Daemon

You're very much mistaken Steve. A competent scientist defines energy precisely in terms of its SI unit. The SI unit of energy is the joule, which is the energy transferred to an object by the work of moving it a distance of 1 metre against a force of 1 newton. ☮️ Footnotes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Units_of_energy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unusual_units_of_measurement ☮️

That's a great suggestion! I'm guessing that it might also be quite entertaing viewing for any competent medical statisticians as well? ☮️

@Mudfoot Roth's tenure is as a Professor of Religious Studies falling under the remit of the faculty of Humanities at Brown. This department can award the degree of Bachelor of Arts. It cannot award the degree of Bachelor of Science. https://www.brown.edu/academics/degree-granting Therefore, what Roth teaches (Religious Studies) isn't considered (by Brown) to be a scientific discipline (and I'm not suggesting that an Arts degree is in any way inferior to a Science degree because, in my opinion, it's merely different while being of equal academic stature). ☮️

Academic. ☮️

Light. ☮️

Laundry. ☮️

Certainly, it also seems to me to me the only way to find out what these ancient sages practiced is through historical, cultural and linguistic analysis. That's not science and (also again merely in my opinion) it does a grave disservice to both the Arts and to the Sciences to conflate them in that way. As far as your second point is concerned, I personally practice a method of heart-centred breath meditation (with a reasonable scientific foundation, given that biology and physiology continue to evolve), which (as far as I'm aware) yields broadly similar benefits and which is (again merely imo) in no way incompatible with this text), so my interest in this text is merely intellectual curiosity (rather than practical necessity). However, should some similarly reliable source publish clear instructions that would allow me to test some other hypothetically ancient practice that may also have been practiced by these Taoist sages, I might be tempted to take it for a test drive (if it seemed that it might be any more effective or efficient than what I and many others already practice, which is a very, very high barrier). ☮️

The scientific approach would be to ask someone who puts scientists (or anyone else) on a pedestal (instead of asking me). As far as I know, science is unable to disprove the existence of Love and because (as a scientist) I'm not stupid enough to attempt to prove Its existence using the scientific method (which would be the wrong tool for the job), again you'll need to put that question to someone else. ☮️

That's the nature of religious bulletin boards. Just do your best to ignore the hard-core believers and concentrate on the possible scientists (in case there might be any). ☮️

@wandelaar Can we dispose of the misconception that the (undoubtedly scholarly) translation of this mythological (or religious) text is in any way science? Firstly, a different translator would produce something different. Hence, translation cannot subjected to the scientific method (as the findings of a second scientist would need to be the same as the findings of the first in order to confer scientific validity). Secondly, the original text is in no way a scientific paper as it lacks the specific details that would allow a second experimenter to duplicate the experiment. And just let me add that, in my opinion, mythology can be extremely useful if it's recognised as mythology (and not mistaken for history or for science). This is an outline of the scientific method. The etymology of "paranormal" is probably also useful. ☮️

That's the way that I was taught that science works (at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels). However, I'm sometimes open to corrections, so if you'd like to point me towards some reputable peer-reviewed scientific papers validating the paranormal, I'll be very interested to evaluate them. Also, while on this point, the book you're espousing as science is not scientific, its academic pedigree seems to lie within the discipline of the Arts (language and history). ☮️

Now hopefully we (@wandelaar and I) might begin to touch on the more nuanced and textured (and abnormal). Firstly, by definition, there's no scientific evidence for the paranormal because if there was, it would be the normal. So, let's leave that aside? Secondly, surely to achieve the extraordinary always requires the extraordinary? For example, if you want to achieve any extraordinary level of skill in anything, you generally need to devote an extraordinary amount of time learning it and then practicing it sufficiently to make it your own (although not necessarily a lot of time in the case of (re)learning how to breathe in a more balanced and healthy way than is the norm for most people). But even (re)learning how to breathe healthily and practicing that regularly (enough) is hardly the norm, is it? Even with something so simple, skilled (scientific) coaching feedback is sometimes (but not always) required. ☮️

From my perspective, you are correct in the first instance but you are a bit off-piste in the second instance. The simplest, most natural form of breathing is quite well scientifically established in terms of its life-enhancing benefits. Its practice is also a solid foundation that can be a basis for profound mystical experiences and (because of its scientific basis) it may, to some extent, protect against the grandiose delusions and magical thinking that's so much in evidence on most "spiritual" bulletin boards. ☮️

You said, I have made some enquires and I've located two possible groups. The first is in San Francisco and is open. It comprises of entirely ordinary people, some of whom have probably had experiences such as your own. The second is in Los Angeles and is a closed group, which is rather dogmatic in its outlook, however, from what you also said, it may suit you better. ☮️

I was inspired to start reading the second of Pullman's "His Dark Materials" sextet by some of the issues that arose for some of the contributors to this topic and I find myself wondering whether Pullman went on to shed quite a lot of light on the central fallacy of exoteric Christianity, the non-sense regarding the Devil, Hell and eternal damnation, which is entirely absent in esoteric Christianity. Certainly, he's made a good start in "The Subtle Knife". I'm reminded of this 2012 documentary that seeks to demonstrate that these false constructs of the Catholic Church were absent from the original Path attributed to the Nazarine. ☮️

If all you want is to meet people who are existing how they really are, then what (if anything) prevents you from relating authentically to everyone you meet? Isn't everyone already existing how they really are? Do you perhaps feel that you are in some way different and special? ☮️

@Jadespear I'm entirely familiar with what you describe and (dependent upon your location and an in-depth exploration of your needs) I may be able to facilitate your contact with a variety of local groups, the members of which would not only also be entirely familiar with your experience but also be able to support you in its unfolding. ☮️

Then should he (or others) wish to learn that practice, how would you advise him (or them) to proceed? ☮️

☮️

For me, the mind needs to be united with the heart (and with the gut), so I'm entirely in favour of the scientific rationale (and I'm unaware of any reason that science cannot, or should not, be used to evaluate wisdom traditions and practices). ☮️

True Leadership is leading people to get things done for the people. False leadership is managing people to get things done for oneself (himself, cronies, political party, etc. But definitely NOT for the people). Management is managing people to get things done. Do you see the similarity between False leadership and Management? No professor dares to add the last phrase, "for oneself" for that will destroy the entire meaning management where there are more than a million books have been written on management. - Eric Woon -

Are you ( @flowing hands ) therefore prepared to tell @wandelaar exactly how to practice the heart-centred meditation, to which you previously referred, or should he consult with someone else? ☮️

Certainly (from my perspective), the modulation of the breath is extremely relevant. ☮️

It's alright to work with the nature of things, but it's quite another issue to violate their nature. - Michael Sternbach -

@flowing hands He's certainly right about that, as the heart's the easiest place to discover the Light. ☮️