Birch

Risk can be evaluated:-)

I think the OP has legit concerns. Given the amount of discipline to maintain a meditative practice in the face of what happens as part of the process, I'd say that if a person has doubts or concerns about their mental health, they probably shouldn't even start it without very good guidance. I agree a lot of other stuff is relaxing or gets you in flow if that's what you're looking for. There's also some skepticism as to the effectiveness of meds to treat certain types of mental illness so I don't feel good about comparing them with CBT - which IMO is a suppressive form. Maybe I'm not getting it right though. Are the CBT people practitioners themselves?

I would tend to agree Steve - with an additional idea that the very conditioning we succumb to (as currently promogulated by our culture/society which depending on where/when it is may be more or less cruel to certain people and not others, which is why this aspect goes potentially misread by some IMO/IME) may be itself rooted traumatically. If you look at the 'rise' in numbers of people affected by 'mental health' issues - or at least the rise in people being prescribed meds for the latter in certain countries, then it may be worth questioning, are we collectively getting 'sicker' mentally or are aspects of us being 'over' or 'mis' diagnosed as 'sick'? @Jetsun - so agree.

Which if you ponder it is one way of being what one is energetically. I know it's not PC to discuss, but I do ponder it on occasion. Why hold this form, that one? What if you realise your embeddedness in the (I was going to say "whole" like there was just one, but I can't say that because I don't know how many there are). Where Nothing is contained but yet holds form. How about that? Isn't it amazing?

Yes i came across an interview with a very aged (just over 100) Alexandra David-Neel (unfortunately not in English) who spoke to this "Hatha yoga is not real yoga" idea. When she said "Hatha" she fair spat it out:-) There've been numerous threads about "using" "sex" energy to kick off development. Numerous also about the idea that maintaining an immature sexuality is key to remaining un or underdeveloped as a human. It's also the one thing that IMO/IME can be counted on to "lead someone by the balls" (excuses for male-oriented phrasing, us girls have it just as bad but I suspect it plays out differently). The articles were good.

Well said Steve. Also note that IME the process was/is not filled with flowers most of the time. Although there's also that. I think that context is improving but if all you have around you are conventional ideas and people then it would be IMO wise to a) find fellow practitioners do some research prior to embarking c) keep your own counsel and your wits about you d) stay away from cults ---- opinion alert----

I agree that Logic And reason are good too but I don't think they can be used on everything. Probably quite good on the internal validity of statements but limited when it comes to knowing things about which statements can then be made. So Logic and reason would be a tool to use on beliefs whereas intuition can only be used about reality. Does that sound like it? BTW the current trend is saying "trust your gut but only if you actually have expertise in the area you're trusting your gut on". I didn't find that very helpful but it's reasonsable enough. I was hoping intuition would work in the absence of expertise...

Yes I agree that using the word "brain" conjures up ideas of "mental" processes that sit in the head whereas the whole body has a lot to contribute that often seems to get ignored or silenced or overidden by the "upper brain". Smart those Taoists with LDT, MDT and upper DT. I suppose that according each relative and relevant 'airtime' could be a worthwhile goal. Overreliance on verbal and visual cognition- especially when the latter can be so easily mistaken, hum.

I know the "baggage reclaim" website is aimed at women but it has some really interesting writing about this. One thing I'm (sic) often guilty of is basing my feelings on someone else's - it's a typical ego "dick-move". Anyway, I wouldn't get down on yourself for any of it. Bhudda had Mara chasing after him again and again. Lucifer keeps showing up when you reckon he's on his way downstairs:-) I'm comparing both of them "Mara" and "Lucifer" as the "ego" or "adversary" and doing so (somewhat) knowingly as I am (not) struggling with similar issues:-) "Sticky" indeed!

I don't know but so far it seems to be working better than the other approaches ("all me" or "all them") that I reckon I've tried up to now. Feel a bit like a Venn diagram but hey.

Add vampires, aliens and a few other things:-) Why "sexualize" what were once considered predators or threats? Nosferatu becomes the Twilight kid via the Lost Boys. I don't know the answer BTW but the combination is pretty sick (not "sick" as in "awesome")

To teach innocents about the dangers of their state and to introduce them to the psychopaths in their midst.

I think you've convinced me to give it a read Dwai! But do you think my Western mind will get it? I'm serious. What if I'm genuinely cognitively hampered by decades of conditioning? And not just because I agree with the stuff you mentioned on Vedanta:-)

Good one Mr Sin! Hey, this Logic-thing, it works, sometimes:-) I couldn't, er, be an atheist if there was no God. Hahahahaha

I agree Mr MH. I reckon if you're (no-one in particular) going to get angry about religions, might as well get angry at the people who are doing and perpetuating awful stuff in the name of them because as far as I know, the stuff is propagated by people. But if those same people are not doing anything terrible in particular? Why concern oneself with their beliefs? I think I'm missing something? Getting angry at an idea, sure, sounds nice. Totally pointless. Bearing in mind I'm opening a door for the same to be said of many other ideas. ----opinion alert---

Somewhere floating round the main discussion is a post by a very favourite poster of mine (Taomeow) about faith vs belief. I can't say exactly where I'm at with as it seems to both be operational on some levels and not on others. Especially not the levels i want stuff on. I think Logic is a good tool but it has flaws - as in it can't be used when multiple forces are acting on any given perception. Some people get past this (I think) by just saying it's all 'illusion' anyway. It's a mistrust of self IMO. Collectively it's lazy and leaves people open to relativism that can then be used to justify heinous acts. In fact, you'd think by now that with all these great religions and practices that we wouldn't still be f$cking everything up this much. Act as if it were all real. ----opinion alert---

This made me think of the kidnapping of magic. I also wonder who's will exactly is operating to create such imbalance in the worlds? ---sorry, that just sort of spoke itself---

I though Atheists did think - unless they're the "from birth" kind;-) So, yeah, here's one. "Did you replace the idea of "god" with anything? If so, why and what? If not, why?"

Santi! Been a very long time! How are you? K

I'm really not trying to be difficult :-) I agree that most certainly us people 'chop things up' conceptually and such. Only thing is, we're not chopping the things up. It's the things about the things we're chopping up, yes? And yes I agree that there is an underlying 'continuity' :-) However, IMO/IME, attributing agency of decisions to separate to only oneself is just as wrong as saying 'everyone else gone done it' :-) 'Interactions' is an interesting territory to get into. IMO its like giving up a bit of an idea of agency but only enough to feel one has a bit left. :-)

Another person who thinks they are doing it all by themselves? Ever consider the wishes of the rock to remain separate from oneself?

I get it too. Especially winter. Just have to rearrange how I approach metal objects (doorknobs, cars...) With elbows and knuckles. I relate it to a a moisture-level thing.

I didn't realise it was 'new'?? Some of the 'ascending energy' stuff really reminds me of some other stuff that was around a relatively long time ago '90's. Probably quite localized

Well, doesn't it go both ways this 'mirror' idea? Certainly if you think of the mirror you see yourself in it doesn't actually do anything. In other words it's not deciding what parts of your reflection to reflect back. You, however, do seem to be making some specific choices about what to reflect back to people. Certainly I can feel a bit of hostility in these exchanges. Should I (as Scotty once suggested) then attribute that hostility only to myself because I'm the only one that can do anything about it? I dunno Vmarco, you've got some interesting ideas but do you have a better approach?