Josh Young

I thought of a way to test this. Normally electricity is not used in the outlets, but when it is the meter records it and also records how much. So if a person near an outlet can cause a meter to run for a house that has no operating appliances, a meter that without such meditation or appliances does not move: then the only conclusion is that the draw of power is caused by the person.

127 Not in the sky, not in the midst of the sea, not if one enters into the clefts of the mountains, is there known a spot in the whole world where if a man abide, death could not overcome him. When the incarnation of self by thought statements ceases; the infinite nature of mind is revealed. Mind is limitless, but if it is trapped by a focus on finite thinking then this will not be noticed. Yet when vast, uncountable, immeasurable numbers of beings have thus been liberated, verily no being has been liberated. Why is this, Subhuti? It is because no Bodhisattva who is a real Bodhisattva cherishes the idea of an ego-entity, a personality, a being, or a separated individuality. The above passage, from the diamond sutra, refers to ego incarnation. and here is more: if such men allowed their minds to grasp and hold on to anything they would be cherishing the idea of an ego-entity, a personality, a being, or a separated individuality; and if they grasped and held on to the notion of things as having intrinsic qualities they would be cherishing the idea of an ego-entity, a personality, a being, or a separated individuality. Likewise, if they grasped and held on to the notion of things as devoid of intrinsic qualities they would be cherishing the idea of an ego-entity, a personality, a being, or a separated individuality. This ego-entity is incarnation in the teachings of Buddha, who does not address the succession of bodies or rebirth cycles including death. Subhuti, what do you think? Does a holy one say within himself: I have obtained Perfective Enlightenment? Subhuti said: No, World-honored One. Wherefore? Because there is no such condition as that called "Perfective Enlightenment." World-honored one, if a holy one of Perfective Enlightenment said to himself "such am I," he would necessarily partake of the idea of an ego-entity, a personality, a being, or a separated individuality. Again the topic at hand of enlightenment is presented in a context of living and it pertains directly to the cessation of the incarnation of ego, not bodies in successive lives after death. Bodhisattvas should leave behind all phenomenal distinctions and awaken the thought of the Consummation of Incomparable Enlightenment by not allowing the mind to depend upon notions evoked by the sensible world - by not allowing the mind to depend upon notions evoked by sounds, odors, flavors, touch-contacts, or any qualities. The mind should be kept independent of any thoughts which arise within it. If the mind depends upon anything it has no sure haven. This is why Buddha teaches that the mind of a Bodhisattva should not accept the appearances of things as a basis when exercising charity Subhuti, if a Bodhisattva practices charity with mind attached to formal notions he is like unto a man groping sightless in the gloom; but a Bodhisattva who practices charity with mind detached from any formal notions is like unto a man with open eyes in the radiant glory of the morning, to whom all kinds of objects are clearly visible. As I said, a goal of Buddhism is absolute clarity, this is only had through the cessation of the incarnation of self, in life, by mind, as Buddha teaches. If a Bodhisattva cherishes the idea of an ego-entity, a personality, a being, or a separated individuality, he is consequently not a Bodhisattva, Subhuti. This is because in reality there is no formula which gives rise to the Consummation of Incomparable Enlightenment... Subhuti, there is really no such condition as that called Bodhisattvaship, because Buddha teaches that all things are devoid of selfhood, devoid of separate individuality This all pertains to incarnation which is manifestation of self, Buddha teaches not to attain freedom/liberation from incarnation/selfhood after death, but in life. And as I said enlightenment is not attained, it is more like taking off a hat than putting one on, but my words carry little weight so: Buddha replied: Just so, Subhuti. Through the Consummation of Incomparable Enlightenment I acquired not even the least thing; therefore it is called "Consummation of Incomparable Enlightenment." And what of Buddha, when he teaches self does not exist?: Subhuti then said to Buddha: World-honored One, as I understand the meaning of Buddha's words, the Tathagata may not be perceived by the thirty-two marks. Whereupon the World-honored One uttered this verse: Who sees Me by form, Who seeks Me in sound, Perverted are his footsteps upon the Way, For he cannot perceive the Tathagata. Too many people worship Buddha. Perhaps if you have time you could explain what you believe happens when you die. I have time. I have no belief about death, having not died I cannot know. Death is permanent, the temporary shut down of the body is not death, thus those who claim to have died and come back, have not died. What I believe about death is that nobody knows. Perhaps there is an afterlife, perhaps not. It has no bearing on the truth. I simply meant that I am not aware of anyone teaching Buddhism without rebirth. Buddhism is not a teaching of Buddha that I am aware of. I hope my reply is good enough, thank you for allowing me to make it.

