Aaron

Hello folks, I just thought about this today. I think VMarco is an academic authority on many of the topics he talks about. If you understand the notion of academics, then you can also understand why he might see our own views as being irrelevant to some degree and why he may feel the need to take on the role of teacher more than student. I sincerely believe that he has a lot to offer us and upon reflection I also understand that, as Five and others have said, there are many other people on this thread who have done much worse than VMarco, but because they have been here for awhile have gotten a pass. That's okay, really it is, but perhaps what we should try to be doing at this time is understanding our own nature, how we choose to interact with others. No one can force us to argue or insult them, it is our own decision. Defending ourselves from words is like gathering water in a spaghetti strainer, you might be able to retain a bit of ego for awhile, but eventually it will all slip away anyways, so just let it go from the start. Aaron edit- Also I apologize to VMarco if it seems like I've disparaged him when he couldn't respond to my comments. I didn't intend to do that. I hope that you find a place here, because I certainly believe with your vast experience and knowledge, that I could learn from you. In particular I'm very interested in religious history, something you seem quite experienced in. Just throwing that out there.

I believe he got sufficient +'s to warrant a gold star. Aaron

Just some points I was thinking about. First in order to be able to moderate one's self, doesn't one first need to be aware of what they need to moderate? If one does not see an action as being wrong, then will they find any need to moderate that action? Second, can we expect all people to moderate themselves adequately and if not, then what do we do? Third, self moderation requires a degree of discipline, most people don't have this degree of discipline. Aaron

Hello Tulku, The point of living is to live, if you decide to give it another purpose, then that's on you. I believe the best way to live is to live life on life's terms. Aaron

I didn't know there was another Aaron on this board! What nick does he go under? I'm sure it's not nice to consider him to be ignorant, but having never run into him, I can't honestly say he is one or the other, so I'll just have to accept you have an opinion of him. Wherever you are Aaron, let me tell you that I think you're okay! Aaron

You should cite your quotes, otherwise it's plagiarism. Second, if you haven't realized that the flag of truce was an attempt to meet at some middle ground, then I don't know what else to say, except toodle loo. Have fun in your holography. Aaron

Okay so if we keep going like this, we'll just be going in circles, so let me ask you this, do you understand my point? My point is, because we have a physical being, we cannot be free of that state of being, the most we can do is become aware of the nature of that being and in becoming aware of that nature, understand it. With that in mind. I think we're having the same discussion in multiple threads, so I'll leave it at that. If you don't understand, that's fine, but if you do, perhaps you could say something to the effect of, "I understand what you're saying, I just believe what I believe." I will say that I understand what you're saying and I have been aware of the holographic universe for some time. I read the book "The Holographic Universe" years ago and it was wonderfully eye opening and I actually believed much as you do for some time, but with decades of experience my beliefs were changed by experiences. I think if I offered you any advice it would be simply to examine your experience and compare it your ideas and see how the two mesh. If they mesh then you are on your way to some great realizations, however if they don't then it would behoove you to look deeper. Consider this my flag of truce. Aaron

Hello Tulku, I would like to hear what you are describing as pure consciousness. When I reach, what I think you're referring to, my heart never soars, rather I feel very grounded, not peaceful, but not afraid, just a state of being where I feel centered. I would never all it wonderful per se, not a soaring experience, rather a feeling of purpose without purpose. Yes I think purpose without purpose would be an even better explanation. This is one reason I've always questioned the reason for the Bodhisatva Vow or whatever it's called, because I've never felt the need to go out and convert others to my way of thinking, in fact other than this website I rarely ever speak of these things, rather I try and behave in a compassionate and loving way. To bring this back on topic though, if you experience pure consciousness, what you do become aware of, is the connection between all things, not only living, but also what we might consider not living, that in a sense everything is living and alive. What happens is that you become aware that natural love, the love I'm talking about has always been there, and all it took was opening your heart-mind to see it. Aaron

