Search the Community

My whole point is that technology and science are not the same thing. Technology works without science. Science is not something that proves itself via technology -- the most fundamental sciences are too complex to even dream of creating, by any linear methods, any technology that could use them. Try creating a worm... not based on the technology already in existence (the actual worm) but from scratch, based on the science of how a worm is put together that we currently have. Try it... it's been tried, and it's not doable on the basis of our science. Tinkering is doable, you can disassemble and reassemble the worm. Science is not -- you don't know how to make one no matter how much data you've accumulated on how to tinker with parts. The illusion of our technology being based on our science is what lets our science claim the knowledge it does not possess. We're good at tinkering, we're good at slapping together theories to create an illusion of the latter explaining the workings of the former. But in reality theories are theories and tinkering is tinkering, and one does not depend on the other at all. Everything that "works" in our world was based on tinkering, invented by tinkerers. None of what works works worse if we don't have a theory for it, or better if we do. Investigate for yourself, you'll be shocked... The inventor of microbiology clearly saw the tiny homunculus in the head of each spermatozoon under the microscope he tinkered together, and believed that that's how we reproduce, because that was the theory. It did not affect the practice, it only affected how what was observed was interpreted. The rest of it is exactly like that too. We can make a bomb, that's true, but it does not mean we see and understand how it works, we've just tinkered enough to produce it. Many theories have replaced each other since we first produced it, with no effect of tinkering on the science or of the science on the tinkering. We don't have a science that produces technology. Shocking but true. We have technology, and we have science, and we have the illusion of one being based on the other. One is used to glorify the other the way you would claim expertise in biophysics behind your ability to lift your arm. You've got the technology, but you don't have the science behind it. It's every bit like that with all our external technologies. Shocking...

And again we pretend that these purportedly isolated (from what? From what we can isolate them from, nothing more -- and that's not the universe, or even society, or even the meddling bosses) "laboratory conditions" "minimize the impact" of the fact that the scientist will have to have his proposal for the experiment in this "isolated" laboratory approved by some "higher ups" and financed by them in case he manages to shape it just so that they would want to, and the work will have to be "peer reviewed" by peers who are in exactly the same boat they don't want to rock under any circumstances lest they themselves fall out of it, and in case they get the wind of this work promising rewards before reviewing it, they will rush their own replica and try to publish first (I'm currently reading a book by a leading geneticist expounding on this very situation), and while at it, cutting corners and tweaking with data to rush their package and establish priority, and that the multitude of other factors on the "outside" of the "isolated lab" will all be "objective" to the max and no consideration will be given to how this new information affects the whales of the field (what if it invalidates everything they built their career, position, power on?), and no corporation will buy the rights to use the applications and then put the discovery on the shelf (any scientific discovery has millions of potential applications, from cognitive to pragmatic, unlike an "invention"), and that highest caliber science produced in this 'isolated" lab will be accepted and acknowledged just because it's true, regardless of who this discovery makes rich or poor, makes look stupid or gives a chance to say "told you so" to, or "in your face!" or "you are fired?.." Dream world, Neo.

You can blame this on Nungali, as a direct result of some posts they made at another thread. I had this up on my YouTube channel some time ago, but took it down. As I say in the description of the video, my voice was untrained at the time of this recording. Since then I received a little training from two sources, Fiona K. and Silvia Nakkach, her book, "Free Your Voice." Still not the kind of training that most of the people you see on TV or hear on the radio have. No autotune or editing here! This thread will provide a sort of before and after, with this video being before: http://youtu.be/081rq4Nk1jA "The Impossible Dream" from "Man of La Mancha" will be the after, and I hope to have it recorded by the end of the week.

Hmmmm ... there is an idea ! Dream bliss .... have you thought of signing up for the Army .... that would be a good career for you . (Make your parents happy too )

Stirred up by Dream_Bliss. When I think about something, I use my mind. My mind consists of both past and future. In my human state I can only assume a future, consciously. I am not capable of clearly perceive a future, yet. And I can take out what I already know, out of my past, my subconscious mind. So in the end, I fantasize. Some individuals call this "creating". But how effective is it? The assumed future has no real substance to it, since we all know how wonderful and colorful a day-dream can feel like and the real application feels Totally different. And when I think, I usually utilize my past. So I think always in the past. Nothing new is ever thought. Thought is simply a reflection of what already happened, so it is eternally the past. Can you see this? This moment right here and right now can not be thought about, because it is so fresh. It can only be experienced directly. Do you see the human dilemma, especially today in our modern world? People "think" they live, but they do not. They think. Living means being right here in this moment and experiencing. Making a direct experience with life. That does not require a setup, a preparation. Can never, how could it be? How can you think about what will happen in the very next moment? You can only assume it from what you already know. Do you see where this leads? It is an endless loop. Endless repetition. Do you see the "humanity" in all of this? How all of our trends are ruminated over and over again? How nothing profoundly new is ever invited? How could it be? It can only happen Without the use of thought, through a clear knowing. Please reflect upon it and see what is actually and only going wrong in this life. This penetrates all layers of our day to day life.

When I think about it, I use my mind. My mind consists of both past and future. In my human state I can only assume a future, consciously. And I can take out what I already know, out of my past, my subconscious mind. So in the end, I fantasize. Some individuals call this "creating". But how effective is it? The assumed future has no real substance to it, since we all know how wonderful and colorful a day-dream can feel like and the real application feels Totally different. And when I think, I usually utilize my past. So I think always in the past. Nothing new is ever thought. Thought is simply a reflection of what already happened, so it is eternally the past. Can you see this? This moment right here and right now can not be thought about, because it is so fresh. It can only be experienced directly. Do you see the human dilemma, especially today in our modern world? People "think" they live, but they do not. They think. Living means being right here in this moment and experiencing. Making a direct experience with life. That does not require a setup, a preparation. Can never, how could it be? How can you think about what will happen in the very next moment? You can only assume it from what you already know. Do you see where this leads? It is an endless loop. Endless repetition. Do you see the "humanity" in all of this? How all of our trends are ruminated over and over again? How nothing profoundly new is ever invited? How could it be? It can only happen Without the use of thought, through a clear knowing. Please, please reflect upon it and see what so many of you do all the time and call it normal.

