Owledge

I know. When someone falls unconscious, not only the observer 'shuts down', but also the sensory system. But the observer can move and shut down without the sensory system doing the same. During a mindlapse when consuming too much alcohol, not only certain conscious-mind parts fall away, but also the observer. That the observer is there and we lose memory afterwards is only a theory. I'm quite sure that one's awareness can be somewhere else and the body+mind unit will continue to function like nothing happened. Take sleepwalking for example. During sleep, the observer is not there (except when dreaming), but the body-mind walks around and interacts with the world. There seems to be some kind of connection between conscious mind and observer though, because we act oddly when the observer is not there.

Some free-flowing ideas... This, generally speaking and not specifically focused on Frantzis, could also be a justifcation for not making the jump from teacher to healer. Teaching is a mind-thing. Healing works best with the heart. If you are the embodiment of loving kindness, there's no use for lectures and teachings. You can just walk through life and people will heal. BUT that jump requires a certain strength. Of course it is wise not to overextend oneself, but one should not take that as a defense against expansion. Pushing the boundaries is healthy expansion. A teacher who doesn't learn anymore is a bad teacher. Easily one stops learning when going by the motto: "I'm just doing my thing.". Spreading a teaching could be a means for avoiding self-healing, thus one will shy away from other people who require healing. They're asking for something that the teacher himself doesn't have.

I experienced something somewhat similar to that during one of my ayahuasca trips - it was the most profound one. It was horrible in a way. It felt like I was losing my mind, and unfortunately there was no message or anything giving me confidence and trust to allow it to happen. It felt like I would have to die completely, to stop existing, in order to give in to it. Weird was that I wasn't scared shitless, but in utter despair. That was because I experienced it as invitable true reality. There was no way in hell I could have escaped that truth, so I couldn't run away, thus no fear. But whenever I get a mild flashback into those realms, it DOES scare me a lot. Feels like reality theatening to collapse and take me with it down the drain. It's like I am wishing to practice slowly, to keep approaching it, you know, getting used to it, getting better at dealing with it, and then some time later it hits me unprepared, very mildly, and I'm like FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK! I'm still wondering what lies beyond, whether I was supposed to do something differently, what's the point? Very confusing, and hearing other people taking ayahuasca and getting insights that help them with their daily problems in life, man, that makes me jealous. Are they more humble? Or are they more spiritually advanced than me without knowing? I envy people who can make profound steps like this without totally freaking out. It sucks to have so much fear blocking the process. That one guy, who practiced shaolin, he said at one point during the trip he felt like he was dying, and thought: "Alright, if it has to be, then I will die." How does one do that?! Back to the unity thing: Yes, one can try to describe it, but eventually the mind has to capitulate. To me it was like even infinity, while not imaginable for the mind, is still a time-based concept. The stuff that's really freaking the mind out is not necessarily the idea of something without beginning and end, but the idea of there being no time, thus no beginning, no end and no progress, no dimension. Everything that could possible exist is the ever-existing ocean of consciousness and whatever we perceive is just a narrowed focus and bringing things into shape. The more you search, the less you find, because all of reality is just imagination, a dream, and the dream does not exist, because the dreamer is awake at the same time. There's only being awake, and we are not so much asleep, but awakened all the time beneath the surface. We have that thin protective layer that keeps us from realizing that "we" are all "I" and "I" am god and all that exists. How does one make pracical use of an experience like that?! There might be subtle changes in personality, but basically, nothing changed. I mean, I am no longer aiming for immortality in the sense I used to think, because there is no death, there is nothing that can die. It also made me consider that yearning for nivana is totally absurd, since we are all connected to nirvana all the time, and since there is a reason for us being 'here', a reason that we came up with in the god-state, and since when you 'go back' to nirvana, you will simply continue to reincarnate, since there's no alternative for a singular entity anyway, the only purpose left is to accept the experience here on the physical plane. We want this, but we intentionally forgot. But I cannot accept that. It's not useful for the experience from my limited standpoint. Keen on improving my life, getting an experience like that, cryptical and out-there stuff and so much added confusion, it kinda sucks. And even if I have some success, it's temporary. It will eventually be a dead end. But giving up (in the sense that I can comprehend) doesn't get things done either.