Hey I think I went to that workshop too! Did you get the audio tapes? Sorry, just kidding. I'm not sure where you're quoting this from, but since it isn't in your normal style of writing, I'll assume you copied it from some place. I will try and clarify some points that many people seem to misunderstand about heart-mind or if you prefer enlightenment. The three impediments to achieving awareness are anger, selfishness, and pride. Because of this, if one cannot find peace and satisfaction with what they have, they will rarely be able to see beyond what they see now. Now say one does possess the humility, selflessness, and serenity to achieve a degree of enlightenment, does that mean they will be devoid of desires or negative emotions? No. Anyone who tells you different is a huckster trying to sell you something (imo). It is within our physical nature to desire things, whether they be physical, emotional, or even spiritual, an awareness of a higher spiritual state does not remove us from our physical being, so in achieving this state we do not somehow become devoid of negativity or christ-like, rather we become aware of the nature of our actions. Detachment is not a vulcan like mindset that allows one to be completely logical, rather it is a state of connection with the world, through understanding the true nature of reality. Detachment means you have broken through and seen the other side, achieved heartmind, that you can be mindful of where your thoughts arise from, not that you will cease to have lust, hate, envy, or desires. If you believe that you can reach a state void of negativity, void of desire, then you are in for a big surprise. I will tell you this, so long as you reside within the physical shell of your body, you will never be free of desire or suffering, you will only become aware of the root cause of suffering and in knowing this, come to terms with it. Aaron

Awhile ago Vaj was banned for insulting someone. Vmarco was actually let off light in my book. The accusations she/he made and the repeated attacks on others was beyond the scope of anything I've seen before on this forum. I'm not saying that Vaj can't get rowdy sometimes, but he's is a kindly old neighbor coming over for tea and crumpets to talk about the weather, when compared to VMarco. VMarco, as Dawei and others have pointed out, is in my opinion, oblivious to what she/he is doing. In fact I think they actually believe they are doing the right thing, which makes her/his behavior all the more disturbing in my book. I do hope that when she/he comes back that they have a change of heart and attitude, but I have serious doubts that will happen. I think we are dealing with someone who fundamentally believes they are right and I have yet to see a fundamentalist treat others beliefs with respect. Of course there is always a first time. Aaron edit- Also I don't believe VMarco is a guy. She said some things in a post referring to herself as a she, which led me to believe she was a she. Trust me when I say I was surprised to find that out, not because I don't think women are capable of being argumentative, I'm sure they are, but rather because I always assume that someone with a forceful opinion is masculine. Call it a social bias.

LOL... great song. I get your point. Aaron

Hell ffvii, I'm sorry to hear that these desires are causing you to suffer. First I want to make it clear that there is nothing wrong with having these desires, in fact they are quite natural. Man has always desired to make friends and fall in love, nothing will change that. You can take a vow of celibacy, join a cloistered tradition, and you will still have these desires, the only difference is that you'll convince yourself everyday that these things are bad, which they aren't. The other option you have is to accept that you want to have friends and find a girlfriend, but right now you might not be having much luck. Times change. Who knows what tomorrow holds for you or me? So ffvii, relax and enjoy life. Don't think about the things you haven't got, but be happy with the things that you have. When it's time to make a new friend, you will. When it's time to have a girlfriend, you will. If you never have a girlfriend, that would be a shame, but it wouldn't be the end of the world either, so long as you are happy with the people that are in your life and you can find satisfaction in that. Good luck and best regards, Aaron

Hello folks, I've explained this before and I'll try to do it quickly this time. Everything that we view is simply what it is, if we decide to define it according to some moral or logical observation, that doesn't change what it is. A vial of hemlock is neither good nor bad, but we can discern it to be, depending on how it's been used and how we feel about it, yet those feelings and the way it was used does not change the fact that it is what it is. In the same way we can view something as true or untrue, but that doesn't change what it actually is, either an object or an idea, it is only our observation of it that changes. When a wise man says he can look upon a pile of shit or diamond and see the beauty in each, it is because he understands that it is only the perception of either object that has changed, that the object itself is both beautiful and ugly, the only thing that makes it so is how we view it. This goes for people too, so just because we have a particular view of someone, doesn't necessarily mean it's accurate, it's just our experience of that person. Everyone can be an ass and hardheaded, just as everyone can be compassionate and loving, the only thing that changes is our observation of that person. Remember the sadist and masochist aren't so different, it's only their observation that changes their obsession with pain. Aaron