Well, I know an electric bull will give some women a wet dream.

That was so funny for me. I have called some people I have known slugs. And yes, they dream. As to the real slugs, I kind of doubt it. I'm not even sure they actually have a brain rather than just interconnected nervous systems.

Do you know if slugs dream too, MH?

awesome. I used to practice with the Yan Xin student group at the University of MInnesota - all Chinese except one other white older dude - like a homeless guy. Anyway I first went to an event when they brought in these Canadian Chinese Yan Xin practitioners and so we did the meditation and they had a mike in the audience for anyone to report their experience. I said I had felt a lot of heat - in my stomach - since they had asked if anyone had felt that. I didn't know what that meant at the time - I was ... 27 years old at the time. So then I went to more of the group meditations - just a small room - but they showed the Yan Xin Superman documentary made by the Chinese government - all in Mandarin but the Chinese students translated for me and the other guy. It was an impressive doc with the nuclear scientists being interviewed about the experiments that are mentioned online. Changing the decay rate of radiation, etc. So then when I met Chunyi Lin in 1999 - then I realized he had been first healed by Yan Xin - what a coincidence! haha. I continued practicing the Yan Xin step one meditation cassette along with the spring forest qigong. I figured they would compliment each other and indeed Chunyi seemed to incorporate quite a bit of it. So - but then as my energy increased and then Chunyi had said I had an enlightenment experience - but also after that experience I truly felt who I was was not any material reality around me - and so I got rid of the Yan Xin meditation tape. I didn't think I needed it anymore. I also got rid of this old journal I had - over 500 pages - it had documented a precognitive dream I had recorded in 1995 which came true in 1998 in great detail. haha. Oh well. Anyway when I told Chunyi about how I got rid of the Yan Xin meditation tape he said my mind was still confused. So then I was pondering something Chunyi taught in his level 3 retreat - when I had my energy very strong - and it took me a few years to finally figure out what I had been confused about. LIstening to the Yan Xin healing vid right now - the reactions are better than a Beatles or Elvis early rock show. haha. Seriously you can feel the qi energy - as Yan Xin said his energy is imprinted in his qi meditation cassettes also. Soon after the crack down on Yan Xin - then the Minneapolis Yan Xin group required that people take a long lecture class of several weeks before they could purchase the meditation cassette again. I'm not even sure they are still teaching in Minneapolis. nope - there's Spring Forest and Falun Gong and another type of qigong but no longer Yan Xin. Too bad. That was the "free" spiritual training center. But yeah someone had sent me the Yan Xin qigong lecture from online somewhere so I did listen to it again. Don't have it anymore. But these 13 hours of Yan Xin healing qi-emitting lectures should do the job.

Id generally say that most people become interested in the occult as a means to an end - as a way to get something done through alternative means. Or they may be drawn to "power" or "hidden" knowledge for some reason or another. As far as your question about illumination - if you yourself do not have a specific idea of what it is, then it will be very difficult for you to receive an answer in the first place. For example, someone could explain it in detail and you would miss it because you would not know what to look for. That is why most esoteric traditions have a process of "initiation" which is considered an entrance into a new world altogether. Real initiation involves what has been called "transmission", which is the direct transfer of knowledge or states of being. The results may be immediate or not, but the effect is real and total - otherwise it is not an actual initiation but rather a fantasy or dream. And while most real practitioners will have multiple initiations into more and more subtle realms - the first initiation of this lifetime will be unique and significant in that sense. Beyond initiation have been termed stages such as neophyte, adept, master - which are fairly good reference points. At first you get your bearings, then you learn methods, then you perfect your own style. In all stages, the initiations remain the real thing - it literally takes years, even decades to understand and unravel all the secrets contained in such an event. The unfolding of the depths of understanding regarding your own personal initiation becomes your own personal illumination, which then bridges towards illumination of the universal. In terms of occult practices, I must reiterate - it goes on and on, further and further... far beyond siddhis for their own sake. In terms of public knowledge (in even the most obscure books), very little is known about the actual practice of what is called "magic"... and it cannot be another way... in the same way the sky cannot be red. It could be... but its not.

oneness is outside of time so there is no "moment" for you to experience it. The name "dreambliss" is not clear because some dreams are bad, some good but what is really blissful is the deep dreamless state that everyone has to experience every night - during which you also experience no sense of time. See the hint? So you can logically infer that unless you're a biological robot - who you truly are must still exist even when in dreamless sleep - not in any "Moment" - and so then when you wake up afterwards happy that you had blissful night of sleep - and it is those deep dreamless "moments" that you are not aware that create that bliss - then you can logically infer that the oneness also has this deep bliss. So in actuality it's not a "oneness" but a "three in oneness" which means the waking state is our logical self, left brain dominant with language and our dreaming state is our right-brain dominant self of visions and the subconscious making itself aware and the third state is the dreamless deep sleep that we are not aware of and yet it is the true bliss and the foundation of who we are. So when we become consciously aware of that third state it creates what's called Turiya - the fourth state of awareness which combines the previous three - the deep bliss of the third, the visions of the 2nd and the logical awareness of the first state. So the fourth state is not just a "oneness" but a "three in oneness." So then now that you logically accept that who you really are is actually beyond time - and so then you can also have visions of your future, just like that lady did who left her body to transcend death and get healed. When you have visions of the future the "you" who is having them again is beyond time and so can access your future. So the only way that lady got healed of cancer was by her realizing that who she was actually was in union with a formless awareness that could see the future. If you want to unify with that experience immediately then all you have to do is embrace the "space" between your thoughts. That's all that is needed. Of course most people can not just stop their thoughts. Another natural moment of this experience is the first breath when you awake - just before you have a conscious thought but just after you awake - there is one breath where you are consciously aware of who you are. At that moment you are consciously aware of your dream state - the theta brain waves of the R.E.M. state. A third method is then to entrain your conscious thoughts to align with the R.E.M. dream state so that you are then consciously aware of your dream state - and this is what Tai Chi exercises do or trance dancing or meditation, etc. What it is through science is pushing your sympathetic nervous system to its extreme so it creates a 7 beats per second of your skeletal and nervous system - and this 7 beats a second is your R.E.M. theta dream state - and so in that extreme of your sympathetic nervous system it rebounds to the opposite extreme of your parasympathetic nervous system - and you hit the deep bliss relaxation state of the dreamless state. So normally our deep dreamless state is dark and in ignorance but through meditation and using the resonance of complementary opposites - then we see light and experience the deep bliss - as we connect with our spirit that has access to our future. How is that possible? Because our deep subconscious desires are played out in the future - and the formless awareness oversees the whole "play" of linear spacetime which we discover in the formless awareness - is just a temporary illusion. No "one" experiences the oneness again since it's a "three in oneness" that eternally creates spacetime and energy-matter. So you can listen to it and it is listening to you at the same time - and through complementary opposites renews your energy - but the process itself is impersonal and formless.

