Seth Ananda

I give up. I simply have now idea how you got this from what I wrote. How How How? Did someone teach you a completely different meaning to the English Language?

Hey my post was in no way an attack against you. Feel free to not be Buddhist. I am not one either, but I am a fan of a few of their central philosophical tenants. Mainly No self and E&DO, but as far as being part of a tradition goes I prefer others. I am very fond of Taoism and still greatly love Kashmir Shaivism. I actually started out nearly hating Buddhism, because it did not fit easily in with the other traditions, and I found it very hard to rectify key sayings with my understanding. But over time [years] I began to properly understand what its general philosophy is saying, and when I looked to see if they could be true, over and over I found I could not argue with its specific realizations. I struggled mightily to find alternative ways of describing the realizations/observations, and I may have found a few, but they need thorough examination on my part before i would share them. For me It almost felt like a forced conversion, where 'I' lol, tried desperately to keep from being sucked down a Buddhist hole. Funnily enough, eventually I couldn't argue any more and gave up. But being 'Buddhist' just doesn't suit me, and creates too many new questions. I have to follow these questions, as more than anything I want the Truth. I will never sit in front of someone and say the Truth is... and speel a bunch of beliefs. I will say, what I can see is... And if the person is smart they will be able to look at what I say, understand my position, then offer their own observations.... If I break up my components I am: Philosophically - Buddhist/Taoist/Kashmir Shavite meditation path - Taoist/Kashmir shavite Health pursuits - Taoist. low stance Taiji is awesome

Lol, no. I think different conclusions are great. But my friend Zhu went to someone elses site, not to engage their process but to teach/win/beat them with his Ideas, and all it really did was make him look like an Idiot. Also as far as a conversation goes, you/me/anyone has to be willing to explore the Ideas of the person they are conversing with. And by explore I mean try to understand. So if someone is trying to help you understand their discovery by saying look in this way at... well if you do that [philosophical bravery] you are then in a position to dialogue, or even have an opinion about what they are saying. This is the crucial point. Then you can come to your own conclusions, about said theory/phenomona which may be something the pointer has not realized them selves. Awesome. And as for digging to china, great analogy. No one has to try this stuff or look or make it their path - Unless they are wanting to debate/philosophize the claims made. In which case every effort should be made to understand the ins and outs of the perspective. Otherwise you are a useless cowardly belief monkey, who as a philosopher deserves Zero respect. Seth.

Thanks Blasto. I need to work on the humility side. Foggy thinking makes me furious. lol.

Informer, It sounds to me like you did not realize 'No self' but rather had a bunch of ideas about No self, that freaked out your survival Instinct. Remember in the Emptiness teachings, it's said, "Emptiness of the self does not deny the Self." Realizing No self, does not leave you without your thoughts, Ideas, emotions, memories or body. You will still answer to your name. If anything All it does is replace the set of deep seated existential anxiety's with a deep sense of peace, and detachment from thing that used to bug you. And not some Zombie detachment. It does not remove intelligence. You wont cease to care if you are hit by an oncoming truck...

Once again a BS reply from you. 1 - I never said you are deficient because you do not 'get it' but because you think you know and plainly do not & Because you claim to be honestly looking but refuse to glance in the direction indicated. Philosophical Cowardice. 2 - That is not the same No self experience that we are talking about. This alone demonstrates that you think you know where we are coming from, but you clearly do not. 3 - Lol if you read my last post, you will realize that I have ZERO interest in having someone believe something. Zero. All I want is for people who 'claim' to be interested in 'Truth', to be willing to bravely Inquire in any direction, and then come to their own conclusions... "Soothing my wounds"... lol, pitiful.