Hello folks, I originally posted that I was getting tired of being called a troll, which I am. I would suggest that if people really want to move forward, rather than keep stirring up the same old ****, then the best way to do that is to let it go and start having meaningful dialogues. Too many topics that have potential for deep insight are being lost in all the threats, insults, and general disregard for others feelings. I am more than happy to have a conversation with anyone that has respect for my beliefs, who is willing to say, I see that's how you view things, this is how I view them, rather than say, you are wrong and this is why. Right and wrong are subjective terms, they have no real meaning, the only thing that's actually there is one person's idea and the others. I would encourage people to remember that. Aaron

Hello VMarco, So taking this all into consideration, do you tell your son that you love him, or since love is a sensory delusion, do you instead say, I have great compassion for you. Some of the things you say make absolutely no sense. I don't know of anyone, except for the VERY SMALL percent of fundamentalist Christians that actually believe someone can send "Love". The phrase is meant to be an expression of care from one person to another, not a statement that I am psychically sending you love. In my opinion, you have a deluded sense of this topic and I would recommend that you gather a clearer understanding of the concepts of love and compassion in Buddhist philosophy before you share your ideas with others and misinform them regarding those premises. Perhaps you might benefit from looking at the Compassion and Taoism thread, it was discussed quite deeply there and it might help to shed some light on some of your own misinterpretations. With love, Aaron

I'm going to join this post with some trepidation, because I think it does have merit. I think we should all aspire to honesty, but as is so often the case, honesty for most people, comes in degrees. Not everyone is ready to be completely honest with themselves, or to admit that what they believe they know, might not be true. In my own experience, being raised a christian, having a spiritual experience that caused me to question my belief in God and then my journey to understand "truth", I've come to the conclusion that there are no truths, per se, that it all relies on intellect and as such, it can't really be trusted. Do I believe in God? No. Do I believe in a higher being? I don't know. I sometimes like to think along the lines of Vedantic Hinduism, that perhaps we are all a part of one single entity and we merely have to awaken to be aware of it, but I'm not sure if that's the kind of honesty that we're looking for here. I think that if honesty is broken down to the notion that everyone must believe in certain ideals and that any other ideals are automatically wrong, then that form of honesty is somewhat dishonest, because again, it's all reliant on the human experience and as such everything is open to interpretation. Perhaps in order to be completely honest, it doesn't require that we automatically disbelieve everything that we cannot prove, but rather that we're open to new ideas, that we are not so set on our own beliefs that we automatically disregard others beliefs? And even if we do not believe in something someone else does, does that mean we have to label it as being false, can someone be honest and also be silent? Anyways, that's my two cents. Aaron

Hello InfiniteTruth, I'm really glad you've had this breakthrough. I had a similar breakthrough when I went through the twelve steps. The first step by the way is "We admitted we were powerless over alcohol- that our lives had become unmanageable." Many people read this step and believe that alcohol made their lives unmanageable, but what I came to understand was that my life was unmanageable because I tried to manage it. I had to give up control, surrender to a higher power, in my case the notion of love/compassion/etc. Once I stopped trying to control things I had no control over and just witnessed those things, let them come and go, did what I could and accepted the rest, then life became much easier for me. Ironically it takes reaching a bottom for most people to understand this and I think that's what you had, your bottom. It is completely liberating, but I would just give you a friendly piece of advice, the realization will bring you a high, as you've mentioned, but inevitably you will have to face life's problems and in order to do that you have to get to a point where you can live life on life's terms. That's the hard part, but surrendering is the first step to learning to do this. I wish you well and I hope that things work out for you. If you need to talk, I'm always here to listen, just send me a tell. Aaron