I readily admit I do not have laboratory alchemical experience, perhaps a better rephrasing of the thread would be 'alchemical theory applied to spiritual work' - with that being said, UFA seems to be the most knowledgeable person here, but he hasnt proved anything to me either, all of his writing while intellectual as heck could be all conjecture, he could be hallucinating in the laboratory, etc, - just as well I could be hallucinating during my work (*insert my occult experiential claims here*) - but in alchemy I found the most accurate model for my experiential knowledge. Thanks! Edit_ its not a big deal, I will go ahead and relate an example: When I was first able to separate my consciousness from my body I encountered a black man expaining something to me about burning spheres, or burning a sphere, or how to burn the spheres - then how there are three things which are One operating in different modes, it was a woman who illustrated the point, she appeared three times in different locations rapidly. I then went outside my backyard, it was real as taking my kids to mcdonalds for breakfast, not a dream, fully awake - then where the moon was supposed to be was Saturn, it began to eclipse rapidly, I ran to get my camera but reemebered i was not solid, then a snap, and what seemed like one thousand crows began to caw violently... at the time I was doing simple meditations based of the Sefer Yetzirah and the work of Abraham Abulafia. Then about two years later I started reading about the symbolism of calcination and was taken aback by the similarities inherent in that first separation. At the time I did not even know about the principles of Salt, Sulfur, Mercury let alone the significance of Saturn or the Crows! Completely objective.

Do I even know what I am defining ? You just ignored all the posts that were written and come up with that ? The better question seems' do you even know what you are reading' ? You just seem to ignore what has already been written and explained at times. It is like you dont want to see it, so you pretend it isnt there. How many times do I have to re outline my experience about it ? How many times do I have to say I live in a world where these type of new age thoughts are prevalent, that I have seen them do damage and cause disruption to the good and great things people can get together. I have lived on an alternative community for near 30 years, I have put on many 'New Age' alternative festivals. There were all sorts of workshops and things there including LoA. I was a tarot reader at an alternative market for 10 years . I watched a good friend die from breast cancer while she used her power of positive thought to heal it, and listened to a whole range of 'spiritual' new age 'healers' and teachers fill her innocent and persuadable head with New age rubbish. I watched another girl die of cancer while her parents admonished her for bringing it on herself by having the wrong 'mental attitude' - it was horrible! I have been in a 4 year supreme court case where the 'spiritual new age founders' of the community I lived on bore witness against their own community that did all the work and realised what they tried to visualise only ... they lost. they appealed with utter similar mental bullshit, they lost again. Now the remnant wackos that practice this BS that are still there are set for a round of local court (against me as a company director), because they believe in 'manifestation' but wont pay the rent the signed a contract to for a whole lot of stupid illogical cosmic reasons that are not going to pay the rates or electricity. They are fighting against the very people that are creating structure and order in able for them to try and live their community dream ... the judge will bring them back to earth (or at least bring down their bank balances! ) Also I have over 30 years experience in studying such things ... the occult and mysticism and magic, and had to pass through a series of examinations and grades to be able to prove I knew my stuff ... I worked for that group as an inspector and national secretary and an assistant to that groups international board. of directors for several years. I rushed over to the school next door once as there was a bushfire in the school grounds, when I got there, high flames were racing through the long uncut grass, up the hill, towards the kindergarten, closer to the kindergarten, little kids were running in that high above their heads grass that the fire was heading towards. I found their ,new age. teacher sitting in lotus on the grass 'meditating' a 'safe field' around the children. I abused he, woke her up, forced her to take the children to the safety point, zoomed home and came back with some people, our tractor and slasher to cut a fire break and our fire-fighting equipment and saved the school from fire and the children from injury. 6 months later, the dry grass is again overhead height and they are still meditating for the children's safety I told their parents and ... well, they pretty much had the same attitude about me as dream bliss seems to ... I was wrecking their pretty perceptions about things. And you want to know my experience ... and you assume my outlook is because I have something stuck up my rectum ? ? ? And you ! What is your extensive experience with it ? But no, you will just poke your tongue out, call me a know it all, but then question if I have ever had any experience with it? This too is a typical approach of these types of New Age 'philosophers'. And people wonder why I have scorn for them ! Been there done that already explained. That is a nice safe and secure thought for you isnt it ? Ha! I left home long ago, I live fulfilling my life in joy and celbration, you should see what I have managed to manifest ! Everything I have needed ... but not everything I have ever greeded. And I did it magically ... but by understanding 'practical' magic. As the crown was in the last disastrous stages of obviously loosing the Supreme Cort case against us, the prosecutor blurted out in unprofessional exasperation " But your honour, these people are outside the system, they have a a large riverfront property surrounded by pristine rainforest, they live in houses they built themselves, they dont even have a mortgage or debts to pay off and they live on paying $30 a week and putting on hippy festivals." The judge replied; "Yes, they have been rather clever haven't they ... but they have not broken any laws ." Also I can mention the continuous and numerous events throughout the court case where it magically and strangely went our way , even straight solicitors commented on that, they would say "I have never seen anything like this! How do you do it, They throw you in the river and you manage to stumble and bounce along every stepping stone and land on the opposite bank on a silk pillow with a cocktail in your hand " Yes; it was 'magick' ... but it wasnt some type of 'Think magick ' and wait for 'something ' to come about. It was ;think magic, plus, plus, plus, : study, legal system, logistics research, visualisation, putting things into practice, divination (using strategy from the 'Art of War', devotions and offerings to Maat, etc. etc. Thoe that wanted to visualise and wait for it to happen would be evicted by now if I had not punched my way through their BS and DID something about it ! Now they are about to go through it again in the local court .... it wont be a case of sticks up rectums , it will be a case of sticks applied firmly across buttocks (or bank accounts ) No experience eh! Actually, its you that dont have a clue about me ..... but keep thinking I dont know what I am talking about, if that helps your emotional security ... but remember , it is you that actually wants to change your physical situation. One day you might drag yourself out of that limbo and instead of only visualising what you want, actually go out there and try to do your part about it as well. I already am, but you think I am not and ignorant of it and your 'lessons' will lead me to it What! You see some mythological resurrection as a sign of realising oneness. Oh dear ! good luck then And also it was before ... when you ran off and were finished here. The above paragraph seems to be your default statment when things get a little 'hot in the kitchen'. Off you go then. At least you will have all the useful knowledge that people posted in here when you finally realise there might be more to this LoA attraction thingo than you and the other 'visualisers' might imagine.

