Nikolai1

Well it seems by your reading interests that you're on the right track and your in the right place to ask all the questions you want. You're going to be just fine!! But get involved, get talking and chatting. Just don't ask me to explain the difference between an attribute and a substance!

7strikes My mind doesn't say it. What I said about just drinking water was a message to you designed to communicate the reality of any given reality. I have directly realised the illusions of the physical world. I have therefore directly realised the illusion of my body. The notion that the body is an 'entity with needs' is nothing more than an opinion, and always was. I drink water. All these notions about survival are illusions. Yes to that, and through the illusion of the mental realm too as it happens. As to my stature, all I know is that I'm now in a position to talk about it. For years and years I simply wasn't. I don't even know what you are talking about. For me, all experience is beyond the body. If you want me to tell you something extraordinary then I can't. My life is quite normal, although my thread on the law of attraction comes from experience. Best wishes

First off, losing your virginity isn't going to do anything for your self-worth issues. Whatever baggage you have will just carry right over into your sex life. Women with low self-worth attempt to find it through making themselves sexually available, and up feeling worse. Men with low self-worth find that it takes confidence and a thick-skin to start a sexual career. We are not born super studs and there's lots that can happen in our performance that makes us feel even more inadequate. So I don't want you to kid yourself that you feel bad about being a virgin because it goes deeper than that. And I don't want you to think that it was the bullies you made you this way, because there was something already there that made you a victim. To me you sound like pretty cool guy. People like you, talk to you, respect your opinion. Lets assume that your problem is in your own head. There's good ways and bad ways of getting confidence. An intelligent guy like you, diligent and with marketable skills will probably find that once you are working and the money starts coming in, that a certain confidence will build. I have no doubt that women enough will come your way in time. Time, and the passage of time, rounds us off more or less and you'll be no exception. But this is the bad way of getting confidence. Its unstable, it might feel that it depends on your external circumstances, and deep down this will show. People whose confidence is based on these externals make difficult partners because deep down the problems are still there. They don't trust their partners, deep down and control them more than is healthy. Plenty of relationships work this way but they're not good relationships. They're just passable. Real confidence comes from a deep place. We won't go into that now, but I'm wondering why you're a lurker on a Taoist forum. There's a million forums out there that cater to lonely people with bad love lives. So tell us, why do you log on here of all places?

I was working on a similar gag but couldn't quite frame it

My guess is that she was genuinely attracted to our friend but that something went wrong. I think she saw something she liked but the time wasn't right and so it ended. I do think it is over. But there will be a next time and you'll behave better. Truth is, DC9, you didn't for a minute believe in yourself, or the authenticity of her feelings. You believed you weren't good enough and that she was playing around with you. Unattractive cynicism on both counts. You may not see how amazing you are, but she did. You convinced her that you're worthless, probably for good, unless there is a serious change of heart as to how you see yourself. We all know that these situations more often than not don't have happy endings. But if life keeps you in touch, and if you gain insight is to how amazing you are, yes you and you alone, then she might remember what she saw. Let's not call her hard names. She tried but was beaten back.