Ok when I say you have done nothing of the kind, I am not using some mystical 3rd eye awareness of your whole existence, I am refering to all you have said in the ruthless truth thread. You really should be able to figure that out for your self. You simply have not done it [looked]. Its right there to see for anyone with half a brain. You have refused to look in the particular microscope that is relevant to the discussion -ie the angle of perception that leads to what the other side has 'allegedly' discovered. If you wont look at how they are seeing what they see, and wont look your self to try to understand the conclusions others have reached, how can you engage in any meaningful discussion. Yon can't. And this is exactly what you failed to do over and over till they banned you for wasting their time. All you want to do is argue your position, without looking to see what their position actually is or why they hold it. That's why you are useless as a philosopher. Did you notice the last time we argued, a while ago, I was arguing at the same time, in the same thread about the same Issue with Marble head. He stepped on up, met the Ideas head on, attempted to understand my side then offer his own points. You did the complete opposite. You babbled inane emotional/mythic beliefs, clung to your guns while barley comprehending what was being said on either side. In the end, my respect for marblehead went up greatly, even though we completely disagree on that topic. You on the other hand... A philosopher or any truthful inquirer should be willing to try to understand the basic Ideas the other side is expressing. You barley listen at all. here you sum it up perfectly: " The effect of 'self' is self-evident, the unique self of Buddha is well regarded by those that understand his wisdom.. the unique effect of the Ghandi self changed a nation and a way of thinking.. the unique effect of the Jesus self has influence over millions.. the unique effect of the Hitler 'self' nearly wiped out the Jewish people in Europe.. " If you even slightly tried to understand what people mean by 'no self' you would find that in effect, No self does not really clash with what you just said. [the wording might be slightly different, but not the general meaning] People have posted you links to better understand what 'No self' means. You seem to be under the impression that realizing No self will take something away from you that is real or important, or maybe leave you like a mindless zombie... But you haven't as yet, even had the decency to try to understand the concept you argue against.... Seth Out!

Thank you Tzu, You demonstrate your Inability to rationalize, or to barely even cognize in this post of yours, which is really reflective of every post of yours I have ever read. 1. I in no way ask you to conform to my perceptions. If you really look, as challenged, you may find a completely different conclusion than we expect or are aware of. That would be an actual conversation, with an Honest [you] inquirer. But you refuse to look, and just speel more belief based B.S. 2. when did i claim some extra sensory perseption? thats just Lame. I really think you barely read what you respond to. Please Highlight and quote me saying this. 3. What the hell are you going on about your hand in a fire? looking to see whether the self is a factual existing entity is Inquiry, not self Immolation. Please note all you would realize is that there is no self to immolate... 4. No self is not based on beliefs, but just on seeing the body/mind/emotions as they are. I have zero interest in beliefs. 5. In the thread I read, you had not one Iota of a sincere attempt to look at the Idea. Not for a mini second. All you did was argue, sprout beliefs and waste peoples time. The Hilarious thing is you actually think you are wise. 6. A sincere attempt means that is someone says, "I discovered that if you look at such and such from this angle, you see such and such..." That what they have said. What you did and do, is refuse to even consider that angle, by Honestly giving it a go, and instead go "No, belief belief belief, blah blah, dogma idea..." Its like a scientist says "Check out what I discovered with my microscope, its...!" and you reply "No that does not make sense, and I will not look in your stupid microscope, But this is an honest discussion where I sincerely want to understand you, but what is really true is my Idea, blah blah blah..." lol.

This is you again just sprouting your beliefs. You are not sincerely looking or Inquiring into the actual nature of your so called self. If you have not realized 'no self' how can you have an opinion about whether it is real or not? To honestly enter dialogue, as you say you tried, you would have to simply follow the Instructions, and then report back what you found when seen clearly. So far you have done nothing of the kind, even though you claim otherwise.