I've seen the black triangle UFO's that have been photographed and filmed, they are a classified US Airforce vehicle and have beacons and flashing lights like they all do, to prevent collisions and provide a light source for their surveillance equipment. Seeing reptiles in a trance is not proof of them. People see all sorts of things in drug trance, er I mean, shamanic states. Doesn't make it real. Aliens surely exist as we do, of this I have little doubt, but more powerful then any extraterrestrial agenda are the human traits of imagination and paranoia. Aside from this greed and want of fame are also very powerful motivators. Had I not been raised as a mormon I might not be as familiar as I am with the willingness of people to lie about fantastic things for various reasons. Authors in particular have a financial motive to mislead others in many cases. The idea that the reptilians exist in the 4th dimension is odd, physics says that the 4th dimension is timespace itself, thus we are living in the 4th dimension. The geometric fourth dimension is a construct and for all intents and purposes not a proven reality, unlike timespace. I am severely entertained by the reptilian stuff. DMT was linked to alien abduction scenarios in the tests in the book DMT the spirit molecule. Apparently people who have large amounts of hallucinogenic molecules in their system tend to report alien abduction experiences of a terrifying nature. I think some people naturally have episodes where this occurs without injection and then they bear their testimony about what they saw. I recall my son hallucinating during a fever once. I was terrified then. If humans are genetically engineered then there should be evidence of this in the genome as compared to the MRCA(most recent common ancestor) of our species before this engineering event. However we are not the most intelligent animal on the planet, we just have the most developed informational systems and thus technological systems. Several animals lacking information systems of the type we use exhibit greater relative control over mental type functions than we. I rather think we are one of the dumber species. We are certainly domesticated, by class division. Those who exploit the majority of people on earth are not aliens or living in space ships. They are bankers and aristocrats, people like David Rockefeller (trilat commission founder) who have openly and admittedly pursued the domestication of the planet through the manipulation of finance, politics, academic and scientific information and religion.

The lower calorie diet is not starving, the monkeys in the study that got fewer calories and lives longer and healthier acutally retained more muscle mass than their high calorie counterparts. Less food does not activate any gene that I am aware of. What is the gene in question here supposed to be? I am sure Resveratrol is good stuff, but there is something to the low calorie diet that Resveratrol has not shown, like extending the life of mice.

Where does he get his understanding from? Black holes are the subject of a great deal of assumption, for example they are theorized, but not demonstrated. The name holes is misleading and most theories about them call them holes but note that they are masses, not holes, however laypeople do not know this and so can easily buy into theories that say they are holes, when they are not. There is also more than one type of black hole according to modern theories, however none are holes per say, just masses so big that they create event horizons. These masses also grow as they absorb. I suspect fraud.

neat link, thanks! I am lucky to have known poverty since I was a child, so i have had a low calorie diet for most of my life. Perhaps I will live a nice long life? My health is not so bad as most of my peers. I am even doing handstands now at 30, something I never did as a kid.

If reading such a discussion is not to your taste then perhaps I have a solution. Vajrahridaya, Could you please explain this to me in a PM? What do the vedas say "truth" is and how does this contrast with the teachings of Buddhism and Tao? Thank you kindly.