So far I've talked about the notion of attracting things we desire. Actually desiring isn't the true cause of the attraction, it is the consciousness devoted to the object that is the cause. When we devote consciousness to something that we believe will happen, there is the potential for it to manifest. As I said yesterday, this process of manifestation becomes stronger as we develop spiritually, that is, as our ego simplifies and the objects in our conscious become fewer and more quintessential of who we were. Now I'm going to talk about the darker side of the law of attraction. It is not only desires that occupy our consciousness, it also fears. As we develop spiritually many of our fears are seen as being peripheral inauthentic and they wither away. But there are some fears that remain deep-rooted. Such fears have the capacity to pre-occupy us even when you have achieved levels of peace and calm that far exceed the normal person. Just as a normals person's desires are too scattered to swiftly manifest, so too are their fears. Yes, the unregenerate life isn't all suffering and frustrating. It is also one massive attempt to protect ourselves. So much of the normal egoic life is an attempt to shield ourselves from outcomes that therefore never get the chance to manifest. We believe we are safe, we don't believe that the worst can happen. But as we develop spiritually we start to withdraw the effort required to maintain this protective bulwark. The job that we suffered we find that we have the courage to just quit. It was bad for us and bad for the world so we quit. But the salary kept us safe. The poverty we feared is now, alas, our reality The relationship that we reasoned was better for us than the life of loneliness is terminated. We realise that we are worth more than this, and that we are making our partner worse by tolerating them. But they kept us warm at night, and now the bed is cold. Yes we are developing the strength to confront our demons, and there is good stuff coming our way. But the iron necessity of the law of attraction has it that our demons shall and must be confronted. Our developing courage and strength means that we are no longer assailed by everyday fears, but living courageously and with grace means that we dismantle the bulwark that protected us from our deepest fears. Hydrogen asked about whether all this defies the law of karma. All this IS the law of karma. A lifetime desiring that special thing will mean that sooner or later you will be presented with your heart's desires. We will be presented with a Last Temptation, and nothing has ever been more tempting. Our Final Fear will present a horror that we never thought could happen. The Law of Attraction takes on a mixed meaning, and requires a different response - a reverse of our former life. We find that we must resist the temptation and yield to the fear. Our urge is to transcend even the law of attraction.

People who don't believe in the LoA don't believe that the human will can't transcend limitations of time and space and the normal province of the human will. Not being philosophical they don't wonder at all about how thought can influence the body - even if it is a simple decision to raise one's arm. This is a deeply mysterious phenomenon but people accept it as normal and commonplace. It takes intelligence to even see the mystery of it. If they could see the mystery of the everyday will, they will be more open-minded to the notion of the law of attraction. Wisdom starts with wonder and doubt about the everyday. To understand the unreality of time and space is to transcend the limitations of time and space. To understand the unreality of the individual ego is to transcend the individual ego. If you still believe in the notion of an individual ego in an individual body then all the LoA stuff is going to seem very magical...and wrong.

Yes, and I would say that conflicting desires in the reason why the law of attraction is discerned by those still trapped in ego. Most people have many many desires and most of them thwart each other. Furthermore we have desires that aren't authentic themselves but serve other desires. For example, we find ourselves chasing money because we think that through money we can get what we want the most: sex and love for example. Or we find ourselves desiring what other people desire because we want people to admire us, and then we won't be lonely anymore. Most egos are in thrall to such a bewildering storm of various desires authentic and inauthentic that they can't possibly give the consciousness and motivation that would be required to attract them. But through this storm they do manage to attract the things they need and want most. A spouse, a house, a car and holidays in the sun. This is done according to the law of attraction but normal people call it will power and hard work. The spiritually developed person sees the vanity of all these desires. Desires wither away in their droves - first what were inauthentic and peripheral to the ego and later the deeper rooted stuff. The spiritually cultivated person starts to notice that what they want seems to come to them even while they have many egoic desires. It is a hazardous time, a kind of limbo. They have few desires, but those they have are strong and receive all the conscious attention that was previously scattered over various conflicting desires. People at this stage truly find that money and sex is theirs for the taking if that is what they crave. What are these strong desires? They vary from person to person, but if you enjoy something for it's own sake then that is the kind of desire that will come to you. If something seems like a good thing in itself, and you can't imagine anything better - that is what your ego shall find it easy to attract. But you must be attracted yourself in this stage. If you are attracted to a woman you will find it very easy to attract her to you. Almost effortless. It will seem like the universe is working on your behalf.. But you can't have any woman you want because you can't choose who you fancy. It follows that the law of attraction is only seen and recognised by people who have done a great deal of spiritual work - the genuine stuff which might mean prayer, meditation, mortifications. Those who haven't followed this path will be sceptical. And there will be right to be so. They quite literally have never simplified their desires to the extent that what they really want comes to them easily. They have so many desires that they will notice all the ones that are unfulfilled. They will therefore have no reason not to think that the granting of desires is just chance or everyday will power. When you start to notice the law of attraction is when it has become a reality with you. If you haven't noticed it then you are unlikely to believe it. if you haven't noticed it it is because you have not cultivated yourself spiritually. This is the truth. If people are sceptical of the law of attraction it is absolutely pointless trying to persuade them. It is a deep and sophisticated teaching that can't be trivialised.