heya peeps, i thought i'd throw this one on the buddhist board as this is very much the context to my practice/teachings. i thought i'd seek some input about something that seems to have happened lately, see if people here can offer an explanation to what might be going on. i've had teaching on a few retreats and started training in meditation throughout the past year or so. additional context is that i sought this out having been struggling with chronic illness for many years (late 20s now). the dhamma provided all the answers to what's been going on, how to start to correct this stuff and even clues to 'interesting' childhood experiences. i have a lot of unwholesome kamma/energy so it's a slow process wearing away the conditioning - the root cause of my sickness (autoimmune in nature). however it's progressing nicely via a body parts healing meditation, a very powerful practice indeed. i've also been lucky enough to receive dhamma from a fully realized teacher, transmission, etc, which is absolutely mind blowing stuff. anyways, i was at a sweet spot when i started getting into the healing meditation a couple of months ago. there was a point where i was getting decent awareness throughout the body, but not too much or with so much chi that the deep stuff was coming out and pressing my buttons. i was able to get really settled just abiding, always a pleasant experience for someone as disorganized as myself. i was also getting a lot of awareness while asleep, remembering dreams in lots of detail and on one occasion experienced a lucid state where the dream world was totally luminous, light shining out of everything. i was more present that i'd ever while awake and my field of awareness was infinite, though i quickly got excited and snapped out of it. it seemed to be around that time that things changed something happened to the 'field' in the waking state and things have remained that way ever since. it's not worrying or anything, just very curious as it's is now a permanent thing. the best way i can describe it is that the field is much broader (kind of like in the lucid dream but not that expansive) but at the same time much more focused. it's particularly noticeable when walking along corridors or walkways with walls or something on each side. it's like a tunnel effect and really cool. there's something about walking down long narrow corridors which really amplifies the effect of whatever happened to the field. i'm sure people will know what i'm talking about. there's also something else where if i focus on something, particularly if engaging another person, that the entire background kind of goes out of focus and i'm totally locked into them or it. it's really strange and again very cool, i had only previously had this experience when receiving transmission from the teacher. i'm also more sensitive than before, though i already have too much of this and barely any equanimity, hence getting into such a mess. moving into other peoples energy field is more noticeable and it's easier to be aware of how that's interacting with my own. certain people also give off a 'special' energy and that's something i was aware of as a child. so, meditators, can anyone offer an explanation of what might of happened that triggered the change in the field and why? it did seem to happen around the time of the lucid dream experience and that's probably not a coincidence. likewise, i'm sure the 'field' will open up and change in a myriad of ways as i progress further into healing, the practices and living in alignment with the universe. especially after such a long time of trying to bend it to my will and breaking the rules!

The first question that occurs to me is what is oneness? Is it the presence of a specific feeling, or the absence of the feeling of separation? The second question is, what does separation feel like? Is it validated by experience? For me, there is a type of experience of "mystical oneness" that is a positive experience. I do not think that this experience can be maintained, since it is a positive state and would require some type of "freezing" of consciousness. I don't know if there is a reliable way of producing this type of "oneness." However, if the feeling of oneness is the absence of the feeling of separation, then this is a different story. Spiritual traditions give many ways to free one of the illusion of separation: critical thinking, examining experience, meditating, asking deeply probing questions. As far as I can tell, there is no short cut. Nor would I expect there to be: neurologists tell us that our way of seeing the world--- me as a separate self--- is based on how the brain has become wired over time. To undo this requires some work. I find that the feeling of separation tends to fall away when I go to sleep and when I have dreams. Exploring the waking, dream, and deep sleep state is a powerful and ancient method of challenging the belief of a limited self. Another method is to closely examine the waking state. I have found that the feeling of separation is just that: a feeling. But the feeling doesn't actually create any separation. In fact, it is imposed on a unitive field of experience.

Hi i've been reading about chi kung and alchemy and i like this forum. I'll post some doubts today Greetings, Dream

No, I'm not lost. I am in a state of denial regarding this. You took this, as did Mueller, much deeper than I would ever go. I cannot forget myself. I cannot forget my thoughts when they arise spontaneously. I am still human, not a saint. And yes, this concept that you spoke of appears a number of times, it is even there in the butterfly dream. Yep, I'm still the same old Materialist I always have been.