If, that you knew there was no afterlife, would the life you live be the same? Perhaps it is best to answer this question in the reincarnation thread here: http://www.thetaobums.com/Reincarnation-t10712.html I do believe in rebirth, but not the transference of consciousness or the succession of bodies. I would like to see someone use the teachings of Buddha, and not Buddhism, to illustrate that he taught the transference of consciousness or the succession of bodies in and of reincarnation. I only wish i could share more, but there are things I do not know how to present in a way that they will be considered fairly. The absolute unity, and lack of origin of the trimurti, is one such thing. anyway, thank you for this chance to share... Vajrahridaya, Could you please explain this? What do the vedas say "truth" is and how does this contrast with the teachings of Buddhism and Tao? Thank you kindly.

If there is nothing after death, why not cherish life all the more and care so much more about right mindedness? I cannot understand why life should be forsaken if there was not afterlife. Does not the imminence of death make life all the more precious? Does not the brevity of the bloom account all the more for it's beauty? Clarity of an absolute nature.

I did not say that. What care I for consensus? I do not believe things simply because others do. No matter what their title may be, or how high in a religious hierarchy they may be.

Can there be such a thing? Nihilism presupposes zero presuppositions and thus cannot be materialistic. Lets put at least one concept of immortality found in the Dhammapada into the topic: 114 And whoso lives a hundred years not seeing the immortal place, a life of one day is better if a man sees the immortal place. So here we have immortality, and mortality. And then: 126 Some people are born again; evil-doers go to hell; righteus people go to heaven, those who are free from evil attain Nirvana. Where in this section, (evil) is the mention of death for those mentioned above? It is not there because these attainments, being born again, going to hell, going to heaven, obtaining Nirvana are not presented in the context of death and afterlife, but rather are presented in the context of life itself. The early verses of this section clearly state that happiness (heaven) is the outcome of good, but that when evil deed ripen then evil is the outcome of evil, this is not in reference to death, but to life. Clearly even in the next section, where it is said that there are those who do and don't find happiness after death, Nirvana is put into the context of being attained in this life: 134 if like a shattered gong, thou speakest not, then thou hast reached Nirvana, contention is not found in thee. Clearly Nirvana is attained in life, not death. However Punishment, which is the section is addressing the fears of those who would otherwise commit evil if they were not afraid of "punishment" however the teachings stress that punishment occurs in this life. It is my belief that these teachings address several levels of realization, they offer reward and punishment in the context of afterlife, as motivators for those sheeple who require such motivators, however for those who are concerned with this life the teachings inform that the rewards and punishments are found in this life, and more importantly if you are concerned with reward and punishment then you cannot become enlightened, for you are not free of desire. and: 148 This body is wasted, frail,a nest of disease; this heap of corruption breaks into pieces, life indeed ends in death As it was said, Life indeed ends at death And later in this section (old age): 153/154 Looking for the maker of this tabernacle I ran to no avail through a round of many births; and wearisome is birth again and again. But now, maker of the tabernacle, thou has been seen; thou shalt not rear this tabernacle again. All thy rafters are broken, thy ridge pole is shattered; the mind approaching the eternal, has attained to the extinction of all desires It says wearisome is birth again and again, not wearisome is birth and death again and again. The maker of the tabernacle is the true mind, being known proper there is no more incarnation of the self, the function of mind, being freed, approaches the eternal, this eternal is the same as the immortal place mentioned above, which is attained in life, not death, and does not save one from mortality. In the next section: 158 Let each man establish himself first in the way he should go, then let him teach others; (so doing) the wise man will have no cause to grieve This establishment of self by self is nothing other than the making of the tabernacle, even the next line starts: "if a man makes himself as he teacher others to be" this very concept of making the self is key to understanding these teachings. At the very beginning of this work this is discussed by the statement " all that we are is a result of what we have thought" this is a direct allusion to the making of the tabernacle, the making of self. Anyway I have no intention to continue at this pace. I mean to say that the recognition of total mortality is a key part of the teachings that I cherish and indeed is tenant of some forms of Buddhism at the least. Living enlightened means no fear of death, and provides the experience of eternity in each moment. How could an enlightened person fear death? What do they prize so that death may take from them? Not even nothing. 385 when the Brahman has reached the other shore in two states (tranquility and insight) he is freed from all bonds as a result of his knowledge Again, attainment and enlightenment, but not death. Enlightenment is not like putting on a hat, it is like taking off a hat. It cannot be lost, because it cannot be gained. It is a release, not a containment. How can a release be released by death? This may be what you believe, and it is your "right" but it "is" the Buddhism that I can "see". Please forgive me for countering your opinion though, I mean no conflict.

