Birch

The kind of 'earn it' idea you just suggested makes it very easy to justify not giving respect to other people. Of course no-one is saying you, Twinner, 'have to' respect people, but that would be your call to kick off with. In which case, no justification required. Given I'm a contrary animal, I'd probably jump through your 'earn it' hoops backwards not to do it

Ever wince when you see someone else hurt themselves? Or even if they tell you about something that hurt? I don't know exactly what that is, but it would seem that there's a communication of some kind.

I stated what my motivation was in the original thread. I came up with the idea I posted today about it after mulling it over and discussing it with someone else some time later.

Well if you know it one way, how is that different from knowing it some other way?

I reckon a lot of it comes from people's own (misguided?) ideas about what 'high-level' people are supposed to be like. I know that TTB's has really changed that for me. And I don't think it's a 'bad' thing. I was saying this to someone else the other day that it probably wouldn't bother them if a really skilled surgeon or racing driver or musician or scientist was a bit of a jerk sometimes, but as soon as we hit 'spiritual' territory, suddenly it's much worse for some reason. I reckon everyone on here ought to get (and give) respect regardless of who they are.

That would be a pretty good resume of what I figure other people figure this 'enlightenment' business to be about.

Especially the part about matter. Sometimes I get that idea that the (going to say the r-word) 'solidified' thought/consideration of oneself is what is dead in such cases. So saying he as a person is dead, well I wonder about that. If that's the case, many of us are dragging around a bit of 'dead' stuff. But that's forgetting you have to be living to perceive such things. Rather than 'dead', I like the 'gone' or 'passed' idea.

More good stuff in that one than in an hour's debate:-)

I've edited my own posts before and yes, I think I can edit the title of the topic I started. I don't know about editing or removing other people's. Yes, I think I would want to be able to do that, remove my own jackass posts. I've got rid of a bunch in the personal forum.

Perhaps Ya Mu removed his himself? Then the mods cleaned up? Thread is def not looking like it was before. I'd be interested in the whys.

Bye Cam!

I reckon if you allow evolution as a science then you allow specialsts of said science authority over domains covered by that science. Which at present seems to be anything and everything. If you don't allow it as a science, or suggest scaling it back to the few domains it can be empirically proven in, I wonder what would happen.

Steven Norquist says similar. He's not happy about it apparently. I wonder, if one is "that" then one can have exactly the type of enlightenment that one desires? Or is there "really" only one kind? Did you ask the enlightened guy what impact it had on "his" life?

I reckon people cut off their desires hopes and wants themselves all the time. If you actually take the time and the strange but rewarding path to follow such thoughts and feelings all the way to their cessation or transformation into something else then IMO/IME there's some really something there. It's the very opposite of repression which just ends up expressing itself elsewhere IMO/IME. Personally it gives me a headache and a strange compressed feeling in the solar plexus. I'm not saying to act on any of those desires, as that also just cuts them off.

I've had the '24 hour healing' effect with Reiki. Why? Because for some reason I wanted to believe that someone else could miraculously resolve one or more of my problems in short order with no real effort (except for showing up) on my part. Same goes with multiple other methods/transmissions/reading.

Good idea! I have to ask this stupid dumb-assed question. 'Who wants 'enlightenment''? Really? if one has even a small inkling of what it is or even what it might be then IMO, no odds matter. IMO what you think is 'You' doesn't decide anyway. In that respect, 'You' are the principle obstacle in the entire endeavor. Of course not 'you' The Lerner, you're no obstacle at all. To the contrary. I'd love a few billion but aside from financial security I'm not even very sure what I'd do with them, given I haven't grown up in the ways of it. It wouldn't, for example, at this late stage IMO, buy me sufficient influence to effect the present tide. Which is exactly what I want to do.

I liked it. I did feel sad reading some parts. Content reading other parts of it. Hopeful reading some parts, devastated (briefly) reading other parts. Who's 'bashing desire, hope, and wants'? Lucky?

Anyone or anything that pisses me off (including myself:-)) - kidding:-) I do like black tea or coffee 1st thing. Otherwise, 'eat when hungry' which is different according to seasons and when (and where) I get up and what I'm doing after I get up, or if its actually lunchtime when I do get up or any number of variables that resume nicely to 'eat when hungry'.

Oh man, Santo Daime, here I come... ---only half kidding opinion alert---

No

There are hordes of books on that stuff. Personally, I've found TCM to be a pretty good set for it. I've also experienced some of the more 'out there' healing modalities that aren't as 'systemic' in their association of meaning to any given 'symptom'. I was going to say they were 'holographic' but that's probably too trendy a concept right now. Steve says it very well IMO. What I have personally discovered through some of this stuff (includes practice) is that the less 'dismembered' I am i.e.the less I 'separate' whatever aspect of myself from some other aspect is bothering. An easy example is 'my gut-feeling' which for some reason I have grown up ignoring as 'something other' from myself until I figured it was actually 'just me' albeit in a different mode of expression. You know if my thoughts say one thing and my gut says another, why do I ignore one and believe the other? That kind of thing.

Yep! Still, I'm curious. Taomeow, where does the pic come from? Possible new thread about strange-looking objects in paintings awaits! Just so one can never say "look, all that symbolism was far too obscure for me, I hadn't realised you actually meant XYZ'. Because consent is always required

Ok, thanks. I'll go check that out. Sorry if I insulted you. I didn't think I was adding BS. Answers were also very much heartfelt. Possibly OT, but threads can wander. Insult accepted.

Thanks for the feed-back Ya Mu. You said "Doesn't it smack of arrogance when people say things like "that smacks of arrogance"?" And I don't honesly know. I'd feel more honesty from the person saying it if they (well, in this case it's obviously you, so not point saying otherwise:-)) if you just said something like "Wow Kate, that was really arrogant yourself" or as sometimes hear, "pot, kettle, black" or something like that. I think people are alliowed to be arrogant, just as much as they're allowed to be wrong or mistaken. It's why I said it's a "spritual pitfall". From my very small understanding of 5E, it's a systemized approach to energetics. I didn't say anything about it requiring belief. More about the nature of the patterns/relationships themselves. I'd be interested in hearing more on the "mirroring" vs 'reflecting" distinction. Sounds like one is active vs other passive.