UFA and the1gza, We are once again dealing with the classical conflict between the traditionalist and the innovator here. Every spiritual system was created by an innovator and preserved by traditionalists. The traditionalists are guarding the "original" system and oppose any changes to it. Yes, there are good reasons for preserving things the way they are. There are also good reasons for the widening and renewal of existing systems. Alchemy has not changed much in its practice since the 1200s? You are kidding me - right? First off, whose Alchemy are you referring to? The Alchemists didn't even agree about the meaning of the terminology and symbolism they were using, much less about the practice of pursuing the Philosopher's Stone! How I know that Nature is and acts as One? Simple... I myself am a unity, yet I am very aware that I am at any moment the net result of a highly complex combination of biological, chemical, physical, meteorological, geo-physical, cosmological, psychological, alchemical, astrological, numerological and other factors. I can single out any of these for special study. But I won't arrive at a thorough understanding of myself (and Nature) if I neglect how all these influences are interwoven. Alchemy was never a closed system. You can't even begin to understand, let alone safely reproduce, the recipes of the ancients if you have no knowledge of chemistry - how could this knowledge be a hindrance? The link to metaphysical philosophy is no modern abolition either. Have you read Zosimos, probably the most important of the Hellenistic Alchemists? He writes about a dream in which he meets the very Divine Pymander that initiated Hermes Trismegistos into the secrets of the world. This is just one example to illustrate how alchemy frequently refers to other systems; chemistry, mythology, metaphysics, astrology, physiology etc. To truly understand it, you are supposed to have knowledge of all these fields. This hasn't changed to this day. Why do you think that many of the greatest Alchemists were universalists? Jabir, Rhazes, Albertus Magnus, Arnald of Villanova, Lull, Paracelsus, Newton. (I omit the question here if ALL of these attributions are historically accurate.) These people were scientists and keen researchers. They were not afraid to think out of the box. They never intended Alchemy a religious system to be worshipped and rigidly conserved. Unlike some modern fraternities whose members typically pretend to know the truth about Alchemy but when asked to elaborate, tell you that it's too subtle for you to understand, or too dangerous, or that they are under oath not to give away the secret... I don't have the time and motivation to enter another tedious discussion of that kind here. My take on these matters should be sufficiently clear from the foregoing, and I don't like overly repeating myself, so I may not further comment on Traditionalist views of Alchemy. I am more interested in elaborating on the astrological parallels to the Chakras, as the OP asked me to do. Nungali, glad you like my Hermes wand.

These deconstructions can be immensely helpful for transcending the very solid limitations that hinder our meditative progress. Because if you hold any of them to be real, it will inevitably stop at that specific realty. Or worse, counter the efforts of hard worked sadhana, making progress a 1 step forwards, 1 step back situation. It also helps me clarify my own understandings: All assertions of true existents are based on the claim that space, time, and quantity are real. The three dependencies traditionally taught can be understood as follows: Emptiness of cause and condition is emptiness of time Emptiness of imputation is emptiness of space Emptiness of part and whole is emptiness of quantity We break them down using dependent origination: What is space? Space is conceived by extension of location. From here to there (not-here). And the conception of here is via not-here. Not-here via here. So it is established like this: the conception of here is dependent on not-here. And not-here is dependent on here. This is a contradiction since here and not-here cannot be conceived at the same time. So the conception of space is an illusion based on an impossibility. What is time? Time is conceived by before and after (not before). So the conception and definition of before is via not-before. Not-before is also dependent on before. But to conceive them together is a contradiction. So the conception of time cannot not real. It is an imagination based on conflicting polarities. Same thing with quantity. One via many (not-one). Many via one. So is everything denied? No. There is one factor that cannot be denied, and that is experiencing. Because it is the foundation of conception. If you say conception precedes experience, then that means conceptions happens outside or before experience. Which we proved to be impossible based on the refutation of both space and time. If they co-arise simultaneously, they would mutually entail one another. But non-conception does not mean experience. Both conception and non-conception are experiencing. So the foundation of everything is experiencing (this is unbounded, meaning there is no such thing as individual units of experience, since that would make space real). The foundation is not conceiving or knowing (this is "individual" and unreal). Conceiving occurs only through dependent origination, because that is how anything can ever be conceived: via contrasting polarities. So if you experience the nature of conceiving (dependent origination/illusoriness), then that is good. If you don't, then you are pretty screwed and think the myriad contradictory illusions are reality. Seeing illusions as illusions thoroughly, being able to create and destroy it freely, then the illusion is a blissful play. If you don't, and take the dream to be real, then you are caught in a hellish play of contradictions, cyclical ideas, and impossibilities. So...let's everyone destroy the impact of delusions pervading our very body and minds! Then let's dance in and as the illusions. _/\_.

These deconstructions can be immensely helpful for transcending the very solid limitations that hinder our meditative progress. Because if you hold any of them to be real, it will inevitably stop at that specific realty. Or worse, counter the efforts of hard worked sadhana, making progress a 1 step forwards, 1 step back situation. It also helps me clarify my own understandings: All assertions of true existents are based on the claim that space, time, and quantity are real. The three dependencies traditionally taught can be understood as follows: Emptiness of cause and condition is emptiness of time Emptiness of imputation is emptiness of space Emptiness of part and whole is emptiness of quantity We break them down using dependent origination: What is space? Space is conceived by extension of location. From here to there (not-here). And the conception of here is via not-here. Not-here via here. So it is established like this: the conception of here is dependent on not-here. And not-here is dependent on here. This is a contradiction since here and not-here cannot be conceived at the same time. So the conception of space is an illusion based on an impossibility. What is time? Time is conceived by before and after (not before). So the conception and definition of before is via not-before. Not-before is also dependent on before. But to conceive them together is a contradiction. So the conception of time cannot not real. It is an imagination based on conflicting polarities. Same thing with quantity. One via many (not-one). Many via one. So is everything denied? No. There is one factor that cannot be denied, and that is experiencing. Because it is the foundation of conception. If you say conception precedes experience, then that means conceptions happens outside or before experience. Which we proved to be impossible based on the refutation of both space and time. If they co-arise simultaneously, they would mutually entail one another. But non-conception does not mean experience. Both conception and non-conception are experiencing. So the foundation of everything is experiencing (this is unbounded, meaning there is no such thing as individual units of experience, since that would make space real). The foundation is not conceiving or knowing (this is "individual" and unreal). Conceiving occurs only through dependent origination, because that is how anything can ever be conceived: via contrasting polarities. So if you experience the nature of conceiving (dependent origination/illusoriness), then that is good. If you don't, then you are pretty screwed and think the myriad contradictory illusions are reality. Seeing illusions as illusions thoroughly, being able to create and destroy it freely, then the illusion is a blissful play. If you don't, and take the dream to be real, then you are caught in a hellish play of contradictions, cyclical ideas, and impossibilities. So...let's everyone destroy the impact of delusions pervading our very body and minds! Then let's dance in and as the illusions. _/\_.

