Sir Darius the Clairvoyent

3 hours ago, Thrice Daily said:

Do you feel as though the prayers likely go to the same place?

Want a biblical answer?

 

Teaching About Prayer.

5“When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward.

6But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.

7* In praying, do not babble like the pagans, who think that they will be heard because of their many words.*

8Do not be like them. Your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

The Lord’s Prayer.

9* “This is how you are to pray:c

Our Father in heaven,*

hallowed be your name,

10your kingdom come,*

your will be done,

on earth as in heaven.d

11* e Give us today our daily bread;

12and forgive us our debts,*

as we forgive our debtors;f

13and do not subject us to the final test,*

but deliver us from the evil one.g

14* If you forgive others their transgressions, your heavenly Father will forgive you.h

15But if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your transgressions.
 

 

Look at 8 there. The way I see it, if you pray or meditate on the highest principle, there should be no need for words.

 

Here is another one for you;

 

"O God and Heavenly Father, grant to us the serenity of mind to accept that which cannot be changed, courage to change that which can be changed, and wisdom to know the one from the other through Jesus Christ, our Lord, Amen."

7 minutes ago, Thrice Daily said:

Now I realise it’s Correct, and actually most people are extremely Christian without even knowing it. In their heart of hearts, it’s all beyond Christ and his story really.

truly there is no escaping him, for better or for worse. May I reccomend the gospel of Thomas to you?

Quote

Jung had always thought that four was the true mystical number, the symbol of wholeness and completion. Christianity’s Trinity was therefore by definition incomplete. As McLynn says, Jung thought “that the dogma of the Assumption clinched the case for four as the mystical number, since it meant that the Catholic Church had tacitly abandoned the Trinity in favour of a quaternity. Although it was not strictly true that there was no feminine element in the Trinity — since Jung often argued that the Holy Ghost was one manifestation of Sophia⁴ — nevertheless the perfection of God had now been fully achieved by God’s union with Sophia in the guise of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Mary was thus in effect a fourth member of the godhead, so that the Trinity was now a quaternity”.

In conclusion, here are a couple of random thoughts. Firstly, Jung’s thinking is more in line with Gnosticism than with Christianity. As June Singer says: “In Christianity the feminine power is subdued, as nature and body are subdued. Where woman is recognized, it is in her biological function as Mother and bearer of the Divine Child, or as virgin, as in religious orders. But as a fully independent and sexual woman, she has little status. In Gnosticism, the feminine is redeemed from the depths of matter and returned to co-equal status with the masculine”⁵.

https://graham-pemberton.medium.com/whats-wrong-with-christianity-carl-jung-and-the-divine-feminine-fbb5dca935f4

You can critize the faith for a lot, but one thing I think you can not deny, is the power of the Christ narrative.  Off which being born in a stable, God incarnate and sacrifised and risen again are fundemental. Although if you acctually, literally buy all of this, I would say you are on the same intellectual caliber as those who belive thunder is the result of Thor beating his hammer or that the rainbow is the messenger of the gods, even today.

27 minutes ago, Thrice Daily said:

Right I’m starting a new topic in this part of the forum thanks for the inspiration 👍 

Im all for it. I often ponder how this one faith went from an obscure cult, to a very diverse sets of belief to the religion. Find me one man that has not heard about Christ today.

 

What I am most curious about, is if some of the greek mysteries got perserved in a masked form 👀

One thing I acctually think is quite strange about christianity, historically speaking, is some of its values.

 

Like the meek shall inheirit the earth..? Everyone being equal in the eyes of God (no superior or inferior, slave or master, barbarian or citizien, jew or gentile). I somehow doubt that was mainstream thought in the early roman empire, but maybe I am wrong.

So, in many languages the word for breath and spirit is the same. Here is a quick wiki search:

The word spirit (ånd) originally meant breath (pust). Spirit in greek is called pneuma, nous, im latin spiritus, mens, animus or anima, hebrew ruach, arabic ruh, english mind or spirit, french esprit and german Geist.

 

So, that is quite an amount of languages where breath/spirit is or originates from the same word. The Norwegian term, as mentioned, is ånd. Incredibly, this is cognate to sanskrit atman: also originally meaning breath. In order not to butched the vedic/hindu tradition, ill let britannica explain the term today:

 

atman, one of the most basic concepts in Hinduism, the universal self, identical with the eternal core of the personality that after death either transmigrates to a new life or attains release (moksha) from the bonds of existence. 
 

In the norse creation myth, the first humans are pieces of wood that Odin, Villi and Ve breathes life (and various charictaristics, like the will, hence the name Villi). This naturally sounds very familiar to genesis, where God also breathes a divine spark into mankind.

