Because it has become associated with the superstition surrounding this process. I wouldn't say it's entirely useless, but it limits what one might convey, what one might say about it.There is a form of communication beyond the spoken word, beyond the symbol. Why is telepathy a useless term to use as a means to describe this process?
The Flaws of Sigmund Freud
I like the Prostitute his post.
Generally,to go around with the word telepathy,there may not be a direct contact of your senses with the situation.
but the Prostitute takes examples from the phenomenal world and tells about things we recognize ,and does not loose himself in the gibberish of Knowledge,and guesses his Ideas.
A small victory for the geocentricist.
Something I appreciate.
Generally,to go around with the word telepathy,there may not be a direct contact of your senses with the situation.
but the Prostitute takes examples from the phenomenal world and tells about things we recognize ,and does not loose himself in the gibberish of Knowledge,and guesses his Ideas.
A small victory for the geocentricist.
Something I appreciate.
first:if our in-breathings are of purity,then our out-breathings are not foul.suergaz wrote:Because it has become associated with the superstition surrounding this process. I wouldn't say it's entirely useless, but it limits what one might convey, what one might say about it.There is a form of communication beyond the spoken word, beyond the symbol. Why is telepathy a useless term to use as a means to describe this process?
remember that what we as humans absorb - psychically or bodily - forms its own excretion.
second:we cannot fathom more than the believable ,but it does not preclude our feeling more.
third:whence we take a grasp of wisdom,it is beyond the articulation of word-flood,but may express itself in some resounding word-graph to cipher a mystic meaning.
example:when I tried to get a 'bigger catch' of the meaning essence,it ended up like this:
I saw a virtual world with water and everywhere out of the water raised vulcanoes.
the magma came from the deep depths under the see (representative as the subconscious and unconscious) and raised up above the water to the conscious.The red threath of the magma can be seen as the 'responsible essence' that awakens in us.the lava(hardened magma when it reaches surface) we see is the 'realised essence' that we have gathered from our('real' world) experiences of the phenomenal world.
many vulcanoes,and each are representative as a part of the realisation for the whole of our multiple-related state of being.
one can also further develop such maps,but it is better to invent your own.
extra:any part of the whole derives its ethos from the whole.
the whole virtual world that I presented is inwardly connected with each other,it is the body of Self,which we can never realise.
4:intermingle 1,2 and 3
- Ryan Rudolph
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
- Location: British Columbia, Canada
Allow me to translate your poetic expressions into mediocre CP language:
Bert wrote:
Eg:// I eat a chocolate bar, and my teeth rot.
Or:// I eat a bowl of organic oats, and my body remains in a state of happy neutrality.
------------------------------------------------------------
Eg://. I attack Bert emotionally calling him a cryptic bastard, and my mind is occupied with these thoughts. In other words, emptiness is momentarily lost because of childish behavior.
Or:// I make an objective comment, and my mind remains in a state of emptiness.
------------------------------------------------------------
Morever you seem to be suggesting that when you get caught between yin and yang, that emptiness is lost. In other words if I become emotional over something then ‘thoughts’ are the consequence which actually prevent emptiness; Keeping the mind clouded.
This word excretion simply implies the ‘thoughts’ that occur in consciousness as a result of foolish action.
Bert wrote:
Bert wrote:
Suergaz wrote:
It seems to me that deluded people have selves and when one is in a state of emptiness then there is nothing there at all. So there is no self to realize because nothing inherently exists including the self. Self implies an experiencer, but when one is alligned with the absolute truth the experiencer dies.
if the experiencer dies then there was no self there to begin with, the self was an illusion.
Bert wrote:
Are you saying that what we consume affects us either negatively or neutrally depending on the quality of what is consumed?first:if our in-breathings are of purity,then our out-breathings are not foul. remember that what we as humans absorb - psychically or bodily - forms its own excretion.
Eg:// I eat a chocolate bar, and my teeth rot.
Or:// I eat a bowl of organic oats, and my body remains in a state of happy neutrality.
------------------------------------------------------------
Eg://. I attack Bert emotionally calling him a cryptic bastard, and my mind is occupied with these thoughts. In other words, emptiness is momentarily lost because of childish behavior.