To my mind the purpose of this thread is about the potential trap of ideas, along with the thoughts expressed in Dustybeijing's final paragraph. However I'm posting the full version of Moellers commentary for those who are interested in his reasoning. But, like I said in my previous post "by trying to fix any interpretation as definitive we risk losing the essence." THE FISHNET ALLEGORY—OR: HOW TO FORGET THINKING There is another famous allegory in the Zhuangzi that has been interpreted in a rather Western manner on the basis of its standard English translation. This story can also be understood quite differently if one looks at it from a "classical" Daoist perspective. Here is, first of all, the fishnet allegory of the Zhuangzi in Burton Watson's "standard" translation: The fish trap exists because of the fish; once you've gotten the fish, you can forget the trap. The rabbit snare exists because of the rabbit; once you've gotten the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words exist because of meaning; once you've gotten the meaning, you can forget the words. Where can I find a man who has forgotten words so I can have a word with him?" At first sight, this allegory seems to be easy to understand. Just as one uses certain tools for fishing and hunting in order to get what is desired but hard to catch, so too does human communication makes use of words in order to catch certain difficult ideas or meanings. And just as one no longer cares about the hunting tool once they have performed their job, one also no longer cares about linguistic tools once they conveyed a certain meaning or sense. Or in other words, with respect to the object and not to the tool: What matters is getting it and having it in one's hands. Just as what matters in fishing and hunting is getting the fish and the game, what matters with words is getting the idea or the meaning. This does not sound terribly unfamiliar to Western philosophical ears, and today the fishnet allegory is usually interpreted in just this manner. It is said that what is essential for Daoism is the deeper meaning behind the texts or the words of the masters. Just as one may forget the fish trap once the fish is caught, one may also forget the Daoist texts and words once one has understood their true message. In respect to language, the words are consequently unimportant, for all that really counts are the "ideas." Expressed in formal terminology, the Daoist teaching would accordingly be: signifiers are arbitrary and negligible, all that really matters is the signified. Such a reading of the fishnet allegory is similar to Giles's rendering of the butterfly dream story in that it strongly parallels "classical" Old-European philosophy. The concept that words are expressions of mental contents, which are representations of facts, can be traced back to at least Aristotle's De Interpretatione. In order to understand facts, one must accordingly go beyond words to grasp the ideas that stand for the facts. Once one leaves words behind and arrives at the thoughts, one will comprehend the truth. In order to arrive at truth one has to arrive at ideas. Readings of the fishnet allegory that focus on the "getting" of true ideas can be found not only in modern Western studies of Daoist thought, but also within the Chinese tradition. One example is Wang Bi, the above mentioned somewhat "metaphysical" commentator on the Daodejing.I believe, however, that a close look at the text of the fishnet allegory, at Guo Xiang's commentary to it, and at the Zhuangzi and other ancient Daoist texts reveals that early Daoists wanted to say something very different with this parable, for the standard translation and interpretation miss a most decisive pun. The decisive pun in the fishnet allegory is "hidden" in the two Chinese characters that in Watson's translation have been rendered as "[ once you've] gotten the meaning." These two characters are in Chinese de yi, which literally means "to get (de) the meaning." The character for "meaning" can also be translated as "idea," "intention," "desire," or "wish." Thus it can both designate an unspecific mental content (as in "meaning" or "idea") as well as, more specifically, the "wish" or "desire" one has in mind. In the phrase de yi, the word yi is more often understood in the second scence of "desire" or "wish," so that the expression usually means (as in Mathews's Chinese-English Dictionary) "to get one's desires." In this sense it often just means "to be satisfied" (as in the phrase de yi de hen, ‘exceedingly well satisfied", see Mathews's Chinese English Dictionary'`). It is in this very sense that the phrase is used - with a slight grammatical variation - in its only other occurrence in the Zhuangzi. One has to have this ambiguity in mind—that the phrase de yi literally means "to get the meaning" but is usually used in the sense of "to get one's desires" or simply "to be satisfied"—in order to fully understand the point of the fishnet allegory. The philosophical point of the fishnet allegory is, I firmly believe, not at all merely that one is supposed to "forget words" in order to grasp the true meaning or idea of the Dao—as the standard "Aristotelian" interpretation maintains. It is rather, that to "get the meaning" or "idea" of the Dao means "to be satisfied"—and that this satisfaction consists in having nothing in one's mind, in having no specific "meanings" or "ideas." Thus, I will argue, that "to get the meaning" (de yi) in a Daoist sense means, paradoxically, to be perfectly content (de yi) by no longer having any mental contents.' The phrase de yi is used in the fishnet allegory with this double meaning. The allegory is then not about how to get ideas, but about how to get rid of them. The Zhuangzi discusses the problem of "ideas" or meanings quite frequently. The character yi is used more than fifty times in the book, and it is often used in semantic connection with words for "language" or "speech" (yan). Practically every time that the notion of yi ("meaning," "idea") appears in the sense of "the meaning of words" it has a negative connotation attached to it. Nowhere does the Zhuangzi say that it is good or desirable for the Daoist sage to have "ideas," but it often says the exact opposite: that the sage should neither be stuck with words nor with ideas or meanings. So why should the fishnet allegory—and only the fishnet allegory—contradict the general Daoist tenor? A typical statement on words and meanings or ideas (yi) in the Zhuangzi goes as follows (with Guo Xiang's commentary in italics): What can be discussed with words is the coarseness of things. What can be reached with ideas is the refinement of things. That which cannot be discussed with words and that which cannot be investigated and reached with ideas neither belongs to the coarse nor to the refined. Only non presence [wu]! What about the presence [you] of words and ideas? Well, words and ideas are present [you]. And that which words and ideas are about is nonpresence. So one looks for it in the realm of words and ideas, and then one enters the dominion of no-words and no-ideas and has finally arrived. That which is neither coarse nor refined is the Dao. It is, as the Zhuangzi and Guo Xiang make perfectly clear, to be found neither in words, nor "meanings," nor "ideas" (yi). In order to arrive at the Dao, one has to go beyond both words and ideas. Accordingly, the Daoist master Tian Z1 Fang describes the qualities of his teacher in the Zhuangzi as follows: "He made people's ideas disappear." Ideas, as another passage in the Zhuangzi explains, are among the "six evils" that "confound the heart. The Daoist sage, or the zhen ren ("true man"), attempts to discard all the intentions and ideas in his or her mind. The Zhuangzi says: "Even more than a sheep he/she casts off ideas." The Zhuangzi is full of such declarations of the limitations of words and ideas or meanings. Why should the fishnet allegory then declare that the Daoist sage aims at "getting the meaning"? Other early texts also show that Daoist philosophy was not simply about "getting ideas." The expression "No ideas!" (wu yi) appears as a philosophical motto. The Liezi says: "No ideas!—Then the heart will be one." Given this philological and philosophical evidence, what does the fishnet allegory really say? How has it been understood by Daoist readers? One has to go back to the text itself and to Guo Xiang's commentary to answer this question. Guo Xiang comments on the fishnet allegory with only one sentence. He writes: When it comes to two sages having no ideas [wu yi], they will both have nothing to talk about. It is clear that for Guo Xiang the fishnet allegory does not say that the Daoist sage "gets the meaning" (de yi), but rather that he/she will be left with "no ideas"—this is just what he literally says. Guo Xiang obviously read the fishnet allegory in this way: Once a Daoist sage no longer has ideas, then he/she will also have attained the "desired" speechlessness. Thus, when two Daoist sages with empty minds meet, they can hardly start a philosophical conversation. There would simply be nothing to say! 'They could not discuss any "true meanings"! According to the "Aristotelian" interpretation of the fishnet allegory, the true philosopher will have to go beyond words in order to get the meaning." According to Guo Xiang’s Daoist reading of the fishnet allegory, the sage has to discard all ideas in order to realize Daoist silence. With the help of Guo Xiang's commentary a Daoist reading of the fishnet allegory can be reconstructed. One can now understand the final sentence of the text in a somewhat less cryptic manner. In the light of Guo Xiang's interpretation the last sentence of the original can be simply read as: "How could I talk to somebody who has forgotten words?" Such a reading is philologically as plausible as Watson's, but is philosophically in accord with Guo Xiang's commentary. How and why would a Daoist sage, if he/she should meet another one, start arguing? Read in a Daoist way, the fishnet allegory is not about what sages "get," but rather about what they lose. This is perfectly in accord with the Daodejing, which repeatedly states not only that that the Dao and the sage are silent, but also that their strategy is one of gain by loss (see for instance Daodejing, chapter 48). *In the light of the basic Daoist teaching of "no words, no ideas," one can now reread the three parallel statements of the fishnet allegory. The first two of these are perfectly parallel images, both semantically and linguistically. The third sentence though, as is often the case with jokes or humoristic tales, contains a pun and breaks, in an ironic way, with the pattern the reader was made familiar with in the two preceding lines. The last line is, as pointed out above, ambiguous, and it is ambiguous because of the double meaning of the phrase de yi. Let us read the fishnet allegory again from the beginning. Somewhat differently from Watson's translation, the first two sentences have as their main syntactic and semantic topics not fish and rabbits and the question of how to catch them, but rather fish traps and rabbit snares and the issue of how one can no longer be concerned with them. The text explicitly puts the snare and the trap in the first section, not the fish and the rabbit. So let us read the text in accord with its actual structure. The first sentences say in a more literal translation: As to al fish trap: [it is] the means to get hold of fish. [One] gets the fish, and then [one can] forget the fish trap. As to a rabbit snare: [it is] the means to get hold of rabbits. [One] gets the rabbit, and then [one can] forget the rabbit snare. The text obviously focuses more on traps and snares than on fish and rabbits. It tells us that they are instruments for getting something, and that they can only be of no more concern once they have helped us to get what they are made to get. So the text is first of all about instruments and the conditions under which we no longer care or depend on them. In order to be free from these instruments, one has to be in a state in which there is no need for them. When one has caught the fish or rabbit and, implicitly, when one is having them for a meal, one can put the snare and trap aside for a while. Only when you are no longer hungry will you not care about hunting. Let us look now at the third sentence of the fishnet allegory in a similarly literal translation: [As to] words: [they are] the means to get hold of ideas. [One] gets the idea [de yi], and then [one can] forget the words. This is the first possible reading of the line that contains the pun. In parallel to the first two sentences it says as much as: In order to be in a state of no longer caring about words, you must have understood their meaning. Only when you have "digested" the idea that the words "caught," will you no longer be "hungry" for the idea or concerned with the words. Once you've read the book and know the story, you can put it back on the shelf. This reading is somewhat similar to the standard interpretation—but it is quite incomplete, since it misses the crucial pun: de yi does not only mean "to get the idea" but, more commonly, "to get what one desires," or "to be satisfied." Thus the third line of the fishnet allegory also means: [As to] words: [they are] the means to get hold of ideas. [One] gets one's desire [de yi], and then [one can] forget the words. In this reading, the line says that the true condition for no longer caring about words is to get one's desire or to be satisfied. But what is the "desire" of the Daoist sage? What does it mean for him/her to be "satisfied"? As the Zhuangzi frequently states, the "desire" of the sage is to be without desires, namely to be without intentions, wishes, and ideas. For the Daoist sage "to get one's desire" (de yi) means ironically, but exactly, to "have no desire" (wu yi ). The desire has to be eaten up in order to be fulfilled. It's fulfilled once it is gone! This is a basic Daoist philosophical paradox, and it is expressed in the pun of the fishnet allegory. To “get the idea” and "to get the meaning" (de yi) of Daoism is "to get one's desire" or "to be satisfied" (de yi)—but this means for the sage just "to have no ideas" (wu yi)! "Having" the idea has a double sense. It is like "having" a fish or a rabbit, or having a pizza and a beer—in English "having" a pizza and a beer actually means eating up the pizza and drinking up the beer. Once one has a pizza or a beer, one cannot have it any longer. The desire is fulfilled when it has disappeared. And the Daoist desire for ideas only disappears once the idea is "eaten up"—when it is no longer there. Getting the idea of the Dao means to get rid of any idea of it. As the Daodejing put it (chapter 78): Right words are like the reverse. Obviously, the "Aristotelian" reading of the fishnet allegory does not get this idea. In a paradoxical yet Daoist manner the fishnet allegory can be read—in a free rendering that tries to convey the pun by using the word "to have" in the double sense of "possessing" and "eating up"—as follows: A fish trap is the means to get hold of fish. You can only forget about the fish trap once you've had your fish. A rabbit snare is the means to get hold of rabbits. You can only forget about the rabbit snare once you've had your rabbit. Words are the means to get hold of ideas. You can only forget about the words once you've had your ideas. How could I talk to somebody who has forgotten words? When it comes to two sages having no ideas, they will both have nothing to talk about. The fishnet allegory is by no means about how to catch and keep some deep thoughts or ideas. It is, on the contrary, about the method of getting rid of thoughts and ideas in order to arrive at a perfect Daoist silence. It is about how to become permanently satisfied and to completely eliminate the hunger for the next dish of meanings and language. (From Daoism Explained: From the Dream of the Butterfly to the Fishnet Allegory by Hans-Georg Moeller. pp55-61)