I have to say I am rather fond of Ruthless Truth. First I am not a Buddhist [neither is Ruthless Truth], but I am fond of elements of Buddhist philosophy. For instance I had a minor realization of E&DO and will never be able undo that understanding. I can see it without trying, the same way I see this screen in front of me. Inquiry is what really does it for me. I do not care to be told by some moralist, Buddhist or otherwise, how I am to speak. I am all for cultivating the virtues, but I count the ability to speak harshly sometimes, as a virtue in itself, when used to point out someones deficiencies. Good Honest expression. So over there they are only Interested in helping people look at the reality/or not, of No self. This is really clearly written over there. -They do not want to discuss No self in comparative traditions. -they do not want to debate whether No self is true or false, in existential terms. -they do not want to talk about what you think or believe about No self. -they have zero interest in self/no self debates. They want to help people actually look to see if No self could be true. Tzu did not even begin to engage them in that way. All he did was talk around the Issue, round and round, be[lie]fe this, perception that..., without once stopping to look if they could be right. Till he got banned. And Good on them for banning him for wasting their time. They are helping large numbers of people gain realization of No Self. And the reason they are so successful in doing this is because they are so firm in their rules. Its not a democratic forum where every clown can confuse everyone, with all their Irrelevancies, beliefs and opinions. All that does is clog up the working of true Inquiry. Its more like a spiritual dictatorship. If you tow the line, do the work [actually Investigate your Ideas of self] then they will be very helpful. If instead, like Tzu, you do everything but that, the ban you. Awesome! They have every right to run their forum like that. If you do not want to Investigate No self, just don't sign up. Seth Ananda.

Fantastic reply! No Gauss, through my benevolence I bring awareness to the true Nature of a manipulative cult [which I have direct personal experience with], thus protecting Innocent seekers from the clutches of people like you, who would have someone cease all ability to rationalize and think for them selves. You Gauss, who write prolifically, yet demonstrate no ability to actually dialogue with another, by truly engaging each point brought up in healthy discussion, you would lead people into a Dodgy cult, and have them give all their power away to the perceptions of a megalomaniac lying unstable cult leader. In the many valid points made against Falun, you fail to seriously look at them, or discuss the finer points of them to see if they really have merit - or none. Instead you just deny the point, and then spew out some mindless dogma, or a stupid quote from the Epoch times rubbish magazine. In other words you are an unthinking fanatic, incapable of discourse. What's more, you hide behind your false humility and virtue, and use it to denigrate anyone who dissagree's with your perspective. My Virtue is somehow wanting, because I continue to warn people on your thread about the Cult you represent. Falun focuses heavily on developing the virtues, and that is admirable. I will never disparage that. Unfortunately, It also offers mindless obedience, a whole host of socially negative attitudes, an Inability to question the Infallibility of the crazy leader. I am sorry but the negatives far out way the positives. Falun also tells people it is a complete system of development which it is not even close to being. No one not even the master, will ever become enlightened by practicing Falun. As a system It is seriously lacking. Only someone who has explored the many rich and diverse traditions on our planet, and who has got to see the Incredible depth that these traditions have, Including the specific stages of Instruction for Students at the different levels of Consciousness, will be able to clearly just how massively undeveloped Falun is, as a spiritual system. Seth Ananda.

I read TzuJanLi's hilarious dialogue over there, and I Laughed my pants off. Tzu went to someone else's site, not to learn but to teach. He made Zero effort to even contemplate their Ideas, and Instead just tried to beat them with His Ideas. The really funny thing is he seem to believe that he is somehow wise himself, but all his posts just make him look, well - the opposite... Incredible arrogance, but he does cling to the idea of self.

I won't be there but I thoroughly enjoyed his books over the years

As said I have Chu's book which I like, but it has no seated practice which I am interested in. Clyman looks Interesting but I want to know more... I hear that Neikung [the meditational stuff] is where Its really at practice wise, Is very powerful Dan Tien work, Fuses the Hun and the Po and does all the other really groovy stuff as well... lol. So I want to know what Good stuff is out there, who the good teachers are, before forking out money for material. On Michael Lomax, I have his book and DVD. I read his book and did not get much out of it practical wise. The DVD looked Interesting but is [i think] qigong, and as I was already doing Spring Forest at the time I did not explore it further. I have been planning to get back to it for a while to feel its style. Why do you call it Neikung? Is there some of that In it? Or does he have further material available on Neikung? Sorry Micheal to talk around you, I was answering Friend there, but of course feel free to fill me in. Thanks again guys

Thanks Kronos, so do these styles have any content available to the general public? And does anyone know of any good Neigung resources?