Thanks for sharing that. I found it very entertaining to read and stimulating. I will not venture to form an opinion upon it, for I lack experience enough to be able to do so.

I believe many things are, not one of which can be put into words easily. Perhaps I am wrong, however: One of the foremost things is that things are not as they seem. Another is that aspect of being that exists before the senses, if the senses were a river, it would be the river bed. It cannot be sensed, but is self knowing. However when I wrote those words I had something less profound in mind. Basically it can be said as follows: seeing may be believing, but it is not knowing and this simple truth is self evident, but you cannot smell it, taste it, hear it, see it or touch it. For this reason I do not believe in knowledge. In context of afterlife this means that even if I perceive what i view as an afterlife, via my senses, I cannot know that it exists while I am alive, and the truth of this, that i cannot know, is self evident beyond senses in the manner I mentioned. What is the thought, that thinks itself?

Can you link me to the video? I have never seen nor heard of this before. I also wish to understand how the term "power" relates to this. When someone increased their "power" by electricity, what is this referring to and how is the increase in power demonstrated and measured? Since wall sockets cannot be adjusted for voltage, how is the regulation pertaining to "higher and higher voltages" accomplished? Can you link me to the original post you are mentioning? Thanks!

The odd part is that they absorb AC, why not DC? This sounds so easy to test too, if they can do this they could prove it on video and the world would change.

I hope to remain open to the possibilities as well, still I am entitled to belief. You know, so have I. I used to experience OBE's often as a child and have had many adventurous episodes relating to this. However I do not accept my experiences as more than subjective. I do not believe in knowledge, thus I do not know there is no afterlife. I believe it may be a possibility, and I also believe it may not. I have never seen any evidence of an afterlife however, so I do not concern myself with this, I have seen evidence of this life, so I concern myself with that. This is true. Some people also see and hear things that others do not report. Head trauma victims often have visions, NDE and OBE's. People on various drugs report these as well. A major study of the molecule DMT (a molecule that can occur in our brains naturally) that sought to demonstrate it was a "spirit molecule" found that at high levels given by injection alien abduction experiences of a terrifying nature abounded and due to the trauma of this the research was ended prematurely. My point being that the subjectivity of our experiences is so profound that we can be certain that things are not at the appear, ever. Color and sound do not exist for example, outside of perception, they are constructs of our mental and sensory function. And yet people will insist they exist, however we do not know them, only the experience of them, which does not affirm their existence. The same can be said about mathematics, which do not exist independently of their application. People can have experiences suggesting math exists, however this is simply not true. So while my belief is subjective and perhaps dogmatic, it is not based upon perception which is illusory, rather it is related that which is self evident beyond sensory input. We may also talk about recovered memories and how people can recount detailed experiences that they cannot tell apart from reality, that they believe happened, which never happened at all. Many false accusations have come of this type of thing, some of them rather famous. So yes i have had OBE's and mystical adventure type experiences, as well as episodes of profound thoughtless euphoria. I have had memories with no source, sometimes of a prophetic nature and true. I have had several experiences which lead me to believe that telepathic events may occur as well. I can see "auras" and have taught several people how to do this, but honestly it is so normal and natural I don't think it profound. I hope to be an open minded person, however I utilize reason in a way that affords me clarity into what I do and do not believe. I care little for Buddhism and a great deal for the teachings of Siddhartha.

