Birch

"who cares what jesus was.." It's another one of those questions I don't like the answer(s) to. Suffice to say that many people seem in fact (usual caveat) to care about what colour Jesus was and have as a result created entire galleries depicting such. I suggest "scripture" is "pro-scripture". Other than that, I dig the guy's teachings and I have to ask WTF happened to that?? Edit: "Mozi" = "Moses"??? That would be weird/cool

"I do still remain open to discussion of the possibility of more than one universe at any given moment in time(s)." I'd wager Mr MH that an example of such a possibility might be yours and mine, respectively (universes). In fact (I should stop saying that word) I'm willing to bet that without mediations such as Taoist philosophy and a common taste for certain types of music, we might also spend some time arguing about who is seeing any universe at all. And I can almost inkle (not that it's really a verb, but I figured I should invent it because Apech was around) that here's the problem (IMO and small monkey experience) it both is AND it isn't. Anyway, whatever I think the universe is doing, it's probably doing something else. I try to listen to it because it's running through me but I think I'd rather often listen to myself. Sorry, that was a bit rambling.

I feel weird most of the time

At last, someone who seems to be taking my "Why's it called a "Kindle"?" question seriously.

Congrats! I wonder if the sheer relief from getting away from that situation makes it easier to let whatever was under the situation out? Speculating as usual

"Someone is taking a discussion on differences a bit personally?" It might be. I think I'm just tired/bored with the same discussion coming from the same folks. It doesn't seem helpful. Although I liked Stig's post. That was helpful to me. So thanks for yours because it got me Stig's. I threw at flower at you because I thought you ought to know better - well, in my head you do, but maybe you don't.

Oh buggery wuggery. I left this thread alone for an afternoon (I was away doing very un-practice things, that must've done it!) and I get back and I see: -"I think this won't digress" - "Viewless view" blah blah blah - "Actually it is a viewless view" - "So 2009" - "Scotty" - "Marblehead" - "My practice, mine my my" - "Thigle" (what is a "thigle"??) So it digressed. Such has been my experience of this thread so far. I think I omitted some parts of it. I'm tired, please forgive. Normally, at this point, wouldn't a bodhisattva throw a flower at ya?

I don't think it will digress unless we stop at the "before experience" point. Which IMO (and small experience) is interesting in and of itself. If you go to practice with "buddhist right view" what you experience is (IMO and, well experience) different from a "viewless view". If you go to practice with an alchemical view, a 5E perspective an anything, then it will also be different. I think alchemy is good for people such as myself who have not quite let their nails off the edge.

"So not all Buddhists believe the same thing about this, it seems. And what it really comes down to is that it's a difference in belief...because experientially, is there really a difference between the two opinions?" Nope

From Mr Guzzi :-p You can't "rush" bro, you's already dere Besides, from what I've "got" so far. The paths themselves will rush you like there's no tomorrow (there isn't one, until there is)

"Meditation and energy practices are a form of mental programming. As stated, you can use mental programming for just about anything." I'd figured from certain practices that I've tried so far that it depends on what type of meditation you're referring to. Certainly IME anything "guided" is IMO close "enough" to NLP. Certainly IMO you would be a "willing" subject. However, experimental problems seem to crop up IMO (and sort of IME) with "Energy practices" as a general term. IMO (and almost "getting it" experience) the latter and NLP are not quite the same, because "energy practices," when fruitful could (IMO)also be described as: - pre/non-linguistic - non-semiotic - non-local. I think that this is why it could be worthwhile digging around in the practices to see what "fits" the NLP moniker and what doesn't. I think that would be helpful :-) Energy arts also often seem (although that could be called into question) to have no "externals" - So the glove-smelling stuff wouldn't "work" in the context of an approach that didn't talk or recall the smell - indeed IMO the whole "point" of energy practices is to detach from all anchors. So the deal would be that without anything, I could effect something :-) However, I'm in the world and as such I'm a failed experiment.

"when times are tough you have to be strong, so good time to cuiltivate strong mind!" All times are tough (for someone). Anytime to cultivate a strong mind is good

The Topic Title and Topic Description sum up my stupid question. What do those dots (and their respective colours) mean? I mean when you're here http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/index (and logged in) and you look at the PPD and you see people's names followed by green or black dots. It's bugging me

"Rationality is a good servant but a poor master." What about "logic"? I also wonder if there is a "non-rational" abstraction of this term created by the common (?) western (?) idea that "rationality" is somehow opposed to other things? For example often we read "emotional" as an opposition to "rational" whereas from what Apech is saying "emotionality" could very well be under the employ of "rationality". As a tangent, there are currently several studies knocking around (which I will go try to dig up) that put a case forward for "rational decision-making" being nigh-on impossible without emotions Anecdotally, the most people I've ever had get really annoyed at me all at once were those who were arguing that I was being irrational I think for fun, if you want to dissect "the shamanistic" approach from this "rational" perspective then I suggest you also dissect the "psychotherapeutic approach" and the "psychiatric approach" from same. I think it's worth doing with all of them Do you want the study where the findings show that people in the States like different coloured pills from people in Europe ?

