhere as it's often done compulsively so.

 

Tbh all people I've met that are spiritually advanced are very simple people, quite prosaic in their explanations and actually science-minded as well. 

 

Re mysticism, it uncovered the techniques to talk to our unconscious, which doesn't grasp past nor future nor is communication possible with language. This is something amazing.

 

But with each new century of history our knowledge and understanding improves and today the unconscious is studied through psychology and psychotherapy.

 

There's some amazing stuff that would had been considered magical centuries ago.

 

Personally I was fascinated that unconscious memories may be linked to the trauma of an ancestor.

 

Transferences of emotions would had be seen as metaphysical ages ago.

 

Projections would probably be thought of as magic in the middle ages.

 

Also while interesting to know and good to be able to recognise, these things are not spiritual advancements necessarily.

Eg borderlines project all the time and they don't even know they're doing it. They do this due to a mental disorder, not due to enlightenment.

 

But there are no fireballs, no telekinesis and no superpowers.

 

My view is the "simpler" the spiritual tradition, the better. I refer to "simple" as something positive.

For more "complex" techniques eg regressions, dreamwork, active imagination (journeying) etc imo a therapist is the better choice.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 4 by snowymountains

[snowymountains]

8 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

For me that is insignificant  ... meaning  ; it doesnt matter .

 

I am not interested in proving magic can work, but the results I get .  And I consider a LOT of 'internal' stuff ( eg. 'psychological skills' , image associations, symbolism, even drives  )  'magical' or maybe better said ; ' valid tools for magical practice'  .  Or conversely , a lot of magic seems a form of self psychology . Eg , I find tarot a very useful tool  for self analysis , getting through certain issues, etc  but NOT for 'divination' or anything like that . This has to do with how well I know the system , what type of system it is  ( visual / symbolic ) and I happen to learn well  within the visual / symbolic ' type of learning .  In short , I can use the Tarot (or the Qabbalah , or my own developed and more finely tuned system)    as a map to navigate through my psyche .

 

Some people that are into magic do not like this and feel it has been degraded to a mere psychological approach ... ie, purely generated from 'inside' one's own psyche  and personna .  Of course that is a significant  element , but I only see it as part of the  source .  For example,  merely by using the term 'personna ' we acknowledge the very significant input of outside forces  - on a 'material level ' ... that is , from our environment  both real and ideal  ( example the physical environment and people  and things like 'ideal' being morals, ethics, local psychology, religion, etc ) .

 

I go for the three option model ;  'Magic'  generated via our own psychology , as an outside influence that can be used  and a third option that is like a midway point between the two .  Which seems to suggest that the  first option can be so so strong  that it actually breaks through and effects changes in 'reality'  ..... as we perceive it .     (    ) 

 

 

I see what you're saying, it's not necessarily just our own Psyche, at least not in a reductionist way.

 

Eg Jung wrote a whole book on his conversations with Philemon whom he called a thought-form and considered Philemon something external to his Psyche.

 

However he didn't use more concepts than necessary nor did he use unnecessary associations, eg he didn't assign Philemon any further properties by calling him a demon or a divine message or whatevs.

 

He also worked on the psychoid archetype.

 

So he wasn't a reductionist.

 

But the workings of rituals, mysticism etc were no longer seen religiously or supernaturally and instead were seen as the Lingua Franca to connect to our non conscious parts.

[Nungali]

9 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

That's what I was alluding to, hence the reference to intergenerational trauma. It's really amazing.

 

Yes, so my perspective on it , again, is it does not matter what the source is   , its the result .  A trauma may be deeply embedded psychologically , depending on one's 'cultural flavor ' successful treatment may be via a psychologist or an exorcist / witch doctor / shaman .  Its about getting to 'the root'  , that 'inner jumble of complexity' and the 'mirror maze of symbolism  '' that the psyche uses to operate  ( from our 'outside'  perspective  ) .

