Birch

"With the present Notification, in order to protect the good of the Christian faithful, this Congregation declares that the above-mentioned positions are incompatible with the Catholic faith and can cause grave harm." Protect the good of the Christian faithful from the truth ? Insane.

So, are any of the monotheisms 'good' for ecology? I'd say if not then they ought to be kicked out with the dishwater because I don't think we have time to let everyone down slowly, which is IMO what these interfaith things are supposed to be doing. But if you say in practice the various religious leaders are more concerned with their respective political powers than anything else then that (for me) points to systemic failure of their respective faiths to awaken or enlighten anyone, which IMO is what we need more not less of in such times.

Be very very honest with the people you meet. And bear in mind that our current setup isn't easy for both sexes. It's not always hearts that break IMO/IME. Or, go find some attractive older women who won't be quite as hurt. But, bear in mind you might be yourself. Mr Slopp, The jing reductionism is wearing. Anyway, young guy, not too much of a worry. Old guy, ought to watch out. I figure if your head's about to blow off, letting yourself off the hook is a good idea. See the perils of retention without additional considerations on Trunk's site.

I like the idea of looking at each tradition to see where it leads and what conditions people acting under it bring to the world. So far I haven't seen much of anything particularly "ecological" in any of the Abrahamic "faiths" but I haven't studied them cover to cover. I suspect that people are less in need of "faith" than ever. Certainly IMO if they continue trying to hold onto any specific one in such an interconnected world then I can only see the shit hitting the fan harder and faster. So perhaps this interfaith thing is a brake pedal for these particular circumstances. I don't think it should be without an "out" for people who have a direct relationship with reality tho. Maybe include some space for those who are ready to drop faith rather than feed the intolerance back. It's also all highly political this stuff. We're no longer looking at frying small fish but huge whales of issues.

Righto, all for spontaneous:-) But I do reckon there might be moments in/within that kind of practice that without closedown could f&ck some people up. Look at the stuff "out there" on abreaction. Look at the stuff out there on the various routes anger could take if you're working with/on it. Look at some of the primal therapy stuff. Look at a super-weird "therapeutic/teaching" model, all avant-garde but has no idea what it's dealing with.

Yey for cord and chord-cutting. Now, ney (IMO/IME) who say this stuff is only ever one-sided. For, IMO/IME, the decision to not be a party to any of it doesn't mean IMO you weren't already (for if you weren't IMO/IME you wouldn't have to bother with any of this stuff.) And, as an aside (IMO/IME) it might be helpful to not take it all personally and look to the wider influences acting on any given situation. I figure there's enough "out there" to give any black magician a run for their money. And if they're taking advantage of anyone's adverse circumstances/lack of experience then I say the "curse" falls right back on them. A44holes. So mote it be:-)

Excellent post Steve. I've found my experience of what I think might be wu-wei to be any action/speech/thought that comes when there is no pressure/contraction around them. I've found that thinking can spin me in or out of wu-wei. Also, many things that feel too "onesided" or from specific unidimensional emotions (like fear, which I figure might be one of the more useless ones). I just had a thought about one's nature hitting up against one's conditioning. Knowing which is which and when is IMO a great undertaking.

I figure a lot of "high-level" practices are "out there" and being taught, and that the less than desirable effects/stages might be more common than we think. So IMO, it's very much worth learning about what such things are. And having the Western docs understand it too.

I've seen this term 'manifesting' all over the place. I don't understand it (very well, if at all). So I thought I'd ask here. Manitou, I have some negative ideas about it, especially if related to notions of blame/responsibility for unwanted circumstances/conditions. Classic example, the person in the other thread with the ovarian problem who was met by a bunch of pretty awful-sounding doctors...You responded to ask the question 'Why am I manifesting this?' Anyway, you seem to use the idea a lot. What's your understanding of it? Is it different from 'karma'? What about cause/effect? What about other people? What are the misuses of the term? That sort of thing. Thank you!