Hi 7 strikes I said my body had no survival needs, I did not say that I do not drink water or look both ways when I cross the road. Do you understand the difference? When I drink water I drink water. All this talk about doing it in order to survive is a fiction in your own head. It's a story you 100% believe in. You have not seen emptiness yet, although your recognition of good emptiness teachers like Tony Parsons means that you soon will. You know it deep inside but its not fully conscious so you can't yet put it into words. Maybe we can talk some more later. best wishes

The contents of experience can be explained either in terms of existence or non-existence. Either way works. Tony Parsons therefore creates problems when he only ever talks about non-existence. It seems like he has simply swapped viewpoints. Imagine two people sat opposite each other and in between them is a mug of coffee. They are arguing. One of them is saying the mug is for right-handed people and the other is saying it is for left-handed people. The person who is open-minded (and a little self-doubting) gets up and walks round to join the other. Then he says: "Oh you were right. It is for left-handed people." This seems to be what Tony Parsons has done. He has been strong enough to reject the view that 99.99% of people hold, but then falls into the opposite illusion.

No, not actually. Although you can explain the body's behaviour in that way. Actually this is another problem with Parsons that we haven't discussed yet. He has a tendency to be materialisitc, that is, he roots his explanations for, say, the sense of separation in brain processes that started in infancy. And yet wisdom is seeing that the body too is empty and that there is no way that you can suggest that separation (or oneness) are things happening in the brain. Actually you don't need to meditate to understand this - a course in Kantian philosophy will deconstruct such notions until you are at least sceptical! Wisdom will later supply you with the truth!

Hi Lucky7strikes, With the insight into emptiness comes the insight that the ego is and always was empty. There was no physical animal, no surviving and no notion of living. Your spirituality does not break it down because there is and never was anything to break down. The ego is an emptiness that must be accepted along with all empty things. You can't reject it because its one of the many empty things that come your way. It is the same as what was once conceived as the 'spiritual self'. The self and the Self are 100% identical. They are both of the same nature - empty. Your sense of an embodied personality still arises...and then passes. It is 100% REAL while it is with you but you know that it will also pass because it also empty. Is the ego then real or empty? Both? Neither? actually the very notions of existence and non-existence are inadequate here. All you can do is take what comes. If it is NOW it is real but shall instantly pass into emptiness. If you get this then you are ready to accept the ego when it makes an appearance. It doesn't trouble you because you know and feel that it will pass. Your whole being is in a relaxed uninvolved state. You no longer believe in the ego's independent reality, but you accept its reality when, and only when, it is your reality. You can love it and understand it, but you don't have to anxiously worry about it's welfare, or it's negative effect on your spiritual self. I don't wish to make you angry because I've really enjoyed what you write while I was a lurker. But I thought I'd better at least attempt an explanation of what I mean. Nikolai

The student can only accept teachings that he is ready for and at some level already understands. Most people will never understand what Parsons has to offer because they aren't ready. But a seeker who has worked and thought hard has a great deal to learn from him. Such seekers know what they need and so they defend him fiercely. He is the best possible teacher for the place they are at and, metaphorically speaking, will sit attentively at his feet. If you find yourself liking TP, enjoying his style, laughing wryly at his insights these are all signs that you appreciate who he is but probably don't have that much to learn. You recognise how special he is, but you actually know that you have the same greatness in yourself. You view him more as a respected peer than a teacher. This is not in any way rejecting him - why would you reject the wisdom that has arisen in you. But it is the recognition that there is more work to be done, and reconciling yourself to your own ego is the first thing in your in-tray. I'm sure I'm not the only one who can simultaneously love Tony Parsons and still see the limitations in his teaching.