 

I wonder if this is an innate human… «archetype,» or if it may be the legacy of the indo european wind deity:

 

H₂weh₁-yú is believed to be a god who controls the wind. He came from Proto Indo European Mythology and many cultures have gods that came from him.^[1] His name comes from the Proto-Indo-European word for "blow".^[2][1] In some traditions, he is shown as two gods who control different types of wind. Other cultures have similar gods, with names like Vayu-Vātaand Vāyu.^[1] The god is also linked to the idea of giving and taking breath, which connects him to life and death.^[3] Many Indo-European languages have words for wind that come from the same root as H₂weh₁-yú including the English wind.^[1]

 

 

 

Most people here, are, I assume, native english speakers. It is curious that the word wind, to wander and wonder are so similar, no?

On 16.5.2024 at 1:14 AM, Apech said:

Why is Christianity such a strange religion?  

 

When you are confronted by it there are several things you are expected to accept:

 

- there is a supreme being who created the universe

- this being impregnated a virgin 

- the child grew up to perform miracles and so on

- he was crucified, died and then rose from the dead

 

Now, other religions have people who perform miracles (siddhis) and so on.  And some have creator Gods also.  But if you approach these religions and ask about siddhis and so on - the usual response will be 'forget about it, its not important'.

 

But with Christianity it is central that not only these things happened but you believe that they did.  You have to accept.  

 

These factual assertions provoke questioning.  Because they are given as facts then they require proof.  Can a virgin get pregnant without having sex with a man?  Can a man perform miracles?  Can someone rise from the dead?  It flies in the face of our normal experience.  Hence the opposing position - atheism which refutes all these things, mostly on the basis that they are outside the experience of all of us.  We have never witnessed any of these things.  So why would we believe them?

 

You don't get anything called Abuddhism, or Adaoism ... why?  Because although there are many people who are not Buddhist or Daoist the upfront claims made by Buddhism and Daoism do not provoke refutation.  Whether or not there was a historical Buddha is actually unimportant to the dharma - as with Lao Tzu ... they do not hinge on stated historical facts in the way Christianity does.

 

?

I get the sentiment, but two quick counter points:

1. I belive you are making a little bit of a strawman here. I think the amount of people that interpet the virgin birth symbolically, as a literary tool, far out weighs the amount of people who think Yahwe put his penis inside virgin Mary.

2. We are talking a very «canonized» christianity, which, as we all know, has been strongly regulated and abused trough the centuries. I think we would see a big difference if it was allowed to grow organically, as I think most religions once did. Christianity even, in its very beginnings.

1 minute ago, Master Logray said:

 

"towards the same truth" - how many truths are there?  

One, by definition.

12 hours ago, silent thunder said:

You asked "Does all spiritual traditions point towards the same truth?"

Then you answered with an assumption of same message.

Then you posited, based on this assumption.

 

I guess my response at this point is... words are words.

Reality is reality.

 

Be well.  Live and thrive!

 

 

 

You know, ironically, what you say is «true.»

 

But curious, how do you propose we avoid human conceptions, when that is all we know? In my language the word for truth is not truth, but «sannhet.» Still, you can be confident that we are talking about the exact same thing.

 

And yes, I made an assumption in my introductionary post. That was meant as nothing but my interpertation, and maybe I should have avoided it all together.

 

Allow me to continue on topics I know nothing about. One paragraph from britannica on mystisism:

 

Quote

 

The complexity of the historical record is multiplied exponentially when one includes other religious traditions in the survey. Both Buddhism and Kabbala, the esotericJewish mysticism originating in the 12th century, emphasize nothingness rather than oneness, and the notion of oneness itself has many varieties in both Christianity and Hinduism. These facts are inconsistent with the postulation of a single unity or oneness that mystics everywhere experience or perceive.

Cant say I grasp «nothingness» tbh. Unity, however, I do.

Meditations, second book, paragraph III:

III. What comes from the gods is permeated by their providence. The work of fate is not nature foreign, nor is it different from the web that is woven by fortune. Everything flows from there. The necessary comes from it, and what benefits the entire universe that you are a part of. What all-nature gives, and what serves to sustain it, is also good for every part of nature. The world is sustained by change, changes in the things that the elements form, as much as the elements themselves. Let that be enough for you if you accept these teachings. Free yourself from your thirst for books, so that you do not die with rebellion in your heart, but sincerely content and with a heart grateful to the gods.
 

 

His mentality is truly unmatched, in my opinion.

10 minutes ago, silent thunder said:

Maps describe terrain, but are not terrain. 

Thoughts and conceptual thinking, are aproximations that attempt to describe, but are not reality.

How close do they get?  How can one be certain when discerning the accuracy requires more thought and interpretation?

 

The picture, name, or concept of a salad is not functional nutrition.

Symbols are not reality.  What we speak of when we speak of self even... 'I' and 'you' are symbolic expressions.

 

neither 'i' nor 'you' are thoughts, emotions, nor body.