Missing again! ... Typical Friday 13th.

Manila also features Daniel Dingel and his amazing water fueled car. Might be worth checking out personally.

A vegetable.

OK, NATO forces bombing Libya, Libya having a lot of oil - pretty clear what motivation is behind that - the usual. But if the rebellion was part of the Arab Spring movement, then I'm wondering about how homogenous that is in its political aims. Does the USA expect it to be easier to corrupt a government that resulted from the Arab Spring? I guess so. Surely easier than corrupting a dictator who won't allow himself to be corrupted by them. Arab Spring might have done good in Egypt, but that doesn't apply in Iran. So I assume as usual foreign powers tweak and support movements based on their own regional interests, making the Arab Spring movement not homogenous. I can't be sure about the claims in the video, but I can imagine it being true. After all, the USA does pretty much the same twisting and censoring of information with Cuba. Sure, every country has its problems, but focusing on the problems only and condemning them while they are worse on the own turf is hypocritical.

When the government is causing problems, they have no right to feel just about providing solutions. You talk about authoritarianism and apparently have a flawed understanding of the term, because you connect it to the granting of more personal freedoms, when authoritarianism is when the government makes decisions for you instead of being a mere representative of the people's will. The option to amend the Constitution is protected by the principles of the Constitution. Trying to circumvent it is what the government is doing a lot. The will of the people stands against the will of the government. That is tyranny and exactly what the settlers were trying to escape from in the old world. ... They didn't do a perfect job, but they put things on a pretty good basis. Again, please get your jargon right first. Neo-liberalism is very much what Ron Paul doesn't stand for. He stands for all-encompassing liberalism, which of course, includes private business. The media focused a lot on very basic stuff in their interviews and you don't hear that much how he would solve more specific problems, but he makes enough statements to show that he's not a lobbyist for unrestrained ruthless capitalism. He says that first you have to get the basic laws followed, only then you have the justification for solving problems that might ensue. Neo-liberalism is something that goes very much in the same direction as neo-conservatism. It's the power-corrupted version of the original. Neo-liberalism seeks to allow business to do whatever they want to do without any limitation, neo-conservatism considers imperialism and military supremacy as a time-tested value to be preserved. And connecting Ron Paul a supporter of feudalism... you can't be serious! You really only see what you want to see, hm? He's not the rich guy getting campaign funding from banks and big corporations. He's not the one trying to take freedoms away from people. He's not the one claiming that wealthy people have more rights in society. Of course he's not perfect, but he'd be a much better president than any we had before, because he is sincere, because he is not appearing before the people with rhetorics training using deception, empty phrases, pychological trickery and funding from criminals to win an election. It's amazing how people are so scared of being treated with respect, but that's the power of propaganda. Then what WAS the point of your posting regarding that? It was very much out of context, that's why it came off the way I described it. Stating that racism exists in other countries, too, is kinda stating the obvious. Oh great, now you're equaling gang rape to a personal right. Worst comparison ever. Newsflash: Outlawing rape is not the same as passing a law that forbids business owners to decide who to allow on their property. I'm sure India dosn't have a constitution that says committing violence against other citizens is protected by personal freedom rights. You will probably only begin to appreciate the high importance of the basic principles in the Constitution once they are gone. .. Or you will support those who took them away. I'm curious: Who is YOUR favorite candidate for the presidency?