I've had a few "schlopp" experiences where I can feel, well a "schlopp" of energy going from me to someone else and vice-versa. I don't mind the ones where I'm giving. I'm not so keen on the ones directed at me. The ones I really didn't like were the spikey attack episodes but I reckon they don't "steal" as much as they "bother" and you can "deflect" them with this barrier stuff. I figure if you're plugged in then you're plugged in period. I realize this sounds stupid, but ultimately what do you have to lose energetically speaking? Yes there is transfer but is it a zero sum thing? I guess it depends on what type of stuff you're dealing with. I think taking good care of yourself (taking heed to respond to yourself when feeling drained or to the contrary very generous), and as others have mentioned doing a check on your own psychological boundaries is very good advice. I'm not quite sure but I think some boundaries might not actually be real ones - hence the tiresome (and so therefore energy-sapping) business of holding them up, whereas the real ones are just there and you're not listening to them. I know this is a lot of subjective pondering

Thanks Ed. Maybe the "lower status" "helps". Well, maybe it helps meditation at least. No reason to get all introspective if you're sitting at the top of the social heap!

"repeating energy pattern is that a person?" I think it's a specific aspect of a person that can get caught up beyond "necessary". What I mean by necessary is a bit weird and in my own words (Apech you would perhaps frown at my usage): The pattern is "looking" for an "out" or a "completion" or "resolution." If no context or conditions are recognized "in the environment" as providing that opportunity then it rolls on ad-nauseum, perhaps even creating contexts and conditions to resolve (I suspect this is what dreams might be "for") It's the "thing" that (arguably, I'm not sure) needs to get dropped in favour of one's self. On a tangent, I wonder how many of them there are around a given self and whether they are in harmony with each other? Do they self-entrain? Do they entrain other patterns around them?

"The length of the movement of breath can be a guide to healthy stretch and the subsequent involuntary activity, both with the breath in and with the breath out." I thought this was interesting. Thanks Mark! Yesterday I noticed as I was meditating and had slowed my breathing way down that my abdominal muscles were moving despite there being no breathing going on to move them. It carried that "tickling" sensation that curls up and under the heart. It's pretty pleasant

"If you study taoist anatomy, physiology, and psychology, it disappears, like all other junk memes replicating mental constructs and abstract ideas with no concrete organ-system-function task in the real world" Oh good:-) Except I'm slowly buying my way out of those (junk memes). Knowing next which model to try on when the one you've just come from turns out to be a lemon. Not as easy as pie. But getting less bad at it as (my) time wears on. I was thinking while on the bus earlier today that to get to an isolated organ model would maybe require cutting up relatively c(old) cadavers when "stuff" had already congealed. Which lead me to think that modern surgery rips into folks as if they were already dead, well... I was figuring if you were going to do "real" anatomy from the sectional POV it would take cutting up (or into) live people.

"If you are into tantrism," Maybe. I think it's into me I can't breathe without it getting to me. I can't put a foot on the ground without it holding me. I can't even run into my own ego without everyone else to remind me I have one.

"The tricky part is, how does one overcome the desire to be without desire?" I wonder. I don't know. I think that this idea is a typical "man-thing" idea, to wish to overcome desire Desire wants you And you think you're doing the desiring ? I reckon if you let your desire run ragged, something neat could happen. Like a world ? Yours anyway. Funny (to me) that the tantrics seem (to me) to use both full embrace and full denial of their desires to gain freedom from both. Where-d-they go t'after that?

I thought Stig's post about the warrior was very in line with what I understand/ have experienced. I think it's interesting on an international-level (I'd love to know how many Bums' are US vs elsewhere based) to see very (what I reckon, anyway) "spiritually advanced" people dishing it out to each other when it comes to something as "bottom line" as their home culture. I have to ask, if your culture is producing shit outcomes for people then why defend it? I was thinking, it might be because the outcomes for you and yours are less shit than for others but is that really the case? I don't know the answer to that one. It's another question I don't think I'd like the answer to. As I've said several times to Bum's privately, if we're idealizing something then something's up. I've found repeatedly on here that with many of these "military" threads, few of the non-US bums want to "go there" when it seems perfectly ok for them to share experience and ideas about blowing love and consciousness through their balls. Something's bizzarre (to me) about that.

I'd wager that taking the time to do it will help you understand time much better