 

Another example is, some psychological theories are about confronting one's phobias or even 'imbalances'  , in a controlled and gradual way , eg, perhaps one fears entering water .  Maybe it was from a childhood experience , maybe great great great great ..... Grandma watched the rest of the village get swept away by a tidal wave ... or maybe a 'past life'    .

 

But I have seen one magical training system, where  ( before being considered a magician ) one has to confront all their fears and phobias by 'mastering ' each element .

 

- so far I have 'mastered '  - survived -   being swept away  by a flood ,   fighting a scary bush fire  .... air ?     Nah , I am not going to attempt the 'flying thing '  ... at this stage

 

 

 

" Whoopsies ! "

 

[Nungali]

4 hours ago, -ꦥꦏ꧀ ꦱꦠꦿꦶꦪꦺꦴ- said:

He’s not wrong though. On this forum there is too much discussion, not enough practicing. If people practiced as much as they argue on here, maybe things will make more sense. 
 

When someone here tries to talk about something higher than entry level, most often than not they are ridiculed instead of listened to with an open mind.

 

Learn how to use the iPhone, not discuss hammers.

 

yeah but  .....

 

its an internet forum , not a practice hall .

 

So of course its gonna be more about   blah - blah .

 

Fun to rave BUT   ' the proof is on the floor '

 

( so I challenge you  (on  the internet ) to a physical duel  ..... I choose flinging fireballs !  ) 

[snowymountains]

Just now, Nungali said:

 

 

 

But I have seen one magical training system, where  ( before being considered a magician ) one has to confront all their fears and phobias by 'mastering ' each element .

 

 

Most psychodynamic techniques are evolutions of old religious/mysticism techniques.

 

I had seen a traditional form of this ( maybe the same? ) where each element was essentially corresponding to some personality traits.

There also was a regression per element/traits where an enlightened being went to time and space where this element was lost and retrieved it for you.

Then it put it all back through some energy channel.

 

This was interesting and the meditations were actually fun.

But the modern technique does have significant improvements, in how the regression starts , how it ends, finding linkages from that event, it's way more refined and systematic.

[Nungali]

15 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

I see what you're saying, it's not necessarily just our own Psyche, at least not in a reductionist way.

 

Eg Jung wrote a whole book on his conversations with Philemon whom he called a thought-form and considered Philemon something external to his Psyche.

 

My  view on these things ; coming from  decades of study and personal experience - it is , again,  'both' . That is Philemon , 'King John' ( Blavatski's version ) , etc  - including my own 'Philamon' :   The psyche is a 'stream' of energy conceived vertically ;  'above us' we have higher aspects of ourselves and the higher one goes the less they become associated with our 'middle ground' ( everyday conscious life)  ie ' ourselves '  , the 'deeper' they go (getting back to our earliest evolution - and again , inter - generational 'gene learning ' )  they seem more unconnected to 'us'  , they are regardless , our deeper drives  ( connections to 'Id ' ) .

 

This is similar to the old 'hierarchy of beings'  concept  ... it has been used to validly  treat patients where standard psychology has failed  - clinical reference ;

 

http://www.theisticpsychology.org/books/w.vandusen/presence_spirits.htm

 

- Intro :

 

" By an extraordinary series of circumstances a confirmation appears to have been found for one of Emanuel Swedenborg's more unusual doctrines-that man's life depends on his relationship to a hierarchy of spirits. Out of my professional role as a clinical psychologist in a state mental hospital and my own personal interest, I set out to describe as faithfully as possible mental patients' experiences of hallucinations. A discovery four years ago helped me to get a relatively rich and consistent picture of the patients' experience. Though I noticed similarities with Swedenborg's description of the relationships of man to spirits it was only three years after all the major findings on hallucinations had been made that the striking similarity between what Twentieth-Century patients describe and Swedenborg's Eighteenth-Century accounts became apparent to me. I then collected as many details as possible of his description. I found that Swedenborg's system not only is an almost perfect fit with patients' experiences, but even more impressively accounts for otherwise quite puzzling aspects of hallucinations. I will first describe how I worked and my findings, and then relate this to Swedenborg's work."