So one I said oneness in my opening post.. that is kind of what you are talking about, no?

31 minutes ago, silent thunder said:

Truth is a human word.  A mental conception. 

 

Words and thinking are more akin to a map of a place than the reality the map represents.

 

What is... is what is.

Thinking is a subjective, interpretive process and truth is but one concept.

Alright, but does the maps describe the same terrain but with different symbolism?

Self explanatory : ) Sure, the language and practices are different, but do they all, at their core, convey the same message? That message, I interpet, as oneness.

1 hour ago, Chang dao ling said:

Me too. Meditation practices from Hinduism, Taoism, Buddhism are experimental and logical 

I get where you are comming from, but is it acctually that different from prayer, charity work, sufi dancing, church choir etc?

How about this premise: the philosophy of the devil. What would it look like?

20 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

Why ?  I see it like this .

 

You might be able to walk to the top of the mountain  with a map . But what if you want to test your skills and what you have learnt previously and see if you can get up there without a map   . And lets say you have been up that mountain many times before , then you would be just working on memory and not skill  of orienting a new way forward .

 

So you go through a process where you forget what you knew about the mountain and the way up , to see if you can work it out again .

 

You might make it ... or you might fuck up ... and least later  you will know where and why you fucked up ... and take that on board  for next attempt  .... ie. try to remember the  processes that worked for you  because the actual route will be erased from your memory each time you try it .

 

The details of each life may not be that important , its the learning of 'process'  or what the Sufis call 'learning how to learn ' ... so it 'sticks'

 

Sorry if  this attempt at simplicity made my  communication unfathomable   

I think I get you: when you walk the same path every day, you stop to live conciousley and go by autopilot. So the point is to live conciously, correct?

 

And yess, there are certainly many trying to tell you who you are, where you should go, what you should buy, say, think and feel. Muddying the map a little. If I am a allowed to be a little dramatic; the whole word tries to manipulate you.

19 hours ago, Nungali said:

or perhaps you want my private specifics , how i found my kvharenah  and how I was able to fulfill it ?

Yes, that was what I had in mind.

 

«There is a frustration though, knowing this has all but died out . Like many elders here ; I am one of the last, I'll be gone , tradition gone , knowledge gone , modern people 'going to hell in a hand basket '  (as they say )  ... sad ?  yeah but .... mhe .»

 

I feel like an absolute ass commenting this when you are talking about one of lifes… idk, scariest and biggest question, but why let the religion with no name die?

11 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

 

11 hours ago, Nungali said:

Spiros may not agree ;

 

 

 

 

 

And also this  is in a context of  a few discussions (posts on DBs) , posts I have made or in discussion with 'Natura Naturans '  re ;

eudaimonia , 'True Will' , Khvahrenah ' , in short one's reason and purpose for being here . It might seem insignificant but this is viewed in contrast with the many modern westerners who dont know why they are here or what their purpose is . Its even said that is the main question of life .   Eg; in another thread I said '' Is it rational to go to work every day in a job you dont like that is unfulfilling and depressing ? ''  There might be a rationale in WHY you are doing it  but that is something different . 

Fucking Spiros 

 

One thing I should probally have asked you a long time ago, but that I have not, is this: how do you live in accordance to your true will? What is essential for you?

19 hours ago, zerostao said:

I've lived much of my life in the wilderness of a large Ancient National Forest. What I've witnessed some animals do, 99.9% of ya'll wouldn't believe anyways. 

To label them, Magical, would be a gross underestimation of their capabilities,virtues, powers,,,

Especially, "possums".

Id love to hear.

Let me clarrify one thing: I do not for a moment doubt animals inner life, personality and emotions. Not for a second, one would have to be completely devoid of empathy to do that. Let me quote you the section I read that inspired the question. The following is quoted (and translated by AI) from the foreword of Epiktets work, by Viggo Johansen:

 

Quote

Page 15:

"According to Stoic philosophy, humans are reasoning animals. We share our animal nature, that is, our biological nature, with all other animals, while what is unique to humans is our capacity for reason. This is often translated to mean that we possess rationality, which tends to be equated with our ability to think. However, it is important to be cautious here, for this is the central point in the entire philosophy—everything else rests upon it—and if we misunderstand this, we misunderstand the entire argument. So let us proceed carefully.

To understand the Stoics' view of what it means to be human and what the good life consists of, we must begin with..."

Page 16:

"...their view on existence itself. The foundation of their worldview lies in the belief in the goodness of nature and its purposefulness. Nature is divine. Epictetus uses the words 'Nature' and 'God' as synonyms. We are obviously not talking about God as a person or entity but as the highest principle. Therefore, it is not so strange that God can be equated with Nature. We do not live in a cold and meaningless universe, where life is random, but rather in one that is absolutely meaningful—essentially. The ordering principle in existence, logos, is embedded in humans as our reasoning ability, or our capacity for understanding. As a metaphor, and perhaps to better grasp its implications, there is a divine spark inherent in every human being—something that is like God—and it is this that separates us from other animals. Humans have an inherent ability to transcend their biological nature and recognize their divine nature. To move from being bound to being free.