Your reasoning includes a severe logical fallacy. You turned things around. Being for property rights doesn't mean being for racism. There was a law that said only property owners could vote? Then that law tied into the superior property rights law, and if you want to stop the racism issue connected to property rights, then you're changing that law, not the property rights law. (Your reasoning is like saying I don't like warts, but since you got a wart on your nose, I don't like you. And warts are a health problem, so I have to get rid of you to solve the health problem.) Ron Paul explained it in the video! He said something that is very insightful and wise: They way they tried to solve the racism problem was to forbid shop owners to not allow "negroes" in their shops. It did nothing to resolve the underlying problem, the fear-based racist behavior, but made the problem worse, by making people angry, the government telling them what to do, and they saw the people behind that, and their resentment might have been something like: "Those negroes are controlling our government now!". Good food for KKK. I'm not sure what those memes are about, maybe I'll have to look it up. The basic flaw I'm sensing here is basing that on the same twisted 'fact' basis that the corporate media spreads. Wow, after this ad hominem attack I think I don't have to try and reason with you until you make an evolutionary step. You're basically saying there's racism in Germany, so Im a racist/nazi and what I say shouldn't be taken seriously? You really need to take a step back and look at yourself and what drives you to do stuff like this. By the way, "Spiegel" is part of the corporate propaganda media - to some degrees very untrustworthy. Hell, they even sometimes just copy articles from the infamously ruthless and manipulative boulevard press "Bild". German media are part of a political correctness network, and due to the "reeducation" campaign after WWII, shame was instilled into the people and now every time you say something negative about foreigners, you are quickly labeled an antisemitist, since the Zionists love to trigger that psychological complex again and again to their own advantage. Even if you say something IN FAVOR of the jewish community that doesn't sound as they like it, same result. You really have to kiss their ass in choice of words, gesture, demeanor and tone of voice to not call their wrath upon you. (And people who are informed I don't have to tell how the Israeli government looks like it's trying hard to emulate or even surpass what Hitler did.) Of course you don't know that, for example, Hamburg's police statistics say that in 2012 there have been many times more politically-left motivated violent crimes than politically-right ones. The extreme right / neonazi scene is used as a scarecrow, a convenient enemy, and fueled by using any shoddy means against them that the government deems feasible. The government is trying again and again (and failing) to declare the NPD illegal because of anti-constitutional attitudes, while the government itself is displaying the most severe violations of law. Huge hypocrisy just like in the USA. And just like the approach the US government took in the case of racial discrimination, this is unwise if you want harmony and reconciliation as a result. But since that's not the government's aim, it makes perfect sense. All tyrants do it. Out of curiosity I attended a march of leftist activists a while ago and they were very confrontational. They were really hungering for causing a crisis with the police and getting arrested and making a big fuss. They were in the same "they are our enemy, we have to fight them" mentality that always perpetuating fear and violence. The BBC reports something that I remember seeing a movie about, playing in the USA, based on real events, where someone did more or less the same there. Again, the article itself mentions the problem with that approach, and you have no problem quoting something that sheds light from both sides so to speak and only see one side. What Günter Wallraff did is not scientific - it manipulates the outcome, makes it as unnatural as his fake black skin was. Oh and by the way, the USA is not alone with huge deceptions and scams, like half of what the IRS does being illegal. In Germany, we have the problem that our whole Basic Law (which the government celelbrated recently for its '60 year success story') is a scam, since it was a post-war provisory means for order and designed to be replaced by a constitution freely voted for by the people, which still has not happened, and people are ignorant about the fact that it says just that IN the Basic Law. To make it very clear: The German Basic Law says that it's supposed to become invalid, to be replaced! Germany is one of the most criminal countries in the world. Comes with material wealth I guess, or the wealth comes with the crime. Goes both ways. Remember, Germany is the 3rd biggest weapons exporter, and it also used to be a colonial empire.

@vortex Very nice pictures there. I'll watch the Gaddafi video later. I'm not sure whether Libya was a case where the overthrowal was a pro-US act, but I didn't research that case in-debth. Could you elaborate about the pic with Ahmadinejad? When did he deny dollars for oil? Right now it's more like the other way round, with the illegal sanctions against trade and banking.

