Athanor

They were created in an era where people seriously thought that even the best interest needs to have a forceful protection to make it able to become reality. So when people imagined these creatures and found them out, they created them with weapons to give them the power to protect their aim, or to destroy the obstacles which people couldn't destroy. No historical person of high spirituality has weapons, only legendary people or people from fairy tales have weapons. Buddha & Jesus didn't have a weapon.

My first thing in the morning is to go to the toilet and pee. It's quite joyful... awesome, so to say Although I wouldn't claim that this is the reason of a well started day, still, my day would be very sticky if I wouldn't do this

Maybe I'm lame but what video?

I know of a practice which is based on developing the ability to harvest solar energy through the eyes (i.e. staring at the sun), and it is said that with some daily practice you can avoid using food. The Indian guy who developed this technique is Hira Ratan Manek, this is his website. Read details there. However, this process - just like any other I've ever met - doesn't allow to avoid water. If you think about it, fire can mean the sun, water means water, of course, earth is the ground you live on, and wind is air. These are the four elements, the essentials for you staying alive. The main concept is that every life receives the same energy - the one from the sun. This is the root of all energy accumulating in living creatures. Green plants harvest this energy source, then animals eat plants, other animals eat these animals, and human eats all of them. But in reality, what we put into our body is just modified solar energy. However, just as the body is able to utilize solar energy for developing vitamins, it is also able to utilize it in another way. Green plants utilize solar energy via chlorophyll molecules which human bodies don't contain. But we have hemoglobin, which is almost the same molecule except for one single atom. The theory which I mentioned above, is based on the connection between the eyes and the talamus. By gazing into the sun, the stimulation of the talamus results in the slight growth of this area of the brain, and this may end up in the ability to utilize solar energy via hemoglobin and avoid food. HRM was tested for over 200 days continuously and he didn't eat for that time. But he still needs water.

So you, and your elevated soul looking down to us poor guys, think that the middle age, when burning human people alive was average daily activity, and thousands were killed in the name of the highest spiritual creature, was actually a brighter time than today? Man, you're misguided...

Did you do it? I don't have experience of how to live a life as a hermit, but I know what I will not have in my life if I live like a hermit. No other people around me; no loved ones; no sharing of anything; no received emotions and no given emotions to anybody. And of course things like entertainment, fun, sex, and other things which are basic parts of average human life. You see, you must not decry someone because he likes the things which are parts of his (and everyone else's) life. If you really want to help others, then you should rather try to tell how to overcome the average, and become a supercreature who will not get depressed and sick of isolation if living like a hermit, instead of acting offended as if you would already be enlightened and you would do a mere favor for us by being here and writing...

You might be right. Like Einstein said: "You cannot solve a problem from the same consciousness that created it. You must learn to see the world anew."

Let us not forget what makes a color in reality. Although "red" is a concept we create, it refers to a real phenomenon. Red is a light wave that has a frequency of approximately 430–480 THz. Although what we call "red" may be perceived differently in case of each individual, the red is generally this specific frequency of the light. What gives a color to something is none other than the atomic structure of the surface of the very thing itself, collided by photons. When photons hit the surface of the thing, the light wave's wavelength (and the frequency) alters according to the atomic structure. This makes it possible that the same light can show something red, while another thing blue, or whatsoever color. I just want to say with this that although color is not the parameter of the thing perceived, it is still a parameter of something. It's just that the something is not the observed thing but the medium, the information channel which makes it possible to perceive: light itself. We should not leave the medium of perception out of the equation.

This is what I call existing for the sake of mere existing (or living for the sake of mere survival) - which makes no sense at all IMO.

The images aren't original, they're definitely refined. Not even a 5 years old has a skin that glows like that. Makeup & Photoshop... The other thing is that this is a typical "BUY MORE, PAY LESS, GET MORE, HERE YOU FIND EVERYTHING, DON'T GO ANYWHERE, WE CHANGE YOUR LIFE THIS INSTANT, GET ALL YOU WANT FOR LESS THAN EVER!!!!" kind of a site. In other words: it's JUST business. And of course, he uses the name Elixxir, to avoid anyone finding a real photo (or a real date of birth) of him...

In my mind, the whole spirituality, or any kind of self-development, has the purpose of minimizing destruction of any kind (both to self and to others), without falling into the trap to try to prevent nature from its own destructions (like animal killing animal). So I too believe that we can do that. But the way how to reach this minimum of destruction, and of course, what we will create during, is unknown to me yet.