Ah, certainly seems that way..seems it's often being used in quite the 'dirty argument' way. Well, I felt it used that way the other day. Oh yeah, it was used on Susan too in that thread that I can't find anymore. And I'm sure some other folks. But...can we really separate what someone is saying from them 'as a person' - I'd argue that it's just more of the splitty stuff. So I guess it folds nicely back into the whole 'manifesting' thing. Would be neat to find out what the various 'players' held as BS (Belief-Systems) during that set-to and whether any of them changed any BS since (or just got even more embedded and hunkered down :-)). I did some pretty interesting introspection on the exchanges in this thread and I'd like to thank 5ET and Manitou for allowing me the opportunity

"Hardly anyone understands that phenomena are illusions of mind basically just by hearing this kind of logic." "Illusions" of mind? What does this mean? I had an idea or 2 related, that I'm finding hard to put into words but it sort of goes like this. - why would a mind make anything up in the first place ? ("illusion") Notice I said 'a mind' but I'm not stuck on this notion, for various reasons I need not explain here. - if a mind makes something up and decides that it doesn't want to continue making that thing up then what's stopping it doing otherwise? I'd say "nothing" but looking around me says otherwise, what gives?

" I believe that it is thinking that causes dualities to exist. " Doesn't it depend on the type of thinking Mr MH? I know that by saying that I've introduced another dualism, sorry :-) But I think (and I guess I've experienced) that one can (re)train oneself to think in terms of non-duality. But it's still thinking. One can (retrain) oneself to listen to one's guts and heart, is that another kind of thinking? Something else? One can train to (re)integrate one's mind, heart and guts. Yet another? One can (re) train oneself to listen to other people. Yet another?

That was pretty good GIH But who is 'we'? I hope it's not just the humans (again). Not an anti-human statement BTW.

It is the 'Sex at Dawn' book :-) Whoops Sorry uncle Freud http://www.sexatdawn.com/

http://www.shametojo...he_shackles.pdf See also http://www.sexatdawn.com/ Excellent post TaoMeow!

Hi Manitou, thanks for answering my question. "Foul" on including a reference to my "life-story" in your example. As far as I know, I'm the only person allowed to talk about it:-) 'Willing to do something about it' Actually am :-) What am I doing about it? Questioning, thinking, acting to change reactions (mine), introspecting, practicing meditation, some bodywork, studying, research (and not just Taoism) discussing what I understand (or don't) with other people. Enjoying life:-) Contributing. I suspect we probably practice some very similar things:-). Of course I have every character 'defect' in the world, I'm a person (and last time I checked, all that came with :-)). The degree to which I have each is often pointed out by other people (or by consequences) but I accept that. What I'm not in favour of, is the use of my own defects by others to deflect attention around debate I actually don't care what you think of me but I do care about the topic at hand. So can I suggest we stick to it? I actually have first hand experience of what I'd call a 'manifesting sequence' (belief--thought/feeling--action) so while I may disagree with the content of some beliefs, like 'reincarnation' or 'choosing' one's birth (or that I'm a victim ) I actually do agree with the mechanisms for it. As far as I can understand so far, TTC teaches the mechanisms and not content. I think some brands of buddhism do too. I just had a flash about jing---qi---shen... I am not under the whatever of "blame and victimization" and my life is not 'on hold'. I ought to know that, giving I'm the person living it:-) I'm also not a Christian and I have some disagreement with organized religions but I do play 'spot the cadecus' and mull over similarities (and differences) in each. I've met a few of my ponies already :-) There almost certainly some more under there. In fact post discussing this stuff, I went looking for a few definitions and found some really interesting articles. So I mentally thanked both you and 5ET for that. I'm off for a few days vacation.

I read elsewhere it referred to qigong psychosis /kundalini syndrome and was to be avoided where possible during cultivation and treated when diagnosed.