Or:// I make an objective comment, and my mind remains in a state of emptiness.
------------------------------------------------------------
Morever you seem to be suggesting that when you get caught between yin and yang, that emptiness is lost. In other words if I become emotional over something then ‘thoughts’ are the consequence which actually prevent emptiness; Keeping the mind clouded.
This word excretion simply implies the ‘thoughts’ that occur in consciousness as a result of foolish action.
Bert wrote:
Are you suggesting that the body/mind can become so sensitive that our faith is not based on knowledge/belief, but rather on the depths of inexpressible emptiness?second:we cannot fathom more than the believable ,but it does not preclude our feeling more.
Bert wrote:
Interesting metaphor.example:when I tried to get a 'bigger catch' of the meaning essence,it ended up like this:
I saw a virtual world with water and everywhere out of the water raised vulcanoes.
the magma came from the deep depths under the see (representative as the subconscious and unconscious) and raised up above the water to the conscious.The red threath of the magma can be seen as the 'responsible essence' that awakens in us.the lava(hardened magma when it reaches surface) we see is the 'realised essence' that we have gathered from our('real' world) experiences of the phenomenal world.
many vulcanoes,and each are representative as a part of the realisation for the whole of our multiple-related state of being.
Suergaz wrote:
This is something I have encountered before, Some philosophers suggest that there is no self to realize and others suggest that there is a self to realize.the imagery you presented is self only in part. Self may be realized.
It seems to me that deluded people have selves and when one is in a state of emptiness then there is nothing there at all. So there is no self to realize because nothing inherently exists including the self. Self implies an experiencer, but when one is alligned with the absolute truth the experiencer dies.
if the experiencer dies then there was no self there to begin with, the self was an illusion.
yes,we have never seen self,I mean.suergaz wrote:The imagery you presented is self only in part. Self may be realized.extra:any part of the whole derives its ethos from the whole.
the whole virtual world that I presented is inwardly connected with each other,it is the body of Self,which we can never realise.
stupid mistake of me.
no time to answer more.
@cosmic prostitute:
1st:1)I do not suggest that one should look for pure in-breathings.just realise what I've said,and you're close I think.
2)having comprehended it,one can 'play' with it.you can indrawn lots of foulness and see how your exhalations are.It tells something about your metabolism.
I talk a lot in the abstract and give nuances.This does not preclude poetry.
2nd:
the fathoming of the believable is our level of ability.but we can feel that there is more going on than we are able to let sound or articulate.
no man has seen self at any time.
we are what we believe and what it implies by a process of time in the conception:creation is caused by this bondage to formula.
who can transgress the law of conception?
to much to say about belief...
1st:1)I do not suggest that one should look for pure in-breathings.just realise what I've said,and you're close I think.
2)having comprehended it,one can 'play' with it.you can indrawn lots of foulness and see how your exhalations are.It tells something about your metabolism.
I talk a lot in the abstract and give nuances.This does not preclude poetry.
2nd:
mmm,not exactly.Quote:
second:we cannot fathom more than the believable ,but it does not preclude our feeling more.
Are you suggesting that the body/mind can become so sensitive that our faith is not based on knowledge/belief, but rather on the depths of inexpressible emptiness?
the fathoming of the believable is our level of ability.but we can feel that there is more going on than we are able to let sound or articulate.
Self is the negation of completeness as reality.Quote:
the imagery you presented is self only in part. Self may be realized.
This is something I have encountered before, Some philosophers suggest that there is no self to realize and others suggest that there is a self to realize.
It seems to me that deluded people have selves and when one is in a state of emptiness then there is nothing there at all. So there is no self to realize because nothing inherently exists including the self. Self implies an experiencer, but when one is alligned with the absolute truth the experiencer dies.
if the experiencer dies then there was no self there to begin with, the self was an illusion.
no man has seen self at any time.
we are what we believe and what it implies by a process of time in the conception:creation is caused by this bondage to formula.
who can transgress the law of conception?
to much to say about belief...
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
zag:
I think we may have had different fathers.
A Christian is one who is of (the) "Christ."