Thus, it is not thinking that is essential to our reasoning ability, even though thinking is derived from it, but rather that it is possible for humans to live in truth. To live in truth is to live in harmony with nature, that is, with the highest principle. For our biological nature, survival and reproduction are the most important principles for life, while for our inner nature, truth is the most important principle—and if these come into conflict with one another, a true Stoic would say that it is better to die alive than to live dead. Therefore, it is not surprising that Socrates is the prime example for Stoics, both in how he lived and how he died. Socrates drank the poison without complaint—although he could easily have avoided it by yielding to external demands—and by his action, he demonstrated the crowning example of Stoic calm: that reason overcomes even death."

Page 17:

"It is no coincidence that the Handbook begins with the words: 'With everything here in life, it is as if the individual thing is what you determine, while others do not.' What we determine, understanding, is the compass in life. If one follows its instructions, external goods lose their allure—health, money, reputation, power—everything worldly is seen from a bird's eye view. Life's events follow the whims of fate, and as humans, we experience both success and adversity, but none of this has anything to do with the good life. For humans, what matters is wanting what happens. Stoic self-discipline is about becoming so attuned to existence that one's own will aligns with the will of life itself; there is nothing in me that resists life's movement—whether it goes 'well' or 'poorly' outwardly. The Stoic understands, or lives in such a way, that they are part of the universe's center, not the center itself—life revolves around me, and I submit myself accordingly to Nature. Then there is no conflict in me, no opposition, which is the same as Stoic calm. The Stoic calm is therefore not about becoming immune to life, but rather about becoming like life itself. A Stoic is not indifferent to life, but rather completely transparent in meeting life—fully alive."

 

Is it our failure to live in accordance to nature, god, "true will," what have you, that lead to misery?  And why do we fail?

So, famously, the greeks considered rationality as the defining feature of humans - what seperates us from animals.

 

i have two cats. They seem to live in constant bliss, without any sense of worry or suffering. Do you agree that animals generally dont suffer, while many humans do?

 

How do explain that the only creature capable of rationality, wisdom and virtue, is the most miserable of them all?

3 hours ago, Gerard said:

Buongiorno, this Taoist will make a tasty Ribollita next week.

 

Yum!

 

Grazie, no cuisine like the italian one.

 

16 hours ago, Thrice Daily said:

Almost same everyday although I change portions and undulate calories (sometimes  )

 

3 Meals and 1 Bedtime Snack 

 

4 eggs, 100-150grams Organ meat [chicken hearts or 100 grams liver], Fermented cabbage, bed of rice, 20g Fat of some sort, usually from butchers lard (maybe heavy good brown bread) [50g Protein]

 

Protein Shake with 1 and 1/2 cups of oats and 1/2 litre milk + sultanas and creatine [50g Protein]

 

4 eggs, Cottage cheese, Fermented cabbage, bed of rice, 20g Fat of some sort (maybe heavy good brown bread) [50g Protein]

 

**Best Meal 

High Fat Greek Yogurt 200g and a scoop of chocolate protein powder. Awesomeness!!! [35g Protein]

 

I love my food me but I keep it pretty much the same. I’m a uniform eater, don’t give it any more energy than needed and can do it with my eyes closed. Tend to fast till 1:30-2:30pm

 

I add garlic or ginger as and when, use as medicine. Same with full lemon every morning in water. As and when needed.

 

NOTE** DONT HAVE MORE THAT 100g LIVER IN ONE SERVING!!!! VItamin A LEVELS ARE OFF THE CHART AND ITS TOXIC TO HAVE MORE!!! 

i used to live like that to a few years ago. Damn it felt great. But somewhere along the road I turned into a goblin. Working on fixing it now tho!

The principles progress from a pursuit of knowledge (1), to the establishment of independence (2), to the understanding of a universal order (3), and further to applying this understanding in one's own life and environment (4), and then to action and courage in the face of challenges (5). The principles of mortality (6) and beauty (7) put this entire journey into perspective, while the final principle (8) encourages bringing everything together in a process of self-realization and wholeness.

11 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

How about this beauty: https://youtu.be/W-hrBhA4XkM?si=rRXGWqQ1TncTynUH

2 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Why would I be pissed off ?   

 

After all I am a young shapely woman born again Christian now .   

 

How's that for the transformative 'power of Christ '  ! 

I post a scetch appropiate for a wise man who was around 50 years ago:

 

Point is: I like Christ if we separate him from the dogma of biblical Christianity. Happy?