Alright 5ET. I'll respond as best I can to this one too. "What I have communicated is my own belief based on my experience. I haven't stated "this is the way it is." So, again I think you are projecting your own personal reactions on others here." I happen to not share your belief. I tried to explain why (albeit quite badly) but no, I'm not projecting. I also happen to disagree with that whole 'projection' model. "It might be helpful if you related this to you." Why? " I get that you feel that I communicate in a way that puts you on the defensive." Um, no, I disagree. I think I'm allowed to disagree without that being suggested as 'defensive'. "So, instead of saying generalized statements of fact for "other" people. Why not state how it makes YOU feel. This is part of taking responsibility." As far as I can tell. I did (and generally) do speak from the 'I feel' perspective. However, I've seen enough 'other people' hurt with some of this pseudo psycho/spirituality that I decided it was time for me to speak about it. Are you saying that YOU are still enmeshed in dysfunctional circumstances and the space for misunderstanding is huge for YOU? No. Although I did say there might be another thread about how dysfunctional our culture seems to be to me. Look at this forum, it's made for talking about this stuff. We spend our time defining and disagreeing :-) hence my opinion that there's a HUGE amount of room for it :-) If that is true, then owning that for yourself in a responsible way helps others (me) to communicate to you in way that you can hear it. Otherwise it is just comes across to me as a judgement and a condemnation. How so? Are you projecting (sorry, I couldn't resist ) OK, I'm not following the logic here... How is sharing what works practically for me not helpful to others? They can take it or leave it. Sharing what works for you is fine. I said that already. Offering it to others as guidance to take or leave ok. Imposing it as teaching...very very dangerous IMO. I was very clear about that. If your current relationships and circumstances are a result of choices YOU made before being born, Jeez, I didn't make any choices before being born. Or rather, "it's not in my belief-system" It's in yours? Fine. Just don't attempt to impose your beliefs on me :-) "then that knowledge frees you to examine WHY you chose to be with certain people in this life and how you can grow from the challenges. But one would have to be willing to let go of protecting their victimhood." One can always grow from challenges. I agree. No 'victimhood' here, although it does seem that I have to do a lot of responding to stuff on TTB's these days ;-) But hey. I disagree, I 'own' that dude. Call it however you want. How is it that some people just happen to be in others' viewfinders and others are not? whatever semantics you use to describe it, the concept of "just being in others' viewfinder" still ends up being that you are a powerless victim of circumstance. No, not at all. Look, right now I'm in your face for some reason. I happen to disagree with a lot of what is being put 'out there' in psycho-spritual circles so I've decided to speak up about how and why I disagree. " I sense that the real issue is that you want to be free of this but you are still protective of the idea of being a target or a victim or whatever and how does that help you in life?" Where on earth do you get this 'sense' from? K- what I am hearing in most of your statements regarding what I have shared is that you feel that I am so pwoerful that if I state my experience that somehow just that act alone has the power to completely disempower others from making their own conclusions. What I am really sensing here is that whatever my dynamic is, that it pushes old childhood buttons in you from your past. I don't have the power to destroy others opinions or cause them harm by sharing my opinions. People are free to make their own conclusions. Sharing in a clear straightforward way what has worked for me cannot harm anyone. I've said enough on this above. So is this really about me or about how your parents treated you? and isn't that the real cause for learning how to become a target and a victim? K - I am being honest and straightforward with you and I know that I may push your buttons and you may think I am an opinionated A-hole, but I think you are asking these questions because underneath it all you really want to find the power to change your life. You seem very protective of your victimhood and are defensive when others give you options to the contrary. It is easy to react defensively and feel criticized when people point out your protectiveness of your victimhood. But how does that serve you? It has nothing to do with "you" and everything to do with how 'up to the gills' I am with reading the BS I sometimes read on the 'spiritual path'. I think my parents treatment of me has nothing to do with you either. Where did you make that connection? Nor did I say you were an opinionated A-hole. I did, however, say I was concerned if you (or others) were leading/guiding people on path with badly explained spiritual 'principles'. Why ask the questions if you are not willing to consider them. So, why not throw off the personal difficulty when people like me don't communicate in the exact manner you wish and simply focus on the meat of the message and give it a try even if it is outside of your experience? What have you got to lose? What makes you say I'm not interested in considering the questions? I don't agree with some of the answers. Some I do. Did you look at the things I said I agreed with or are you stuck on the stuff I disagree with? I don't have anything to lose since I'm not anyone here :-)

What's your definition of "Will" Manitou? -Interestingly enough it was the very thing my upbringing strove to rid from me. Thanks Mr MH for a more pragmatic response ;-) Unfortunately a) they're too old and sick to be fought with baseball bats and it's below my own sense of self to be anything other than dutiful and respectful towards these people - funnily enough I wasn't respected by them c) I wouldn't hit a defenseless person - funnily enough that didn't stop them. So, no, despite the rough treatment, turns out that I'm not a carrier of dysfunction towards others...I'm pretty hard on myself though. Working on that I happen to disagree quite strongly when large philosophical terms get thrown around and at people without sufficient definition. Manitou, I feel your sense of identity rests heavily on a lot of this stuff. And why not, if it's not doing anyone any harm? I guess you'd suggest my nausea at your suggestion of forgiveness was self-inflicted as well? Interestingly enough, my mother used to tell me that it was all in my head and that it was up to me to feel the way I did after getting mistreatment. Now, was she a Taoist? Or was that something else?