I don't think he's claiming what obviously is not true. He's smarter than that. The Constitution has amendments, duh! But all the time he says that stuff is happening that violates the constitution. He points out that the Constitution has to be obeyed first, that it contains principles that other laws cannot render void. And people like Bush didn't even try to conceal that they consider that legal document non-binding. He and Cheney are more like: 'It's not useful, so we don't feel bound to it. And we don't think people would see the wisdom in changing it, so we'll just ignore it.' The people can update the legal basis for their society. But in a state where the government violates it all the time, you cannot expect a positive outcome. Please point out how obeying the Constitution would result in segregated schools. (I won't even go into the "racism and rampant discrimination" thing, since that's still happening and very much practiced and encouraged by the government, just in different clothes.) Well, far from all of it. He's not ending foreign wars. He's expanding on that. And I don't think a rep. president would have been worse. In an environment of propaganda and deception, maybe the only thing that can make people wake up is a more radical, faster change. You know, like the thing with the frog in the hot water. Bush was widely unpopular - people knew what mentality he was running on. But with Obama it's more problematic, because he makes a smiley face and speaks fancy words and is doing the opposite behind people's back. The mass craze during his campaign was really unhealthy. People idolized him like a rock star based on his skin color - that's so shallow. I think even people on XTC don't behave that extreme.They deserved to be fooled. But many are still in that state. So now Obama is making fake tears when children are shot in a school massacre that's maybe another setup (Osama apprehension was ridiculously implausible), claiming it hit him hard emotionally, but he has no problem raining bombs on weddings. After all, those are Pakistani children, and they are so far away. I might have said it before, but that makes him a sociopath if he's sincere and a deceptive piece of scum if he's not. I wish people would finally stop fighting over whether Coke or Pepsi is best.

Well, there's still a huge difference between real defense and the US version of defense. Nobody wants to drop all security measures within a day. Ron Paul is smart enough to know that you can't make drastic changes without drastic results. BUT he would end those activities which have no positive influence whatsoever. Radical Islam is in a way caused by an environment of threat, and surely there are some people who are in it for the power and influence. But as spirituality teaches and demonstrates, when you remove the fear factor from an environment, everything cools off and positive processes can flourish. With the most possible political change imaginable in the USA regarding world politics, it would still take time until the past is forgiven. It's always like that. Sincerity is very powerful. Only sincerity (words matching actions) can dissolve mistrust. One more thing: Even in the scenario of deconstructing defenses, it would most likely not be 'real' islamists going on the offensive. When changes like that happen, most afraid are those who have great power - afraid of losing it. They have great power in the first place because they feel a need to have it. And those people are usually the ones responding with false attacks to create false facts, to 'prove' that their enemy would use the opportunity to attack. There are many examples in history from all areas of society where when an enemy vanishes, those who fought it will create a new one to secure their fearful basis of existence. Considering that most terror attacks in the US were fake media reporting or false flags anyway, with a sincere change in US politics there probably wouldn't have to be defenses police-state style like the USA has now - if it wasn't for the 'own' people who fear a world without enemies. This can be seen very metaphrocial, too. Fear can be like an inner demon who demands attention, acknowledgement, to be fed in order to survive. It's common that people will project their fears outwards, see that everywhere which is only in their own mind, and here's another spiritual principle: When you act based on that perceived reality, your actions will seek to (re)create that reality. If you think that everybody is your enemy and live that way, then eventually everybody will be your enemy ... especially if you have a lot of power and are using it. And THEN you will have solid proof that you were right all the time. Thing is just that that solid proof was manifested by yourself. And you yourself then will be unable to see how you have become what you fear.