Hello folks, I wanted to elaborate on this topic, at least how I came to my own idea regarding Light being consciousness. In my years of meditation I've found that using the "empty mind" technique of meditation I am able to reach a state of awareness where the is only light. As I stated when I reach this point of awareness, there is nothing physical about, nor is the light flickering, or does it glitter, rather it is constant, it seems to go on forever and have no boundaries. I hadn't thought about light being consciousness until I read some of the talk about physics and linked it to some ideas I'd read on Quantum Consciousness. Now in my experience of reaching this state, I've never experienced any form of higher being, but it seems that if so many people experience this "light" during meditation, it would seem to lend credence to the idea that somehow light is linked to each and everyone of us on a physical level that we might not be able to perceive, and if so, then it most certainly does deserve further inquiry. I'd like to hear other people's experiences of this "light" state, if they've had it, and how it might differ from my own. Aside from that I think that light is neither good nor bad. I also think it would be hard to quantify through physics, at least in regards to light being consciousness, though I think as science progresses we may see that breakthrough. Anyways, that's my two cents. Again, I'd love to hear more from other people. Aaron

Hello VMarco, You are seriously delusional. If you can't figure out the difference between a literary allusion and metaphor and an actual suggestion to mame, then you need more psychological help than I previously thought. You're most recent posts are revealing just how disturbed you really are. Your "Abrahamic religions cause cancer" theory should've been my first sign, but your vehement hatred of Christianity should've been my second, the third should've been your almost total lack of empathy for your fellow man, a clear sign of someone who is suffering from some kind of mental disturbance. Of course these aren't professional diagnoses, rather they are merely a layman's appraisal of someone who is behaving in a way that falls seriously outside the norms of society. I do hope you find another forum to torture, because I am definitely getting tired of seeing your rantings here. Even when people tell you they're tired of you, you just don't stop. I think that's a clear sign of how sharp an edge your compassion has. Aaron

I doubt that will happen, but I have put her on ignore. She's too unstable for me to continue to deal with. I'm sure most people by now have started to ignore her. Notice that once she sees I'm bowing out of the conversation, she starts to make even more pointed jabs and comments. Really disturbing personality to say the least. Aaron

L O L... I mean really, you are the queen of ad hominem and quoting things out of context. You should really write a book about it. You only address those parts of the conversation you want to address. I'm not asking you to be like me, per se, but just not to expect everyone else to be like you, little liberation zealots out to cleanse the world of Abrahamic religions (isn't that the one that is the cause of cancer according to you? I would love to see the evidence supporting that.) Anyways, many of your ideas are so far out there, I don't know whether you meant them seriously or were just having fun, I certainly hope the latter, for the former is quite disturbing. You've certainly touched a nerve with me, of course that's because I don't care for totalitarianism, fascism, and zealotry. Three qualities that I find in most of your comments. It is because I am compassionate that I understand the fundamental nature of these qualities and the damage they can do, hence my desire to make you aware of your actions, in the hopes that you will cease causing others to suffer. Aaron

Hello VMarco, There is nothing for you to threaten. I am not a Christian, nor a Hindu, nor a Buddhist, I am nothing, so your attacks on these religions doesn't effect me personally, rather I see through your practice your ignorance. I'm sure that doesn't make sense to you, that someone can have "no path", but I honestly don't these days. I read the Tao Teh Ching and books about Buddhism, but I don't listen to dogma or ideology or people that promote their own agendas in the name of a specific path, rather I discern for myself what I should practice and not practice, and ultimately I allow others to do that for themselves as well. You really don't get any of this, even after I've said it numerous times, so I'm not going to bother to continue. You read what you want to, then a couple days later add what someone else has said to your own rhetoric and call it an original idea. That's okay too, I could care less. I would just recommend that you not consider yourself too original, there have been others who have come along and said the same things you have, they just had the good sense to quit pushing it, before they made too much of a fool of themselves. I think we're all impressed that you have continued on with your diatribe for as long as you have. It takes, either great arrogance, complete ignorance, or a total lack of empathy for others to be able to do what you've done and claim innocence. Kudos and I really do hope you get what you're actually saying someday, and how absolutely absurd it is, but to be honest I don't see that happening in the foreseeable future. Aaron