"This kind of dysfunction is the gift that just keeps on giving" Agreed! I keep flipping over the 'coin' you suggest 'victim/blame'. I wonder if that's how you see me or if that's what comes across in my writing. It's actually quite tough to write about the way I was treated because do I fear others treating me as 'weak' and taking advantage as a result. Like there's a fault line in there that could be exploited by folks with less then stellar intentions. I guess I equate 'forgiveness' with letting them off the hook for things that they "should" not have done but did. Maybe not your definition? I actually feel physically sick if I am asked to 'forgive' them or to consider their ignorance. I don't have the strength for it.

Could I respectfully suggest that we might make a collective call that if we don't actually know jack about healthcare and medicine, we avoid giving specific advice to someone about a given condition/set of symptoms? Or if we're pondering the question, contemplating and offering personal opinion, be very very clear about the fact that that's what we're doing?

It's a great thread Mr MH. I do agree with "if we caused someone pain without intention then we were simply operating in a faulty mode" and I'd be interested in looking at how this came about. Idea being, if we know causes then we can take steps to do otherwise. Or maybe that doesn't matter at all and one can go straight to 'full responsibility' - although I argued it wasn't foolproof in the other thread due to egoic tendencies. So I'm going to have to go off and contemplate it some more.

I'm back to respond Sometimes I actually do stuff offline Anyway 5ET. I'll try to answer some of your questions about what I said. I did mention I wasn't perhaps explaining it well enough but you decided that was "unnecessary hyperbole" on my part. Correct. I do not believe "that people can cause harm or illness to others by taking responsibility for their own lives." I don't think I stated otherwise. What do I think potentially causes harm or illness is the way that this principle is communicated to others. For those that are still enmeshed in 'dysfunctional' dynamics (and to be honest, sometimes I think 98% of our culture is based on that, but that's another topic:-)) the space for misunderstanding this principle is huge. Like the space for misunderstanding non-dualism is huge :-) Easy enough for the immature egoic self to swap one set of dysfunctional beliefs for another under the flag of 'spirituality' or 'self-realization' and say "I do all this". "So, regardless of the truth of these attitudes, I am only concerned with what helps me on a practical level." This is all well and good IMO/IME. It might not, however, be the best option for the people you're guiding/helping (I think you are in that role, if you're not then it doesn't matter to me). I personally don't believe the universe to be 'fair' or 'unfair'. It is what it is. Beautiful, also violent destruction. My beliefs about my place in it, about other people, however, yes that runs the show quite some:-) My actions follow my beliefs so if my outcomes are crappy then I guess I know where to look. No belief in reincarnation required. Although I guess I'd find that fun if it were true and I could find out. But what would it do for me or anyone else today? My statement about being a 'target' isn't that I'm 'targeted', rather that I just happen to be in the viewfinder for other people's perceptions from time to time. Maybe even their 'manifestations' sometimes;-) Nothing personal. Unless, of course it is :-) "taking responsibility for one's own reactions to that behavior." I think we agree on this one. So thanks for pointing out that I didn't express myself well enough to be understood and that I used terms which are too personal to me for others to understand. I'm not being sarcastic, I actually appreciate it

*Sigh* - I guess I'm still not being clear enough :-) A 'target' is a person who has been chosen by someone else :-) Let's give an example taken directly from my experience so I won't offend anyone. My mother treated me pretty badly because that's the best she could do. In that sense I was a 'target' for her inability to love or treat me well enough. Not a victim. Do you see what I mean? I used to blame myself for her behaviour. Now I don't care. I've seen it for what it was and I make sure I stand up to her (and some other people in the family when they act out).