Oh man, you compare what presidents did to spanking your children? The first paragraph shows how much you are still thinking based on propaganda lies and scare tactics. Claiming that wars prevent terrorist attacks, when the whole reason terrorism occurs is because of governments terrorizing their own and other people. If it still has escaped your awareness how for the US government everything that serves their imperial agenda is "good" and everything that doesn't is "evil", then do some in-depth studied. The USA are the biggest supporter and performer of terrorism in the world, and in parts they don't even try to hide it! They don't have to, because servile US citizens will know that those are called "freedom fighters", and labels are truth, especially if their masters are making them.The US government is putting militant organizations on and off and on and off and on and off their terrorism list as they please. The CIA trained Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden and supported the Taliban against the Russians. And you claim that wars prevent terrorism. 9/11 was welcomed and arranged by the US government, just like past pretexts for war were. The US government has a long record of killing their own people when it serves their agenda. The past pretexts, while not that widely known, are accepted as truth by the mainstream, but as long as the most recent deceptions are always swallowed as truth, people will repeat the mistakes over and over and nothing will change. But hey, people are so dumb... first they swallowed the lies about Iraq without question, then the lies were revealed, and now the same is happening with only one letter difference in the country's name and many people are fooled again. Ironically, even G.W. Bush mentioned a saying that applies here: "Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, shame on me!" And regarding Ron Paul and depression: War is only profitable for the industry. Ron Paul would have ended some wars, and you might not know this, but the US war budget is appalingly huge. It's even said publicly all the time that the USA are in trouble because they wage wars they can't afford anymore. Ron Paul would have removed that problem a long time ago. (in theory, in praxis, ad I said, he wouldn't have been elected in the first place) Oh my, you are still in USA benevolent world police mode? That's almost more backwards than I was thinking 12 years ago. And I did extensive research all the time. Looking at all that the USA did, it makes perfect sense they have so many enemies and feel a need to 'defend' themselves. If you act like a criminal, a mass murderer, ruthless beyond comprehension (I'm talking about historical facts now), there's no moral highground to justify anything but humble focus on one's own turf and affairs and keeping out of other people's business. I might sound harsh, but I really wish to open your eyes to all the stuff that is drowned in the propaganda storm. The corporate media blatantly censored Ron Paul during campaigning. If you think that was a good way, that he needed to be treated unfairly to 'prevent' him from becoming president, for the greater good, then you will get what you ask for ... deception. If you support deception, then you will be deceived. ... In a way you already are then.

With that attitude, you will make some enemies at the Department of Redundancy Department.

I see. You're obviously wearing a catsuit.

That clip has some serious sociocritical aspect. It mocks how corporate media spins everything into entertainment for the sheeple. I'm confused. Are you talking about cosplay?

Not really something to laugh about. It shows how safe the planners of false flag incidents feel. Are you aware that the sinking of the Titanic was a real life enactment of a novel published earlier? It followed the book in almost every detail. It was the banksters getting rid of a bunch of influential opponents to the Federal Reserve Act, and now they can laugh their asses off how sceptical 'experts' believe that it was some freak metaphysical synchronistic coincidence of life rather than realizing it was all a setup. Escaping into superstition when the truth is too frightening to believe.

Hah, yes, well, probably the only mistake greater than trusting what Obama says is trusting what his political opponents say about him. They need to use lies to attack him, since there's so little truth they can attack him with that's 'safe' for the sheeple's ears. Although I wouldn't trust some fancy statistics published by the Wallstreet Journal. You can take authentic numbers and take them out of context and thus mislead people. It's a long information chain and you only have to manipulate at one point to make it all untrustworthy.

It's nice to pose as the savior when you are part of the problem. Doing just what the banks want, making a blackmail work, is not something I give credit for. He bent down to his monetary masters. (You know, various banks are major contributors to his campaign.) You're judging by propaganda and history written by the winners. Clinton had the renditions running (circumventing basic legal principles of the USA by sending prisoners to other countries where servile corrupt regimes do the dirty work for them) and he started an illegal war. Reagan was mostly a puppet, he was less bright than George W. Bush ... good intentions, but very naive, and much ugly stuff happened during his administration. JFK was responsible for an act of war against another sovereign country. The CIA told him they wouldn't get caught doing their totally illegitimate thing, and that was good enough for the President of the United States to greenlight it. But I guess he learned quickly, and he was murdered by the federal reserve banksters for the monetary reforms he attempted. To me, a good president is one who wouldn't get elected in the current system, because the system doesn't allow it. First the people have to change the system so that they deserve a better president. It's a perpetual folly of the people to elect a champion instead of a representative. Ron Paul is one of the very few prominent politicians who actually prove sincere, because their actions match their words. And the degree of media manipulation regarding his campaign is appalling and not even in any way hidden. It's the clear message that those who are really in power don't have to conceil their influence; they feel safe and probably get a good kick out of witnessing how easy it is to fool the majority. You have to look past the propaganda storm, beyond the mainstream common-knowledge history version. If you call Reagan a good president because he 'ended a war', then you'd have to love Henry Kissinger. You know... he got the Nobel Peace Prize. ... Truth is, though, that he's a war criminal. The politics in the USA are so far away from legality and following the Constitution that people confuse that sick state with normality. It's telling that when people call Ron Paul a constitutionalist, they say it like he's some kind of quaint freak clinging to ancient concepts, when in reality the Constitution is still a valid part of the US legal system. Bush should have been hanged for treason for his utter disrespect of it, but people take a lot of shit without seeing clearly. Man, there's so much stuff to open your eyes. I, too, started off with shaping my opinion based on the official version of events, but some things were unsatisfying and so I investigated. Many people now realize what's going on. It takes some courage to realize most of our idols are crooks. Not much left then, but that which is left is what we need to focus on. It's not about being on the winner's side. It's about being on the right side. In short: In a system like the one the USA had for a long time now, there is no such thing as a good president, because the president is of very little relevance.