 

and further on regarding Swedenborg's perceptions;

 

" Swedenborg describes all of life as a hierarchy of beings representing essentially different orders and yet acting in correspondence with each other. The Lord acts through celestial angels, who in turn correspond on a lower level to spiritual angels, who in turn correspond to a third lower heaven-all of which corresponds to and acts into man. On the opposite side there are three levels of hell acting out of direct contact into man. Man is the free space and meeting ground of these great hierarchies. In effect, good and its opposite evil rule through this hierarchy of beings down to man who stands in the free space between them. Out of his experiences and choices he identifies with either or both sides. These influences coming from both sides are the very life of man. The man who takes pride in his own powers tends toward the evil side. The man who acknowledges that he is the receptacle of all that is good, even the power to think and to feel, tends toward the good side. In the extreme of evil, spirits claim power over all things and seek to subjugate others. In the extreme of good, angels feel themselves free in that the good of the Lord acts freely through them. Swedenborg's doctrine of the effect of spirits with man is simply the lower aspect of a whole cosmology of the structure of existence.

 

Such is the equilibrium of all in the universal heaven that one is moved by another, thinks from another, as if in a chain; so that not the least thing can [occur from itself]: thus the universe is ruled by the Lord, and, indeed, with no trouble (SD 2466)¹. From this order of creation it may appear, that such is the binding chain of connection from firsts to lasts that all things together make one, in which the prior cannot be separated from the posterior (just as a cause cannot be separated from its effect); and that thus the spiritual world cannot be separated from the natural, nor the natural world from the spiritual; thence neither the angelic heaven from the human race, nor the human race from the angelic heaven. Wherefore it is so provided by the Lord, that each shall afford a mutual assistance to the other....Hence it is, that the angelic mansions are indeed in heaven, and to appearance separate from the mansions where men are; and yet they are with man in his affections of good and truth (LJ 9). "

 

- of course,  this perception existed long before Swedenborg wrote his version of it .

 

 

 

However he didn't use more concepts than necessary nor did he use unnecessary associations, eg he didn't assign Philemon any further properties by calling him a demon or a divine message or whatevs.

 

Yeah . Thats because he was not a trained magician ... which , in that field, would be considered highly dangerous and reckless . Would you accept advice on ... well, anything , without considering if the source was valid or misleading ?

 

The above reference shows how the 'negative' forces seem to be focused on 'misleading' ... at least !  We also notice that with these associations ( Jung's 'Philamon' , Blavatski's 'King John ' , etc ) that they are prone to trickery  at times .  I have never found that with mine , and I note , that in agreement with Dr VanDusen's finding , they are more 'abstract' and less personified  than the others .  I do have 'converse' with 'spirits' that will do that  - its more like a friendly ribbing or testing , and nothing like a persecution , but they are of a totally different order to the '  tutelary spirit ' .

 

He also worked on the psychoid archetype.

 

So he wasn't a reductionist.

 

But the workings of rituals, mysticism etc were no longer seen religiously or supernaturally and instead were seen as the Lingua Franca to connect to our non conscious parts.
 

That is why I say that religion uses 'magical technology '  . The 'religious form'  is for another purpose actually .  The techniques themselves ( taking out religion , spirituality , or a way of 'proving if magic works ' ... by itself alone ) are about understanding  and improving our relationship and position in our environment and within ourselves , thus creating a more healthy and relevant persona .

 

( by 'persona'  I mean the result  between  the person themselves and their outer environment .  The 'person themselves ' is that quality that makes them differ from others exposed to the same influences , eg twins . )

 

[Nungali]

51 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

Most psychodynamic techniques are evolutions of old religious/mysticism techniques.

 

I had seen a traditional form of this ( maybe the same? ) where each element was essentially corresponding to some personality traits.

 

yes, that is generally and individually ; generally we can be classified under the elements ; fire- individual nature , inspiration , nervous system . Water, emotions, feelings, unconscious, dream states, intuition, etc  , circulatory system.  Air, intellect and  mental powers ,  and 'state of consciousness' ,  respiratory system and earth -  the action realm - 'doing'  ,  skeletal muscular.