Thanks guys. Blasto, I just aquired Chu's book, to assist in foundation strengh training for the Taiji that I do: But I was surprised to see no 'subtle' neigong in the book. I think I am really Interested in both the martial neigong, and the Subtle neigong. I just love LDT meditation. I have discovered lots in myself with it, but want to learn more...? And I do love B.K. Frantzis as well. Thanks, and tell me more... lol Seth.

Within is where you will find your answers. If for Instance you are harboring serious hurt and rejection feelings, from how you perceive the wonderful Females of our species, and then because you see them that way, in your Interactions with them, you then come across as a misogynistic needy jerk, then of course 'Look within' is your only option. So get in there, deal with your fears of not being Manly or Alpha enough, deal with your underlying dislike of women, [yes you despise them for liking the 'bad' guy] and then get on with having your life and the meaningful relationships that it brings. Really Non, looking out will only show you your own BS perceptions, as those are the glasses you view the world [and females] through. If you don't go within, you go without. [without Women in your case] Sorry If I come off as harsh, but Shaktimamma was right in the other thread. You come across [to me at least] as a woman hating AssHole. This does not mean you actually are an A'hole, but just how you sound. You seriously need to clear your shit around Women. All your posts go like this: Women - projection - projection - projection, I am a victum, waaaa! All the reply's go: thats just your shit, see it for what it is, deal with it and you'll get clear in your relating... To which you reply: 'No it really is the way I see it, women really are - projection - projection - projection, so your brilliant advice would not work or change anything, at least in me, Waaaa!' I hope you can get free. Seth.

Very nice Blasto, thank you Another book for my epic library! Moohahahah But seriously anything that helps with parenting...

From studies I have read, there is a 10% increase in brain size in a single generation, within species that become undomesticated. For Instance, cat's that go feral, then breed, their kids brains suddenly increase. If those kids get caught and are re-domesticated, their kids brains reduce again by 10%

Superb! Listen to Sloppy! Seriously...

Some great points have already been made, but a good observation from western psychology is that much thought comes from the underlying belief structures. Someone who feels worthless will have a constant stream of thought, whispering "you can't do it, you'll never succeed, your hopeless, why even try..." As those structures get broken down, that quality of thought ceases. So our belief structures themselves are constantly generating Internal chatter. Some have theorised that the structures take on something akin to a survival instinct, and speak constantly to get attention and validation/energy to maintain their existence. I have found it very interesting over the years to notice that when I have successfully dismantled another set of structures, that my Internal dialogue slows greatly, and the associated thinking style ceases. Occasionally after Intensive Inner work I have managed to temporarily collapse a great portion of my structures, resulting in, up to weeks without Internal dialogue. Quite amazing, and also why I think that [good] western psychology should be Included in the spiritual path. Seth

Hey Jetsun I have been using it for a few years, and sometimes with students. First I think its a very valuable tool, as well as voice dialogue, for quickly accessing expanded states of consciousness in an undeniable full contact manner. I would not necessarily recommend driving after a big Mind session. lol. It did get a lot of hype at first. I think people were so surprised that it works so quickly on anyone, giving them such a dramatic shift in consciousness. That said, It in no way replaces serious meditation and proper work. I have heard all kind of ridiculous things said about the process, such as it is enlightenment... Sure compared to everyday consciousness its a very expanded state, but its still nothing on a genuine mystical state. Second, Genpo has received a lot of flac for trying to present it as a form of Zen, which it is not. It is his creation from voice dialogue with bits of eastern Jargon, thrown in. Voice dialogue itself regularly goes to similar states, but it follows the client and their personal/transpersonal elements, rather than funnelling them down a track towards a specific state/outcome. Ironicly Voice dialogue [to me] seems more Buddhist, as the aim is to meet all the internal structures, observe them, and in doing so gain a certain space or freedom from them. Big Mind on the other hand focuses you down a line with the goal being an expanded state, that may well be training attachment to a particular mental state in the practitioner. lol. Still its a great technique Have Fun! Seth.

Really well spoken

Absolutely.

Hmm, In a society that is inherently sexually repressed you may be right. All the systems that develop within such a culture would be based on the underlying condition of the practitioners. And their is no good point to being closed in the way that I mean closed.