I actually view the Buddhism you present as one of these corruptions, thank you for bringing this up. I mean you no offense. People easily forget Buddha was born a Kashatrya prince, was highly educated in many regards, that he read the scriptures and discussed much about them. If you read the same scriptures you will find that many kings retired to become wandering spiritual ascetics. How absurd my belief must seem to you then. For I do not believe in final goals. You say it is about destinations, I am saying it is about the journey. The goals of the organizations meet human agendas, not spiritual ones. No 'ism' functions, for no group approach can work for enlightenment. The operating goals of numerous religions is monetary in nature, or pertains to proselytizing. So then if you break through this so called cycle of reincarnation and escape karma then what?

Physical: posture and movement. Mental: thought and word. Spirit: mood and presence. All people cultivate all the time, but what are they cultivating? Few do it knowingly.

durkhrod chogori, what you present is of no meaning to me. I neither believe in an afterlife nor a transference of consciousness. There are teachings associated with Buddha that are self evident, then there are dogmatic aspects from evolved Buddhist folk religion that are not self evident. I have no use for the scheme you present, which is still based upon ego, fear and reward. Enlightenment is here and now, not then and when.

I read it and cannot tell the difference between the Buddhism it describes and Brahmanic and Shaivite traditions the Mahabharata describes. The only difference is that there are yoga and martial art aspects to the Hindu traditions of acetic hermitism. The mountain monks in India, Tibet, China and Japan are known to have practiced martial arts and several modern martial arts hail to a founder who is or learned from a wandering acetic monk. Also in some traditions the acetic monks would have scriptures with them and study them in addition to their regular practices, so there was not always a dichotomy between scholarly pursuits and acetic pursuits. But I also contend that Buddha was not a Buddhist anyway and that he only found the truths of the system he was passed, and that he saw through the untruth he was passed.

If unnatural balanced natural would it only be natural? All contexts impose limitations, so in a given context something may be perceived as subjectively un-natural, like a beer can in the woods. For me; yin and yang are not opposites but correlates and compliments. Yang and yang are opposites, they oppose each other, as do yin and yin. This is also like magnetic fields.

Some of Crowleys poetry, often written under a pseudonym, contains some obscene works, one theme that is in at least a couple of them involved some type of pedophilia. Sexual acts are also frequent topics his poetry, however the man had virtually no prohibitions or morality in any codified sense and was prone to experimentation of many natures that would normally repel most people, including animal sacrifices even when rather young, which he mentions in his writing on his life. If the adds help pay for the site then I am in favor of them i suppose, but I don't like the history of Scientology either.

I have advice for those who practice Japa yoga. Often people who do this go through the mantras quickly and over and over in an automatic way. This is not ideal. Every mantra has a meaning, merely repeating the mantra quickly does not allow that meaning to sink in. The number of times you repeat a mantra is actually irrelevant, a few sincere repetitions is more enlightening than 10 million false ones. That is to say, do not take the names in vain. Know the meanings of your mantras and mean them when you say them. Say them slowly and sincerely, ponder the meanings themselves. Get more than the words of the mantra, for in and of themselves the words offer nothing, get the feeling of the mantra. To get this you may have to translate the mantra into your own language for a time so that when you repeat the mantra it has the proper meaning. Do not repeat the mantra expecting sincerity to show up later, though this method is widespread it is poor. Do not expect reward from repetition, the rewards of Japa yoga are not to be sought, only discovered. You may experience bhakti with a single repetition of the mantra if you actually mean it. You may never experience it if you only go through the motions, you could practice your whole life and make no progress. More than just this, Japa can involved your own mantra. Every thought is a mantra with tremendous impact, realizing this is key to understanding Japa. When I am not where I want to be in a mental sense I repeat mantra which is as follows: I devote myself to the divinity of all things by surrendering my preconceptions. It is very close to the translation of Na Mah Shi Va Ya which is sort of like" I humble myself before the divine beauty of existence." Even with mantras we may not share with others, knowing the meaning and meaning it is key. I refuse to merely repeat a mantra I cannot mean, for this and no other thing is to me taking the lords name in vain, so to speak.

I've never had an original thought in my life.

I agree, no line, and no self. So then above or within holds no relevance for me.