This is actually what I alluded to in the post a few back. Once you have been through emptiness and been able to reconcile it with your life as an individual the two states start to merge together. The ego is still very much in existence but it has been dealt such a blow that it becomes all loose and airy. Emptiness doesn't kill the ego but it does transform it. The ego then becomes an incredibly effective vehicle for the expression of emptiness. Almost any words will work as teachings for a person who has seen the truth, in fcat he wouldn't have to speak at all. The irony is, Tony Parsons acknowledges that all this happens. He says that the personality becomes richer and more rounded through the lifting of energetic constriction. He is speaking honestly, from experience - and good for him.. But he hasn't found a way of accounting for it in his 'self is an illusion' doctrine, and so in other contexts he finds himself saying that the self is an illusion and to talk of transformation makes no sense. For me, when my insight into emptiness and form really started to merge I realised that the ego is and always was a fruit of spiritual development - in a way the first fruit. I realised that all my traits as an ego were just preparations for ways of being beyond the ego. The ego is a triumph of spiritual development. The laws of time, space and individuality aren't entirely real, but they are magnificent metaphors for what comes later. Very simple skills and understanding that we take no notice of are actually identical in essence to the huge stuff that comes later. When we wish to transcend the ego, when we are seekers, we have a tendency to demonise it. This is all necessary and well, but when we finally have transcended it we can look back and recognise that all the sufferings of the egoic life had deep meaning and purpose. We love and respect our ego and we acknowledge and endorse the traces of it that are still with us Once you have transcended the ego you haven't left it behind .Your life in time and space is still available to you as and when you choose - but all the neurosis and the suffering is gone because it has served its purpose. I do understand why Tony Parsons calls the ego an illusion. To see emptiness is to realise that the ego isn't true how we once thought. But at the same time, I wouldn't want anyone to deny the ego outright. The ego is a beautiful achievement that shall develop with you infintely if you let it and stop trying to deny it. The peace and tranquility that you saw in your teacher were a direct consequence of his former sufferings as an ego. There is a link between then and now, that is why.

Emptiness isn't experienced by anyone, which is why it can't vary according to perspective. But when a person explains 'it' they do so as individuals, The telling is itself the individuation and so can't be the emptiness. Only I know that what I went through is what Mr Parsons went through. I can tell by the way he talks, and the way he explains it.

We can't share the experience directly, we must choose our words. The sharing will occur naturally, it may even feel involuntary, but still there are two different methods you follow. Either, you present the truth as accurately as possible. You therefore acknowledge the fact that any given moment can be described in terms of both existence and non-existence. For anyone who hasn't even experienced the truth of non-existence this way is completely and utterly baffling, and actually makes people angry. It looks like blatant self-contradiction and paradox for paradox sake. Or, you take a pragmatic approach and try to stay consistent. You present one half of the story only, usually the non-existence half because that it is the view that people are in most need of. Tony Parsons is certainly doing this. I don't know if he is being pragmatic and withholding teachings, or whether he has, in his ignorance, completely substituted his former life of existence for a new life of non-existence. I would have to meet him to know. I would have to ask him the question. But it is only because I have been through exactly what he has that I understand that he has a predicament as a teacher, or that his understanding is incomplete . But I can tell that the guy is 100% genuine when it comes to explaining his experience and as far as most people are concerned, just to see the non-existence of the self is an extraordinarily rare and previous insight.

When Parsons is asked "Who become enlightened" he always says "Not me" He could just as easily answer "I did", but he doesn't. It must be a nightmare being a teacher because all you do is create confusion and distort the truth. But it can be no other way.

