Daemon

Thanks for the detailed feedback. I was attempting to indicate that I consider that no valid wisdom tradition is incompatible with science. To clarify, I have nothing against harnessing religious paradigms (i.e. myths) but I'm certainly not a believer. In fact, attempting to fit experiential gnosis into a religious paradigm is usually a grave error. For example, George Fox attempted to align his own experience of gnosis with the Christian paradigm, thereby sowing the seeds of Quakerism's ultimate failure. In terms of the scientific method, I'm able to offer the possibility of gnosis to anyone open to carrying out an experiment with some simple practices for themselves because the results are reproducible. The only problems occur when someone attempts to fit this experience into a linear (i.e intellectual or dualistic) narrative. Perhaps that makes more sense to you? ☮️

Split from A Path of the Light (Practices). Some of us practice static vertical, sitting and horizontal forms. All of us (within my closed group) practice various moving forms. Start here for the vertical form: Sitting, horizontal and moving forms have many possible variations and permutations, so I will not be exploring them in this topic. Wuji does not. ☮️

Meetings times are Saturdays. Los Angeles 07:00 Edmonton 08:00 New York 10:00 Montréal 10:00 Reykjavik 14:00 London 15:00 Paris 16:00 Berlin 16:00 Johannesburg 16:00 Athens 17:00 Ankara 17:00 Moscow 17:00 Mumbai 19:30 Perth 22:00 Singapore 22:00 Tokyo 23:00 Sydney 24:00 Doors open 5 minute prior and close promptly at the scheduled starting time, which will be signalled by a bell. There will be 15 minutes at the end of the meeting for any (written) discussion if required but there's no requirement to stay. Please do not leave the meeting before 20 minutes after the scheduled starting time, as this can be disruptive for any other beginners who may be present. The meeting will be disconnected at 35 minutes past the hour and a bell will be sounded 5 minutes prior. If there's no written discussion, many people enjoy continuing to sit together in silence until the conclusion of the meeting. ☮️

As indicated on the Path of the Light (Practices) topic, I'm starting this topic as a fork in that discussion. This topic is for those who would like to learn this practice and to have the support of a non-hierarchical online videoconferencing practice group that will meet weekly for a 20 minute practice session and discussion. The total length of the meeting will be limited to 40 minutes and there will be no requirement to take part in any discussion. Attendance will be based upon the premise that members will also practice 3 times per day for 5 minutes between these weekly sessions. If you would like an invitation to this group, please PM me an anonymous email address. If you have any questions or comments, they are welcome either publicly (here) or privately via anonymous email. ☮️ Footnotes Please note well that if you choose to join this practice group your online anonymity and privacy will be maintained by not pointing your video camera at your face. We will also be using our keyboards for written communication rather than communicating via our microphones. We have found that by using videoconferencing in this way, we can closely approximate the experience of being part of one of our real world meeting groups. ☮️

So, perhaps I should trademark the phrase Harmonious(In)Action in order to avoid the possibility of conflict with any owners of RightAction™, Zanshin™ or WuWei™? ☮️

At this point, I feel that a fork into "ChiKung" and the practice of Heartcentric breathing will probably be the easiest way forward, so that this topic doesn't become bogged down in extraneous detail. Before starting those topics, I'd like to highlight the fact that that both "ChiKung" and Heartcentric breathing are not meditation. Instead they are gateways into zanshin[1], aka the flow state or wuwei from which emanates right action[2]. ☮️ Footnotes [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zanshin [2] I'm not referring to RightAction™ in any religious sense. By right action, I'm pointing towards harmonious action (including harmonious inaction). ☮️

At this point @rex, I feel that we diverge. How is a "teacher" going to obtain informed consent? (Between equals, the question does not arise.) ☮️

I might be able to help you. PM me your an email address if you'd like to discuss. Protonmail might be the most convenient for you, if you want to maintain your own privacy. ☮️

Having given this careful consideration, I discover that neither do I disagree, nor do I feel that (other than that) I have any significant to add to your commentary. ☮️

I'm wondering if you've ever considered the possibility that realisation may be a mixed blessing? ☮️

Is it the case that if I started a topic, the rules of this bulletin board are that it will be transferred to my Personal Practice Discussion on my written request (assuming, that I also first jump through whatever hoops are necessary for access to the PPD function)? If that is the case, please consider this to be a request both for access to the PPD function and for the transfer to it of the Brexit topic that I started. ☮️

Delightful, isn't it? ☮️

Symbiosis? ☮️

You might find it useful to consider Global Warming. ☮️

actor and script? ☮️

No. ☮️

That too is my understanding. ☮️

@Apech Does True socialism requires the implementation direct democracy? ☮️

You're simply taking your own side, as usual. ☮️

From my perspective, all isms are time-bound and never eternal (or universal) because they are by their own nature dualistic and cannot encompass the infinity of complexity. ☮️

And most people find it impossible to go with the flow and end up being dragged out to sea, whereas, it's always possible to swim across the rip current (unless, of course, you're unable to swim). What's sad about this is that in this instance I could have thrown him a life jacket that might have allowed him to swim across this particular rip but instead, he chose to ignore the possibility of a creative solution that would possibly have kept both sides of this dispute entirely happy. For myself, I removed all his memes months ago by using the Ignore function. That had the benefit that those who apparently enjoy them (including @memeahong/spamahong) can continue to enjoy them and I can always unhide posts if I'm curious. Incidentally, the life jacket that he chose to reject was the suggestion that he wrapped all his memes within a single Spoiler function, which might have kept whoever succeeded in getting him to ban himself entirely happy as well. Although, I cannot understand why the complainants didn't just swim across the rip themselves by use of the Ignore function. What could be easier? ☮️

Who is "We"? I ask because some people are prone to use "we" when they should more accurately use "I" or "Some people". Do you belong to some group that shares these beliefs or do you mistakenly believe that I agree with your statements? ☮️

So, you've chosen closure. ☮️

Are you open to the possibility of a solution instead of a closure? ☮️