You cannot create without destruction, and every destruction is followed by involuntary creation. Even if you create life itself, you actually destruct too - living creatures need oxygen which they take away from others; they use food which they take away from others; and of course, food itself is life, so a living being must destroy other life to sustain its own. By cleaning yourself to create health, or healing yourself in other ways, which is the creation of health, you destroy your own cells and protozoans inside and on the surface of your body. By building something you destroy what was there before. Yet, even if you destroy a whole city, vegetation will take place on the ruins. The important question is: do you want to minimize the destruction you do when you create or not?

I wouldn't take the courage to state that I know what is good for me. Although I know what I despite now, I also know that some of these are caused by my inner suppressions and all kinds of psychically defective things, which will dissolve with further development. Although I don't like things today, I am aware that this is an unsustainable mental attitude in a spiritual development. So I will most likely have to face that things I despite will become indifferent, or even liked. A good teacher often uses methods which are against the student's will. Disciplining can take on rough forms. But when a disciple faces the things which are outside of his comfort zone, he hardly recognizes the difference between this rough disciplining and evil behavior. He will be forced to believe that the guru wants his best interest (he'll force himself to think that). And he simply despites failing the guru, just like I despite things today, yet, this fear of failing him might also derive from some psychic defects. You see, you leave sense outside the door when you allow someone else to take total control over your life, regardless whether it's a dictator or a guru. In such relationship you can't rely on your own sense. Eventually, the disciple's devotion will become his greatest trap, as it is general with blind faith... I see the existence of con-gurus as significant problem, but it's not really the existence of these fakes that disturbs me. The problem is more the fact that these fakes teach the same things what the real gurus teach. Not almost the same, and not something like them. They teach the same. It means that even if you follow these teachings, you still don't overcome these sexual and other kind of issues. I, most likely among many others, strive for spiritual perfection because I want to avoid those mistakes and errors what average people do. I don't want to end up dealing with a decade-long sickness before I die, caused by bad habits. I don't want to raise my children in a way as they won't get answers and they'll become misguided by other influences. I want to understand what this whole thing we call life is about; even if the answer is that it has no meaning at all, I want to understand that answer. Spiritual development is something what can lead to this, according to my view. So, this belief makes me feel secure, it tells me that when I do these things right, I will eventually go towards this goal. Although many things can happen which prevent me from reaching the final goal, I will still go towards the goal. Yet, when I read about these "gurus", I see that this is not so. I can't be sure whether I go towards the goal or not. I can't be sure whether the end I'll reach is enlightenment or a deeper and stronger psychic defect, some sort of perversion which will put me into the next volume of Stripping the gurus... I just finished a book called Zen Buddhism and psychoanalysis, and it clearly points out that, on the highest level, psychoanalysis and Zen has the same goal: to overcome the suppressions and to make the unconscious fully conscious. According to the Zen definition of enlightenment, and the psychoanalysis' definition of spiritual health, this is what they're all about. Now, we've already known for a long time that psychotherapists can be incompetent, they can lack knowledge or understanding, or they can be simply bad in what they do - or even psychotherapy itself can be a failure. But we had a feeling that this can never happen with a guru and a 2 thousand years old teaching; although a psychotherapist can have his own defects, a guru is someone who has already overcome his own, who has completely achieved enlightenment. But it turns out that we're all just people after all... I'm not sure whether it even makes sense to look for a teaching...

This book seems quite shocking if you ask me. Not that I believe everything I read in there (I didn't read the whole book), but it certainly makes me wonder... or rather confused... I'm starting to lose hope that I'll ever find real teaching. I mean it's very nice that someone can write dozens of inspiring books which help us to develop our lives. But if it eventually results in sexual perversion or other sick habits, that's something what I'd rather not develop for... I don't want to become enlightened if it means that I will do what I despite. However... I believe that I don't want to live as a hermit, for example. But I know that during my self-cultivation and inner development, this will probably change, and maybe later I will have no problem living as a hermit. And I find this OK. Yet, there are things what I wouldn't find OK if I'd have no problem doing them. But if a spiritual teaching cannot ensure me that I will eventually free myself from these evil thoughts and deeds instead of surrendering to them, then how should I cultivate myself and how should I develop? What should I follow?

Thanks for the new link. Too bad that the pdf's image quality is way below expectations....

Is it just me, or do these links not work?