To be "of" something is not the same as following it: which happens to be what most "Christians" think.
Nor do I see that its possible for anyone to "follow" themselves.
Do you find yourself running around in circles?
I think we may have had different fathers.
The title is not irrelevant.Leyla, the title 'Christ' is really irrelevant. He who had it, Jesus, followed himself before any other. His followers ultimately could not follow him.
A Christian is one who is of (the) "Christ."
To be "of" something is not the same as following it: which happens to be what most "Christians" think.
Nor do I see that its possible for anyone to "follow" themselves.
Do you find yourself running around in circles?
Leyla:
Bert:
I was never christened. What is it to be 'of' the christ? You follow yourself whenever you lead yourself to something, I'm sure you know the expression is not to be taken literally. I like to run, but not in circles.
A Christian is one who is of (the) "Christ."
To be "of" something is not the same as following it: which happens to be what most "Christians" think.
Nor do I see that its possible for anyone to "follow" themselves.
Do you find yourself running around in circles?
Bert:
:DSelf is the negation of completeness as reality.
no man has seen self at any time.
we are what we believe and what it implies by a process of time in the conception:creation is caused by this bondage to formula.
who can transgress the law of conception?
to much to say about belief...
The cosmic prostitute:
Everyone has self. When one is in a 'state of emptiness', whatever that may mean, one is there nonetheless.It seems to me that deluded people have selves and when one is in a state of emptiness then there is nothing there at all.
Everything inherently exists, which does not mean a thing may exist in and of itself, unless this 'thing' be everything, ie. the universe.So there is no self to realize because nothing inherently exists including the self.
Self is an experiencer. a commander, a realization.Self implies an experiencer, but when one is alligned with the absolute truth the experiencer dies.
Not in an eternity, and an eternity is the inherency we happen to have inherited.if the experiencer dies then there was no self there to begin with, the self was an illusion.
- Ryan Rudolph
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
- Location: British Columbia, Canada
suergaz wrote:
So the commander is an illusion, along with the self, and that is the realization.
If you observe a palm tree flowing in the wind, there is no commander there. It just moves along with nature’s rhythms. Nature is in control, the commander is defeated by the wrath of Nature's law.
But if there is no choice, then there is nothing to command, the commanding is done for you, one just has to live according to this law. Moreover there is no commander because all commanding is ultimately caused anyhow.Self is an experiencer. a commander, a realization.
So the commander is an illusion, along with the self, and that is the realization.
If you observe a palm tree flowing in the wind, there is no commander there. It just moves along with nature’s rhythms. Nature is in control, the commander is defeated by the wrath of Nature's law.
There is choice.But if there is no choice, then there is nothing to command, the commanding is done for you, one just has to live according to this law.
That commanding is caused does not make it non-existent.Moreover there is no commander because all commanding is ultimately caused anyhow.
Nothing is an illusion.So the commander is an illusion, along with the self, and that is the realization.
Nature is inexorable.If you observe a palm tree flowing in the wind, there is no commander there. It just moves along with nature’s rhythms. Nature is in control, the commander is defeated by the wrath of Nature's law.
Wrath is of consciousness, nature is not conscious.
- Ryan Rudolph
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
- Location: British Columbia, Canada
Suergaz wrote:
Suergaz wrote:
Suergaz wrote:
Perhaps you are saying that when someone is wise that the commander becomes increasingly refined/minimal/wise/non-existent.
However a commander implies that you have some control over your life, which is quite debatable. A commander implies free will does it not?
Suergaz wrote:
Are you sure nature is not conscious? How do you know? What evidence do you have that nature is not conscious?nature is not conscious.
Suergaz wrote:
Incredibly deluded people don’t exist. There is nothing there. There is a girl I’m forced to work with from university and she has the mind of a chickadee bird. The girl is one big illusion, there is nothing there,but flesh.Nothing is an illusion.
Suergaz wrote:
There is commanding, but the commander is an illusion. My father is an example of someone who has a strong commander within. He drinks, gambles, is addicted to television, attached to my mother and all the rest of it. He believes there is a commander who is free to choose, but he is a fool.That commanding is caused does not make it non-existent.