 

Individually one  be more of a 'fiery nature ' or 'down to earth . I think TCM  system might be relevant here ?

 

 

 

There also was a regression per element/traits where an enlightened being went to time and space where this element was lost and retrieved it for you.

Then it put it all back through some energy channel.

 

This was interesting and the meditations were actually fun.

But the modern technique does have significant improvements, in how the regression starts , how it ends, finding linkages from that event, it's way more refined and systematic.
 

 

[snowymountains]

9 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

 

"Philemons" are not always because a psychotic episode and thus they're not treated always as such.

It's important to distinguish if someone has control over the induction of the state of consciousness, if they control the on/off switch to that state of mind.

If they have control of the switch, then by definition it's not psychosis. If because of these practices though someone starts to lose control of the switch, they should stop, as psychosis starts becoming a potential risk.

( And thus it's really surprising to see eg some teachers of modern shamanism suggest that they should always be in that state of mind, this is horrible advice ).

 

Of course one needs to consider the options, one can talk to the Philemons and write a whole book like Jung, one may not want to interact at all or anything in between.

My personal preference is that whatever needs a lot of daytime to explain philemon time, is wasted time because we don't live forever, we don't have our senses forever, our loved ones don't live forever, so time is better spent on these.

 

However as long as someone is always in control of the on/off to these altered states of consciousness, both options are ok.

 

But the realms associated with these states are entirely psychological, not metaphysical.

If X drops a note in the "astral plane", a day later Y won't find it if they go to the "astral plane", because it's not a real place, each of X,Y has their own "astral plane".

Same applies to all types of journeys everyone comes with their own distinct map of realms, they're personalised, not something objective, they're psychological realms ( not necessarily in a reductionist sense ).

 

Whether a psychological realm is used as a stage to interact with the psychoid archetype is something different, it doesn't mean the realm is something that's objectively there nor metaphysical.

Edited February 5 by snowymountains

[snowymountains]

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

 

The elements in the one I did were the Ayurvedic ones and the mapping to organs a different one. So they sound very close but not identical.

 

But it doesn't matter, what matters is that there's a regression per group of traits and someone else also "being there" during the regression ( the enlightened being ).

 

This is exactly the sort of progress I'm referring to that has been done in psychodynamic therapy:

 

• decoupling what matters from medieval medical theories

• isolating the important factors & improving the technique.

• having a much better understanding of when the technique should be applied

• Understanding the associated risks.

Edited February 5 by snowymountains

[Nungali]

14 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

"Philemons" are not always because a psychotic episode and thus they're not treated always as such.

 

I dont see them as a psychotic episode at all . More from the perspective that the ancient Greeks saw them .  However , people having a psychotic episode are those that cannot integrate these experiences into everyday life .

 

 

It's important to distinguish if someone has control over the induction of the state of consciousness, if they control the on/off switch to that state of mind.

 

Thats one of the aims of Magick , regarding 'states of consciousness'  or 'trances'  .  However , at times the 'higher' is triggered spontaneously , eg, by experience, by age (and associated triggering chemicals ) , even by place ; whether its the mystic castle in the secret forest (internal or 'astral' ) or a  real place like Palka-karrinya ( the unknown Ainslee Roberts , who had been sent on a holiday by his relatives  - to sorta get rid of him for a while - to recover from a 'nervous breakdown '  Someone took him out back , they spent a night at Palka-karrinya  ... they should not have , very sacred special place , horses refused to enter, even though good water available , they had to walk in .  After one night Ainslee never the same again , he became one of our greatest artists .

 

Palka :

14 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

Roberts work

14 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

 

If they have control of the switch, then by definition it's not psychosis. If because of these practices though someone starts to lose control of the switch, they should stop, as psychosis starts becoming a potential risk

 

Yes .... very good magical advice I have heard from a few people , even Crowley  ( he seemed a nut about 'keeping at it ' ) : " Take some time off all of this and do some gardening . "   The issue here seems to be some type of internal 'obsession ' .  The reason this state exists is to improve our life , if you stay in that state  and dont 'get back to normal life' how is the experience going to improve it .