Okay, lets look at this (but I will leave dream bliss out of it). The behaviour you just described is common in many of the pop New Age set. I have to deal with all the time ... including an hours long talk yesterday with someone who is a defendant against court case bought by a company I am a director of. he eventually left thanking me and happy although somewhat 'stalled' in the tactical aim of his visit. There is a whole range of 'platitudes' and half baked philosophies that many of these people come up with to try to justify their behaviours with a super-conscious ideology that shallowly masks a mass of actions formed from impulses in the lower nature. But they cant see it. For years I have seen it , years and years. I put on a dozen alternative festivals and did the real organisation and sorting out for it to happen ; I have worked on collecting the money or tickets at the gate, liaising between council health inspectors and required regulations for a hippy food stall !, parking etc etc. I have heard the lot from " Pay to get in ? Man we all own everything anyway." .... 'You are projecting poverty consciousness on me .... are you a capitalist ? No, the food is pure and uncontaminated because I chanted Hare Krishna over it. And now some people with a pop LOA (I am talking about the rich people in the dvd that wanted more jewels and people that want to emulate this behaviour ... and pay in millions of dollars to get it ) Of course this is a human dynamic, it just isnt new agers (and there are some great ones of course ; " Here is my entry fee for me and 4 kids { single dad } ... I know kids are free but its my fee plus a small donation. Now, after I get settled in and camp set up, what work can I do to help get this all happening ?" .... ) ... Its just the way that a supposed higher consciousness and spirituality and 'philosoph' is used to mask this sort of behaviour that gets my In a way ... its a type of unconscious behaviour ... unless its deliberate ... sometimes it is , as I noticed that after some reasonable discussion they will come around ... " Yeah ... that makes sense ... look, I am not actually broke, I will pay the entry fee." " Yeah ... yuo tried to 'pull one over on me then didnt you?" " .... <sheepish grin> " There you have it folks ... the different between a sheep and a goat. And not that some here may not have already detected ... but goats do have a big part of their skull that is numb ! (Note: I dont think Dream bliss is one of these deliberate scammers, he has just been conditioned by some of their beliefs - he appears to have underlying good intentions. I think he has the potential to navigate through it if he perseveres . )

