Maddie

The Buddha spoke of impermanence often which was his premise for no-soul, or at least of of his premises.

The reason it's emphasized is during the time of the Buddha in India one of the common teachings was that there was a soul and that it was defined as being permanent and unchanging. The Buddha on the other hand said this was not the case. This is why there is the focus on it being unchanging or changing in this context. This would be one definition of a soul. There is nothing to say that there couldn't be a soul that evolves and changes.

Yes I suppose that is a good point, defining what "soul" means. Though I think in the context of the time and place of the Buddha it was seen as the unchanging inner essence, and the Buddha rejected this notion.

I actually have known people who went to those things and they actually had to pay to get in and some of them actually got knocked down and they said that they were not trying to do so. The psychology of group hypnosis is actually pretty well documented and understood.

And for those who think someone demonstrating pyrokinesis on a YouTube video is definitive proof and could never possibly be faked this is for you.

This is just a case of group hypnosis and the power of suggestion. There was another one of these so-called Masters who got challenged by an MMA fighter and since the MMA fighter wasn't under the power of suggestion like his students he knocked him out in like 30 seconds. But if you would watch videos of the same Tai chi Master with his students he would throw them around barely touching them or even without touching them. There's many cases of group hypnosis having pretty profound effects on the people who buy into it.

Now we really know what happened to the dinosaurs. 🦕

Someone can shoot lightning out of their nostrils and fireballs out of their butthole but if they are not kind, compassionate and humble I could care less. "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or clanging cymbal resounding in the wind. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and can understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have faith, that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing." - I Corinthians 13:1-2

Questioning the validity of anything is not synonymous with an attack on the person holding the view. We only tend to perceive a challenge to our views as synonymous with a challenge to ourselves when we identify with the view as being part of our self. When we identify with a view as being part of the self than any challenge to that view is the challenge to the self. On the other hand when we do not identify with the view but only see it as a view and not part of the self any inquiry into the validity of the view simply focuses on why the view may or may not be correct. The mindset of scientific objectivity is to be willing to change ones view when new data disproves or modifies that view.

Yes check out my new guru.... https://youtu.be/0PsMdeVLmTs It's all real too because nothing in a video can ever be faked.

I don't know if the chicken or the egg came first but it seems like the vast majority of practitioners of the system that I've read on here seem to have a lot of ego and delusion, and tend to get very defensive if questioned.

But wanting to not talk with me is a desire, which is not applicable to someone who's transcended ego.

I suppose asking for evidence of statements is personal if one has an ego but that wouldn't apply to you would it?

Can you show me the quote where I said I have not tried cultivation?

Cultivation means to grow and develop. If I cultivate crops it means I'm growing crops. If I cultivate my ego it means I increase my ego. It's possible to cultivate anything

How would you know if I have or have not tried cultivation? If you can't have an ego to begin cultivation then what must one do in order to get rid of their ego?

But how do you know you're cultivating your ego less or more?

How do you know your mind has been freed from ego and delusion as opposed to that thought being just another delusion?

If you don't see.... 1. having no money 2. having no abilities 3. having no power 4. having no personal life 5. having no cultivation 6. letting go 7. death .... as suffering (dukkah) then you see it as happiness and peace then?

Seeing the lack of these things as suffering is a very interesting point of view for someone that has no ego don't you think?

Those who know do not say........

The draw to and for powers is just one of a myriad of ways the thing that we think of as being "our-Self" seeks to make itself more real. The actual "thing" that our illusion of self uses is really immaterial. Some seek wealth, some seek fame, some seek power whether it be political, influence, or mystical. Anything that supports, props up, and builds this idea we have of what our Self is, comes from that same notion of self. The problem comes usually on a subconscious level due to the fact that at some level we feel that this idea of self is an illusion but this notion of self desperately wants to survive and perpetuate itself. So therefore anything that threatens this idea of what our "true self" is we see as evil or threatening. On the other hand, anything that we perceive as building up this idea of "self" is seen as "good" or desirable". This is why when the Buddha was asked what was the most important superpower he replied that the ability to teach the dharma effectively was the most important power. And what is the dharma? It is the realization that this false idea of a self is indeed false. Letting go of the whole illusion of what we think we are is the most important superpower.

I am not doubting you but since the nature of the ego is delusion how would one know if they were or were not seeking powers of the ego and for the ego? How would one make the distinction? Seeking limitless power is still seeking power which is still of the ego.

The abilities that come as a by-product of cultivation come from the mind which is limitless. The powers that come from seeking power come from the ego which is quite limited. This is why powers of the ego weaken the being, and powers of the mind do not.

One time near a river the Buddha saw a yogi. When the yogi saw the Buddha the yogi proceeded to tell him how he had spent the past 20 years developing the ability to walk on water and that was how he had crossed the river. The yogi then proceeded to ask the Buddha how he was able to cross the river, and the Buddha replied that he just used a boat.