Then you need to educate yourself, search for some facts. I mean, it's actually quite obvious, for example how Obama is continuing where Bush left things, and is often continuing it in a more extreme way. He's the president who fully runs drone warfare, killing civilians, backs Israel's crimes, lies and deceives people, seeks to deconstruct the Constitution, continues the patriot act, continues and expands illegal sanctions against Iran, didn't close Guantanamo and fully continues to run secret prisons for the abductions that they're still doing and during his presidency, we were presented with the ridiculous fake Osama apprehension story. Where is Obama less rotten than Bush? He's just dressing the whole thing differently. The USA have democrats and republicans so that you can divide the people in two and properly fool both halves.

Same here. "The researchers concluded: "We conclude that there is increasing evidence that people who profess spiritual beliefs in the absence of a religious framework are more vulnerable to mental disorder." As usual, quick to make up their mind about the cause-effect relation. Amateur mistake. I've heard that most shamans have diabetes. I guess those researchers would conclude that shamanic practices cause diabetes.

Well, that could also have something to do with his personality and what he does. He talks a lot about building confidence, but ironically the way he does it doesn't instill much confidence in him. Having the tendency to think that if someone doesn't follow through his program, it's because they're fucked up ... doesn't create a basis of respect, you know.

I knew that emptiness would sooner or later result in somethingness.

Well, I got a birth chart analysis from a trained Ba Zi astrologer and then I searched for info on the web that could reflect that. I found a birth chart calculator and a document that has some good info, some confusing. The fact that there seem to be detailed circumstances that can make the advice deviate from the standard doctrine makes the whole elemental thing less useful for planning and such, so I'm more inclined to mostly dump those systems and instead try to trust my feelings and wisdom, which usually served me well. But, I can give you links that I found useful. The only online calculator I found that considers all factors (apparently even stuff like regional daylight saving time): http://www.wangnick....tor.htm?lang=en For the usual western world set "solar calendar winter solstice start" and "local time", then it should be accurate. And if you leave out the time, you just have to ignore the hour column, the rest still fits. Some basic explanations are here: http://lizamlee.com/...zi_analysis.htm As I said, my astrologer recommended something that deviates from what is shown there, since I am prosperous wood, but I have a lot of metal in my chart, which controls wood, and being quite intellectual, I have a lot of fire using up my wood, and that came easy because my wood is dry, since there is no water in my birth chart, which kinda reverses which elements are lucky and which are unlucky. Yeah, when systems get too complicated, they're confusing and trigger the mind too much. What I did find those sources useful for though is for determining human interaction. I check the chart of two people and know how the energies work between them BUT here, too, it's not perfect, since some people might have overcome their energetic birth setup to some degree, you know, like conditioning your personality to not be that easily controlled by those energies. A practical example: I just assume that Joss Whedon, the maker of "Firefly", doesn't know about Ba Zi. Well, maybe he does, but anyway, he's weak water. One cast member is fire, two others (playing siblings) are weak water like Joss (one of the characters is even named "River"), and the other 6 cast members are all metal. (metal nourishes water) The whole show is full of heart, you could say, you see how it is a masterwork of Joss, how he poured his heart into it, the cast members are long time favorites of his; he used them for other shows, too.