I'm sure every teacher knows that they cannot teach the whole truth. If they want to be logical and consistent they must focus on one half of the story at any one time. We all believe (or used to believe) that we exist as independent selves, and in a sense we are. But Spiritual teachers tend not to bother teaching us about this because we are convinced already. What we don't tend to realise is that we are also completely empty of independent existence, as is everything that appears to us. Because we don't understand this too well the spiritual teachers emphasise it because it's the biggest gap in our education. Tony Parsons emphasises emptiness of the self alone. He is quite insistent that he and you and I are not really here. If people base an argument on independent selfhood he contradicts them. This consistent and disciplined contradiction of questions is his teaching. He teaches emptiness and impermanence like the Buddha did, but he seems not to remind us to reject the teachings. He does not teach the middle way between the extremes of existence of the self and non-existence. We do not now what Tony Parsons' understanding is. If we we judge him by his words alone he seems to be very much 'trapped in emptiness'. But it is possible that his focus on emptiness of the self is strategic. We will not become enlightened unless we first 'see' the emptiness that he teaches so consistently. It is only later that emptiness must be reconciled with the former 'dream of individuality' rather then remain in contradistinction to it. It is when this merging of form of emptiness occurs that the miraculous fruits of the spiritual like start to appear. Parsons has an acknowledged ability to communicate emptiness - sometimes miraculously. He also seems to be lovable, loving and charismatic. If we should 'beware of false prophets and judge a tree by its fruit' then I think we can trust him. The Zen Buddhists talk about the three states of awareness: First is the nornal state of independently existing objects and selves. Trees are trees. Second is the realisation that things and selves can also be seen as empty. Trees are not trees. Third is when these two views are harmonised into two sides of a coin. Trees are trees again. If Tony Parsons is still at only the second stage he is still doing better than 99.99% of people. His message is definitely worth listening to.

What a lovely lovely man

When a person assumes themselves as individuals, and assumes themselves as responsible for their actions they are likely to be concerned with questions of morality. To be in this state is very much of the Tao but they themselves are not aware of the Tao. We might say that they are acted on by the Tao When a person understands that good and evil are the same then they are no longer concerned with questions of morality. It is because they are not concerned with good and evil that there are able to judge each situation on its own merit. This is being aware of the Tao, and acting from the Tao. When one is aware of the Tao one is free to view all as Good. This transcendent understanding is not the same as the ignorant person’s understanding of good. Now I shall explain all this: Moral relativism is an extremely important first stage in transcending the ignorant view. When a person is able to see that what is good for them might be bad for the next person, they are growing in wisdom. But this has nothing yet to do with the transcendent good of the Taoist sage. If a moral relativist still sees themselves and others as individual mortals, they will still take death, and especially their own death, as an evil. They might deny that they think this way, but when it comes down to it, their actions will suggest otherwise. But is this not natural? How can we be unconcerned with our own death? When a person truly sees and understands that they are not the mortal self that they thought they were, they will no longer be concerned with their own survival. Furthermore, they will recognise that so much of what the ignorant world calls evil is particularly useful at bringing about this understanding of their true Self. For example solitary confinement is the punishment ignorant people reserve for the most heinous criminals, and yet it also allows the opportunity for deep, undisturbed prayer and meditation. If you can see the spiritual good even in the cases of bodily harm then you have transcended moral relativism. The sage is therefore free to enjoy what the world sees as good, as well as what the world sees as evil. Some things, he sees, are enjoyed on earth and some things are enjoyed in heaven. He is quite content for any situation to arise, whether good or evil in the normal sense. The sage can still see what the ignorant call good and evil, but he himself takes no view on the matter. All is good. He can be as jolly snorting coke with a girl on each arm, as locked in a cell with only bread and water. All really is good. When a person sees that all is good, he has no need to strive. He is not pre-occupied with his own bodily survival and so doesn’t jeopardize the survival of others. He therefore doesn’t put himself in danger. He hasn’t trodden on anyone’s toes. He therefore survives and endures, and inadvertently achieves what all the ignorant mortals are so desperate to achieve. But the mortals cannot understand this one simple point. It is because they are so afraid of evil that they create so much evil. It is their fear of death that leads them to such extremes of evil, very often carried out in the name of good. But as the Tao Te Ching says it is only because the Sage is unconcerned with good and evil that he is able to be good. Extreme behaviour like drugs and whores only emerge in people who are ignorant and far from the path. It is because they are so afraid of evil that they pursue exaggerated forms of the good, in the form of pleasure. Is the way of the Tao the same as moral relativism? No. But moral relativism is definitely a way of finding the path.