You know, since the beginning of Earth itself, there is no less matter and energy on this planet. In fact, due to meteors, there's more. The problem is not that there is not enough; the problem is in logistics (i.e. the food is not where the people), and in utilization problems (i.e. some energy sources cannot be used, or cannot be used well enough - like wind, sun, tide...). There is well enough for everyone. Look at the waste America produces. Just the food put to waste here would serve a whole African country. But there is no way we could deliver this food to Africa. The food and the people are not in the same place. This is the main problem today with food, and not that there's not enough. Maybe tomorrow there won't be enough. But you see, we've already come up with plenty of ideas how to improve food production, and there will be new ideas. And there will be new logistical solutions, and new energy sources. It's not just Earth that gives to people, it's also people who give to people. But the way people can give to people is called civilization. Hermits don't give to other people. Restoring ecological balance on the planet and restoring spiritual balance in humanity are not the same. Spiritual balance has little to do with the lack of food, energy, water, and fresh air. Earth was doing fine even at the time when it was a hot boiling orb of lava. No life at all - Earth was fine. See, sustaining life is our interest. Earth won't decide how much life it will spare and how much it will take. Natural processes keep on doing their jobs without thinking of us. If we find a way how to give food and water to 30 billion people - it will still be fine for the Earth.

What is MCO? The description with the book is quite graphic. However, I don't see the point of full retention; don't you think that keeping your body more fit with training and having sex with ejaculation, not often but more often than with celibacy, would also result in the same state? If not, then what makes the difference? I think this whole "I lost my energy and now the woman doesn't like me" thing happens partially in the head, and if you weren't concerned that the woman doesn't like you so much anymore, then maybe she still would...

Do you think he can be contacted simply by email? Will he answer? You know, the name Komjathy sounds Hungarian, there are many Komjathys here... maybe he is from Hungary, and maybe he speaks my language. In that case, he's probably the best source of knowledge on taoism I can ever find... But my experience is that most of the people with vast knowledge don't answer emails with questions.

I think this is not a general solution, it's not working in any case. In fact, there are "dark sides" in all of us, and you can't face darkness with darkness, yet, you can face it with light, just as you should allow darkness in light too. Dealing with your good side with positive thoughts and nice things is something what you don't need a cultivation for - everyone can do that. Allowing your evil inner repressions to come up to this light and show themselves, or bringing this light down into your deepest darkest self, that is something that needs to be cultivated. Your life is guided (beside your will) by those things which are suppressed deep inside your subconscious mind. I think these suppressions can be considered as the manifestations of karmic past, since they are unambiguous effects of all your past happenings, at least from the moment of your conception.

If there is karma, or if there is destiny, they will affect your life whether you believe them or not.

On a global scale, what you suggest is to let less-fortunate people die, which means hundreds of millions of people. You see, civilization is based on this materialistic way and it is very clear that civilization has created lots of products which help much more people to survive than nature would let. For nature, it isn't wrong or bad to kill living creatures, or let them die, since death is a part of life. Yet, we've reached a level of development when we can cure sicknesses and give food to those who wouldn't have it anyway. We support the less fortunate and spare the life of those who wouldn't be spared by nature. Now, the question is: would you (and do you have the right to) tell all these hundreds of millions that they are actually the cause of unsustainable life? Can you select those who are the cause and separate them from those who aren't? Could you label human beings like this? Children too? It's nice that you'd like to change the living on Earth so that it will restore balance. Yet, you can't ignore the fact that there is already imbalance today, and that millions of human beings are parts of it. Today, if you only talk about how good it would be to live in a stronger relationship with nature, this is simply sentimental reverie. To actually find a way to achieve this, a way that will be good for everyone, is another question. I don't think you would kill all those people to maintain Earth's natural processes. Although it would be a most wise choice to do on many levels, just think about how much nutrient all those dead bodies would mean to the soil... beautiful crops would rise. But the ones who are actually aware of the right direction of development (i.e. sustainable development) would not take the onus to get rid of the "obstacles". We cannot forget that sustaining life and development on this planet is only reasonable if it's done for the sake of human beings, or at least not against it. We do things for our own good. No human being must be sacrificed for any cause, especially if it's for humanity. But returning to a hermit-like living on a global scale would mean that. Avoiding civilization's fruits would kill many.

I think it's either karma, or destiny, but it's most likely a little bit of both.

My favorite stupid question (on a moving train): "you too travel with this train?"

Yet, the non-existent "I" still can hit the non-existent "you" with a frozen tuna And it will hurt the non-existent you, regardless whether you think there is "you" or not. And I think, independently of all the mighty philosophical talk, eventually this is the only thing that matters.