Dream bliss ... you just described a process of the unconscious, selecting an archetype and delivering to the consciousness and awareness as something that should be played out ... even though the person may not be that thing. be who you are, not try to act like the implanted , unconscious archetype that is sending messages to the unconscious . [ It is probably a moot point, as the original idea here ( post #1) was not actually to deny the faculty existed, but that you had thrown it out, by a conscious act of thought or will. ... but I think you are starting to realise that some of your reposes here ... are still coming from that place. Yes, of course they will arise more when we are tired, stressed, 'not in a good space'. That's one of the dynamics ... some practices even invoke and push that state, so things will arise to consciousness, so we can begin to deal with them. Confrontation ( training, dialogue, examination, psycho-analysis, breath work, etc. causes us to draw on our resources and expose or strengthen them - for good or ill. Success is not assured for every person.

Homage to Great Bliss! Mahamudra is knowing that all things are one's own mind. Seeing objects as external is just noetic projection. The whole of "appearance" is as empty as a dream. The mind as such is merely a flow of awareness, without self-nature, moving where it will like the wind. Empty of an identity, it is like space. All phenomena, like space, are the same. That which is termed Mahamudra, Is not a "thing" that can be pointed to. It is the mind's own nature that is Mahamudra It is not something to be perfected or transformed. Thus, to realize this, is to realize that the whole world of appearance is Mahamudra. This is the absolute all-inclusive Dharmakaya Uncontrived and just as it is, the inconceivable Dharmakaya, is itself effortless meditation. Trying to attain something is not meditation. Seeing everything like space, like a magical illusion, Neither meditating nor not meditating, Neither separate nor not separate: Such is the Yogin's realization. All virtuous and evil actions Become liberated through this knowledge. The sinful defilements become the Absolute Gnosis itself; becoming the Yogin's friend, this is a fire consuming the forest of trees. Where then is going or staying? Who then needs to run to a Monastery to meditate? If one does not understand this point, liberation will be but a temporary event. When the true nature is realized, one abides in the unwavering state. Whether or not one is in the state of Integration or not, There is nothing to be corrected by antidote or meditation. Whatever arises is devoid of self-nature. Appearances are auto-liberated into the Sphere of Reality (Dharmadhatu). Conceptual creation is auto-liberated into Absolute Gnosis (Mahajnana). The non-duality of these two is the Dharmakaya. Like the flow of a great river, Whatever occurs is meaningful and true. This is the eternal Buddha state, The Great Bliss, transcending the Worldly Cycle. All phenomena are empty of self-identity, Wherein even the concept of emptiness is eliminated. Free of concepts, clinging not to mental projections, is the Path of all the Enlightened Ones. For those fortunate to connect with this teaching, I have uttered these words of heartfelt instruction. Thus, may all sentient beings become established in Mahamudra. - Maitripa