Perhaps you are saying that when someone is wise that the commander becomes increasingly refined/minimal/wise/non-existent.
However a commander implies that you have some control over your life, which is quite debatable. A commander implies free will does it not?
Suergaz wrote:
What are you free to choose? Very little. Your life up to this point has not been based on personal choices by you.There is choice.
cosmic prostitute:
Not entirely, no, but personal choice exists, no matter how impersonal its origins.
The universe, nature, is not (completely)conscious of itself. It is infinite.Are you sure nature is not conscious? How do you know? What evidence do you have that nature is not conscious?
Incredibly deluded people exist. Flesh is no illusion.Incredibly deluded people don’t exist. There is nothing there. There is a girl I’m forced to work with from university and she has the mind of a chickadee bird. The girl is one big illusion, there is nothing there,but flesh.
How, if there is commanding?There is commanding, but the commander is an illusion.
I said what I said.Perhaps you are saying that when someone is wise that the commander becomes increasingly refined/minimal/wise/non-existent.
A commander implies will.However a commander implies that you have some control over your life, which is quite debatable. A commander implies free will does it not?
Very little is not nothing at all.What are you free to choose? Very little.
Your life up to this point has not been based on personal choices by you.
Not entirely, no, but personal choice exists, no matter how impersonal its origins.
Free Will
Man, what is the big deal with free will?cosmic_prostitute wrote:However a commander implies that you have some control over your life, which is quite debatable. A commander implies free will does it not?
The way I see it, free will has to do with decision making. When you make a decision, ideally you take into account everything that you know that is relevant to the decision you make. In that way you make the best decision possible for you at that time.
So, under free will, I could, if I want to, throw out that decision and do something else instead. In other words, I can ignore everything I know and make a bad decision. I can go ahead and order pistacchio ice cream, even though I know I don't like it.
I just don't see what free will gets you, other than the ability to make bad decisions, and frankly, that's not really so great.
- Ryan Rudolph
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
- Location: British Columbia, Canada
Dhodges wrote:
Suergaz wrote:
Root meanings:
1. military officer: an officer commanding a military unit
2. naval or Coast Guard rank: an officer in the U.S., Canadian, or British navies or the U.S. Coast Guard of a rank above lieutenant commander.
3. police officer in charge: a police officer who leads a shift, precinct, or unit.
4. member with high rank: a high-ranking member of a knightly and fraternal order
Two words for you Suergaz: Come on….(sarcastic)
Agreed. It appears the more wise one becomes, the greater conviction one has that there is only one way to live.I just don't see what free will gets you, other than the ability to make bad decisions, and frankly, that's not really so great.
Suergaz wrote:
I see what you’re getting at, but the will of the wise person operates much differently than the will of a deluded person. My major beef is that commander is such a bad decision as a word, it sounds incredibly shoddy.A commander implies will.
Root meanings:
1. military officer: an officer commanding a military unit
2. naval or Coast Guard rank: an officer in the U.S., Canadian, or British navies or the U.S. Coast Guard of a rank above lieutenant commander.
3. police officer in charge: a police officer who leads a shift, precinct, or unit.
4. member with high rank: a high-ranking member of a knightly and fraternal order
Two words for you Suergaz: Come on….(sarcastic)
cosmic prostitute
In actuality, the wiser one becomes, the greater understanding one has that there is an infinite number of ways to live.It appears the more wise one becomes, the greater conviction one has that there is only one way to live.
The root meaning? One who commands. I could have said creator, ruler, etc. Three words for you Cos: Eat more beef.My major beef is that commander is such a bad decision as a word, it sounds incredibly shoddy.
Root meanings:
1. military officer: an officer commanding a military unit
2. naval or Coast Guard rank: an officer in the U.S., Canadian, or British navies or the U.S. Coast Guard of a rank above lieutenant commander.
3. police officer in charge: a police officer who leads a shift, precinct, or unit.
4. member with high rank: a high-ranking member of a knightly and fraternal order
Two words for you Suergaz: Come on….(sarcastic)
- Ryan Rudolph
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
- Location: British Columbia, Canada
Suergaz wrote:
Eg:// one can either eat a slab of beef, which originates from a cow that has been grain-fed for years or you can simply eat the grain yourself. It’s a no brainer.