 

A bit like acid tripping  , a trip can be enlightening , IF you take the time to process it and integrate it into your life , but if you keep doing it  , one on top of another ... you just end up being a fried acid head .

 

( And thus it's really surprising to see eg some teachers of modern shamanism suggest that they should always be in that state of mind, this is horrible advice ).

 

Of course one needs to consider the options, one can talk to the Philemons and write a whole book like Jung, one may not want to interact at all or anything in between.

My personal preference is that whatever needs a lot of daytime to explain philemon time, is wasted time because we don't live forever, we don't have our senses forever, our loved ones don't live forever, so time is better spent on these.

 

Such 'contacts ' are meant to be a normal healthy holisitic part of life  and  help us have a good and improved life , they should not be 'for no purpose' and certainly not a 'waste of time ' . To think they are clearly shows  'ignorance ' of their function, I think that is because a lot of this understanding has been lost to us and we  (collectively ) dont  know what's going on with these type of things .

 

However as long as someone is always in control of the on/off to these altered states of consciousness, both options are ok.

 

But the realms associated with these states are entirely psychological, not metaphysical.

 

We cannot 'prove ' that one way or the other .  I go for a mixed plate option .

 

If X drops a note in the "astral plane", a day later Y won't find it if they go to the "astral plane", because it's not a real place, each of X,Y has their own "astral plane".

 

I dont think the 'astral plane' has anything to do whatsoever to what I was  just talking about  .  Its an entirely different experience. My experience was not 'astral'  but conscious .   The only connection between the two is the 'imagination' .

 

Same applies to all types of journeys everyone comes with their own distinct map of realms, they're personalised, not something objective, they're psychological realms ( not necessarily in a reductionist sense ).

 

Agreed , except that all types of these 'journeys' may not be 'astral'

Sure everyone's map may be different , that is why we are encouraged to make our own maps adapted from the 'form templates' .

 

Whether a psychological realm is used as a stage to interact with the psychoid archetype is something different, it doesn't mean the realm is something that's objectively there nor metaphysical.

 

perhaps , perhaps not .... IMO it does not matter if the 'technology' works .

 

magicians opinion ... we are here to get results not  to prove  that things may exist out side of our own psyche's  .... if thats one's main aim, I suggest an investigation of Buddhism .

 

Edited February 5 by Nungali

[Nungali]

12 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

The elements in the one I did were the Ayurvedic ones and the mapping to organs a different one. So they sound very close but not identical.

 

But it doesn't matter, what matters is that there's a regression per group of traits and someone else also "being there" during the regression ( the enlightened being ).

 

 

I am not sure what that means ?   It seems to refer to the therapist  but the bracketed bit suggests something else  ? 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_man_factor

 

 

Sir Ernest Shackleton, in his 1919 book South, described his belief that an incorporeal companion joined him and his men during the final leg of his 1914–1917 Antarctic expedition, which became stranded in pack ice for more than two years and endured immense hardships in the attempt to reach safety. Shackleton wrote, "during that long and racking march of thirty-six hours over the unnamed mountains and glaciers of South Georgia, it seemed to me often that we were four, not three".^[1] His admission resulted in other survivors of extreme hardship coming forward and sharing similar experiences.

 

The thing is, if you read this story , uits one miracle of chance against incredible odds over and over again that led to one of the most fearless intrepid and successful explore fail and rescue attempts in modern history .

 

 

This is exactly the sort of progress I'm referring to that has been done in psychodynamic therapy:

 

• decoupling what matters from medieval medical theories

• isolating the important factors & improving the technique.

• having a much better understanding of when the technique should be applied

• Understanding the associated risks.

Hmmmm ... sounds like some of my research in collating ' simple spiritual beliefs and practices ' .