Hi Cat The ego could be a viewed as a kind of landscape where the power of attraction, which we call the ego's agency or will, flows readily in some areas and not others. Some egos are like high plateaus where water seems to flow readily in all sorts of directions. We would call these people powerful, like politicians and tycoons. It is spiritual power they possess but limited by virtue of being ego-bound. Interestingly, people who have poorly developed egos are often more aware of their power of attraction then those with well developed egos. These narrow anxious people never really developed their strong sense of wlll power which is the everyday masquerade for power of attraction. They are therefore very frightened of what they wish for because they have noticed how thoughts can become manifested. Such people would be diagnosed with OCD. (Psychological science has found that people with OCD have weak self-concept and struggle to make decisions). The power of attraction can only be contained with equanimity if one realises that we are not an ego, and in a sense not in control anyway. Then we can trust in whatever power is behind all things in the universe. There is this notion that the power of attraction can be used to make us rich, get us laid etc. If you believe in it strongly enough then it will work for you. Unfortunately if the power of attraction is being used to serve such egoic needs then it means that you are silll ego-bound and you will suffer hugely from the responsibilty that it brings. It is probably best that 99.9% of people don't believe in the power of attraction, but believe in the much safer and more limited version: personal will power.

Hi Grandmaster To believe that such a thing could happen you would have to have transcended the ego and the laws of the ego's world to quite a high degree. But if you have reached this state then you are not likely to have strong motivation to perfom something so unnatural. But if needs must, there is no reason why you couldn't open the can with the banana. After all, its no different from using a can opener. "But a can opener is hard and sharp!!" Indeed, but a banana is soft and blunt!

Hi sun lover I've got a feeling that you've taken some of the mythology about the spiritual life in a one-sided way. I'm not denying the Gods and deities, its just that you don't have to meditate to see them. Perhaps it makes it clearer if i say that most people see a small number of Gods in their lives. They are the ones we fall in love with. For some reason we can meet a person and we see them with clear spiritual vision, just to look at them is a beautiful and meaningful experience. We might marry them and in time the 'scales might fall from our eyes' but when that happens it is our spiritual vision that fails us, nothing else. People who cultivate their spiritual vision find that they are able to love and see transcendent beauty in more and more people. This is because their spiritual vision is developing in magnitude beyond the normal person. With time you start to understand the true meaning of the word 'angel'. On the one hand we know that they are just regular people but we see so much beauty and meaning in them, even with strangers sometimes, that they appear as something divine. All this happens while still going about our daily life. Going to work, going shopping the formerly miserable world of samsara is being transformed day by day by day. At some point it will occur to you that each person is a potential deity. You realise that it is your own lack of faith, lack of vision that stops them from being so - it is not something defective in them. You talk so much about the miserable state of your fellow bipeds. You seem to want to escape them through meditation. Maybe escape works for you - the way of the arhat - where the whole universe is realised within you. All this is fine, but there is another way, and that is to stay exactly where you are and accept and work with whatever life brings you. Rather then modify your experience by running off alone to some mountain you can modify your interpretation of your experience and stay exactly here. Both ways work. But if you could understand that whether you stay or go, sincere practice will yield exactly the same results and exactly the results that you want - then it would help you with the frantic attitude that comes across in your posts. If you say you don't want a companion and mean it then it is your choice. But if you think you do, it is perfectly possible to meet a true angel right on your doorstep - you just have to understand how.

What you do to men's feet

So did I. there are lots of men who find compassion revolting, and for very good reason. Nietzsche is really good on this important point.