Eat as low in the food chain as possible. Meat is rather feminine if you ask me. It slows down the metabolism, and is only consumed to derive self-gratification.
I don’t know about these words your using suergaz, commander, beef, ruler, creator, self as an experiencer. You sound like quite the dude to me.
“And there’s only one thing worse than a dude, a dude who thinks he isn’t a dude.â€
Cosmic Prostitute
Jason wrote:
Like Dhodges has pointed out, free will is nonsense. The new age flakeys are the first ones to enthusiastically preach the good news that “there are an infinite number of ways to live ones life, anything and everything is possible.†What rot!
The human body has tremendous restrictions and limitations, not to mention the environment where one is born and one intellectual disposition dictates how ones entire life will unfold. They make it sound like I could just dive off a cliff and fly if I wanted to; I think they’ve been watching too many disney movies.
Sorry bud, no can do. I don’t eat meat these days, and not because the animals make me feel all warm and fuzzy. If one is a true minimalist philosopher one sees how inefficient it is to eat meat.Eat more beef.
Eg:// one can either eat a slab of beef, which originates from a cow that has been grain-fed for years or you can simply eat the grain yourself. It’s a no brainer.
Eat as low in the food chain as possible. Meat is rather feminine if you ask me. It slows down the metabolism, and is only consumed to derive self-gratification.
I don’t know about these words your using suergaz, commander, beef, ruler, creator, self as an experiencer. You sound like quite the dude to me.
“And there’s only one thing worse than a dude, a dude who thinks he isn’t a dude.â€
Cosmic Prostitute
Jason wrote:
Agreed. Of course because you and I come from different environments with slightly different frictions, our lives will not be the same, but fundamentally there is only one way for each person to live their life.On the contrary, in actuality there is only one way you can live your life: exactly the way you live it.
Like Dhodges has pointed out, free will is nonsense. The new age flakeys are the first ones to enthusiastically preach the good news that “there are an infinite number of ways to live ones life, anything and everything is possible.†What rot!
The human body has tremendous restrictions and limitations, not to mention the environment where one is born and one intellectual disposition dictates how ones entire life will unfold. They make it sound like I could just dive off a cliff and fly if I wanted to; I think they’ve been watching too many disney movies.
Last edited by Ryan Rudolph on Sat May 20, 2006 4:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
Is that a monkey flying out of my ass?
But you can! You just have to believe in yourself!cosmic_prostitute wrote: They make it sound like I could just dive off a cliff and fly if I wanted to; I think they’ve been watching too many disney movies.
Sorry.
- Ryan Rudolph
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
- Location: British Columbia, Canada
ya know what!? Dhodges is right! We just need to believe Suergaz.
Come brother take my hand and I’ll show you a whole new world.
We’ll go on infinite adventures together….
Anything and everything is possible.
Join me at this link:
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/lyrics/aladdinworld.htm
Come brother take my hand and I’ll show you a whole new world.
We’ll go on infinite adventures together….
Anything and everything is possible.
Join me at this link:
http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/lyrics/aladdinworld.htm
Positive Thinking
I was thinking of the song Anything, which is track 14 here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/hardnphirm
It's just a sample, so they cut it off before the punchline.
http://cdbaby.com/cd/hardnphirm
It's just a sample, so they cut it off before the punchline.
- Ryan Rudolph
- Posts: 2490
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:32 am
- Location: British Columbia, Canada
The song “anything†reminds me of compulsive pep talks I used to hear from my grade three teacher Mrs Tordan. She would constantly tell me as a child that I could do anything and be anything if I believed in myself.
Looking back, the woman was a cross between Mary Poppins, Puff the Magic Dragon and one of the Care Bears.
Very sad. She was a nice woman, but just not the type of woman that should be allowed within a 10 mile radius of a child.
Looking back, the woman was a cross between Mary Poppins, Puff the Magic Dragon and one of the Care Bears.
Very sad. She was a nice woman, but just not the type of woman that should be allowed within a 10 mile radius of a child.