Hello Sunya, As a man who has experienced the "unchanging light" I have always said that it cannot be absolute, nor should one say that it is true, rather they can declare they have experienced it, knowing that the only way one can understand its existence is to experience it themselves. It seems selfish to expect people to believe something as fact, simply because you've experienced it. I agree also that there is no "true" reality and that any allusion to such is a misunderstanding of the nature of reality. In other words if there is a "true" reality, then there must be a "false" reality, but then how does one define a reality as false? Who makes that decision and what criteria is it based on? Is the decision objective or subjective, based on hard provable facts or anecdotal evidence? In my mind there is just simpy reality. It is neither true or false, it simply is. The problem is that isn't enough for some people, so they need to look for more, believing that there is a way for mere men to transcend to Godhood, when that doesn't happen. The mortal man remains mortal. My final point is that I've known many people who've experienced the "light" and one unifying characteristic is that they seem to have a deeper empathy for others. This stems from the inevitable detachment that is associated with the experience, the ability to see through to the root of an action. So they act, not of need or duty, but rather out of a sincere impulse (or desire) to ease another's suffering. Those who have had this experience can understand what I'm talking about, those who haven't, but claim to, rely on intellectual definitions of compassion. The liberation of all souls is done by the ruthless expression of truth, rather than by living as an example for others (the eightfold path). They take the short path, believing that the quick attainment of experience is enough, not realizing that the experience, without preparation is worthless. It's like a doctor who knows how to identify an illness, but not how to treat it. Anyways, I don't want to blather on, just making the point that I think you've hit it on the nail. I hope life is treating you well, Aaron

Hello VMarco, I have to laugh. The short path is about doing away with teachings and doctrines and getting down to the truth, but you post and cling to this stuff like it's gold. Your greedy little fingers can't let go of your treasures, yet you tell everyone, I don't need it, I can give it up anytime I want, I'm detached. Yet I don't see you being able to do this, nor do I think, has anyone else. I can't remember one person who has followed your posts from the time you came on, who has not seen through your ignorance. I think you might like to think of yourself as a rebel with(out) a cause, but I think you come off more as a spiteful little girl who likes to make sensational comments in order to provoke people to action. Have you always wanted to be the center of attention, or is this something new? I would ask yourself that question seriously, because your greed (i.e. desire for attention) is not helping others to be "liberated" rather it's causing them to see your ugly, crude, and vicious brand of philosophy as Buddhism, when I don't think anyone who knows the subject is fooled in the least. Keep gathering random quotes to prove your points. Most people will begin to understand that you're taking these things out of context. Keep using them to justify your actions, that doesn't take away the fact that you are mean spirited and malicious in your treatment of others who refuse to see your way, nor does it convince others that you understand the true nature of compassion (which you clearly don't). Your compassion has a fine edge that cuts through anything that stands in it's way, I'm sure it helps you sleep at night. Also I would choose a different metaphor than rape, it just comes off as sensational and an attempt to redirect the argument away from your inability to actually answer questions. You are, by the way, the queen of ad hominem, you just don't realize it. Now for the compassion, although I believe you have suffered much and that suffering has caused your heart to turn bitter and spiteful, I think with much meditation and reflection you can come to terms with these things and begin your path to true awareness. So long as you cling to this idea of the short path, you will never be able to, because you are using it to justify those actions that Buddha himself decried. Give up your truths and dance on them, innocent and unashamed, then you will begin to see the true nature of things. With great love, Aaron