Beyond the Material Plane

[SeekerOfWisdom]

It works fine as long as it isn't a competition, I have had great progress while talking in small groups cooperatively, going through whole subjects and ideas in short times while covering every avenue and angle, the benefits far out way whatever problems of individuality you might experience, as long as we remember we are all pretty much the same person, brother.

Love the Tao, haven't read Robert Greene.

[Cory Duchesne]

I've got tangled with some difficult people, and the difficulties persist to this day. Entirely my fault. My issues are likely due to the fact that I try to express wisdom with my talent, and they have been correct to see it as ambition.

I find an environment is friendly and cooperative as long as there is nobody in the group trying to achieve something in particular. If you make it known to the people around you that you are striving for a goal, they will quickly shut you down, usually just with withdrawal, deflating comments or creating physical obstructions. Most of us have instincts that are very collective, conformist, rigid and conservative.

Anytime I create these passive aggressive situations, I always blame myself.

There is no greater sin than desire,
No greater curse than discontent,
No greater misfortune than wanting
something for oneself.
Therefore he who knows that enough
is enough will always have enough.

For those overflowing with creative passion, the best strategy is not to view it as desire for oneself, but rather, an overflowing and generous gift to the world. From that premise, be creative in private and wait until you have a product to disperse. Look at your creations not as projects, but as seeds to sow widely without announcement.

Wisdom does not contrive projects and speak of them as forthcoming. There is no project, only a single, open ended activity without beginning or end.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Diebert what you described is different,
"which to my knowing science already admits as far as constructing the picture in your head goes"

You have misunderstood, science has not said anything close to this, science is under the assumption that we interpret light using our eyes which causes us to see, and that we have a brain which causes our consciousness.

That is a wrong assumption :) The brain and the eyes exist only within consciousness.... which is the eternal source of all things.

No, you're just talking about a very simplified notion of what science is doing. There are many scientific disciplines dedicated to understanding how we construct our world view, objects and understandings. And how awareness arises. It's very a very difficult subject but it's not "interpreting light using the eyes". Which is a very unscientific statement anyway, it would be the visual cortex and it would also address the notion of cognition where other brain areas are identified with for playing a role in.

Of course I understand this still supposes the "brain" as object but the alternative is to suppose "mystery causes". Science however creates a theory about brain matter where they can poke in and see what happens. This is not about claiming the brain is the source of all, this is about being able to experiment on cause and effect. The brain also has causes, development, genetics, nervous systems while its workings are just as well closely related to our environment, culture, people and perhaps even other yet unknown causes. Science is open-ended that way. It does not make a statement about a solid "external world". That's just a dumbed down simplification for children. Knocking that model down would become a straw man argument. Then again, you can stop believing in an external world of objects but you cannot stop behaving like you're part of that objective world. The outsider does not see the difference when he studies you sitting behind the keyboard. You are behaving exactly like you would if you would believe in a computer, internet, brain in skull, other people in a forum, etc. Do you understand this point?

Some impacts:...

But what do you imagine being the impact of those experience and beliefs you are describing? I distilled only one from your list: less need to worry. Enlightenment itself seems not specific enough. Not sure why you think "you" would not be affected by losing the body or for example being slowly tortured or why you think "you" as sensual memory would live on for eternity in any meaningful way.

What you seem to be saying is that any good Virtual Reality game console (or Mental Exercise) where we can plug the brain into any type of world or experience could set us free from delusion. Personally I think it would end the notion of "human being"(*) altogether but that's also a solution to the perceived problem of course. Perhaps something different could arise.

(*) interesting book documenting this line of thought is "How we became post human" by N. Katherine Hayles.

[brad walker]

Know your enemy

If you are not one of us, you are one of them.

The Tao Te Ching (combined with Robert Greene) seems to offer some solid social tools for making your way through society, and if you can get a group of men together who can all learn the language and laws of power, then perhaps a support network could be established that allows wisdom and genius to thrive on unprecedented levels.

Western mystics have been doing this since at least the Pythagoreans.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Wisdom does not contrive projects and speak of them as forthcoming. There is no project, only a single, open ended activity without beginning or end.

That's because you are still caught up in the "terms of enlightenment" thinking there is one way and trying to act alongside the "rules" of the sages.

Lao Tzu contrived a big project... it is clear then that an enlightened person, the campaigner of non-action, acts and makes projects and speaks of them as forthcoming.

What he doesn't do is try to hold on to that which he can't.
Wisdom contrives of whatever it wants to in order to bring about awakening in others.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Diebert

Haven't I already pointed out that I am openly disagreeing with those very simple scientific understandings?

I am saying that without eyes you can see clearly < fact

And if I smashed open your skull you would just be seeing somewhere else < belief.

So remember to keep in mind before replying again that I think the brain exists as much as a yellow four armed organ in your bowels exists in a dream, get me?

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Haven't I already pointed out that I am openly disagreeing with those very simple scientific understandings?

I am saying that without eyes you can see clearly < fact

And if I smashed open your skull you would just be seeing somewhere else < belief.

So remember to keep in mind before replying again that I think the brain exists as much as a yellow four armed organ in your bowels exists in a dream, get me?

That's the thing, I don't get the impression you are disagreeing at all with any current scientific understanding about cognitive processes. Neither do I get the impression you would be acting in any way different from someone who believes in the actual existence of brains and a material world shaping this material brain and its senses.

In what way your different perspective on "sense" changes things for you? So far I only get from you "less stressful that way" or it allows you to challenge all rule and law as being contemporary falsehoods you don't have to worry about. What else could it do?

[Cory Duchesne]

Haven't I already pointed out that I am openly disagreeing with those very simple scientific understandings?

I am saying that without eyes you can see clearly < fact

And if I smashed open your skull you would just be seeing somewhere else < belief.

So remember to keep in mind before replying again that I think the brain exists as much as a yellow four armed organ in your bowels exists in a dream, get me?

That's the thing, I don't get the impression you are disagreeing at all with any current scientific understanding about cognitive processes. Neither do I get the impression you would be acting in any way different from someone who believes in the actual existence of brains and a material world shaping this material brain and its senses.

In what way your different perspective on "sense" changes things for you? So far I only get from you "less stressful that way" or it allows you to challenge all rule and law as being contemporary falsehoods you don't have to worry about. What else could it do?

It could prevent him from falling into passive aggressive hostility commonly found on message forums, such as GF.

A joyful connection to the whole of life means that dominance and submission rituals with finite manifestations (e.g., let's show that anonymous blogger whose boss!) would be a waste of time.

Here's something rather scientific to consider: "you cannot antagonize and positively influence at the same time".

[Cory Duchesne]

Wisdom does not contrive projects and speak of them as forthcoming. There is no project, only a single, open ended activity without beginning or end.

That's because you are still caught up in the "terms of enlightenment" thinking there is one way and trying to act alongside the "rules" of the sages.

Lao Tzu contrived a big project... it is clear then that an enlightened person, the campaigner of non-action, acts and makes projects and speaks of them as forthcoming.

I'm surprised you would judge me. You barely know me.

The story goes that Lao Tzu wrote the Tao Te Ching reluctantly, at someone else's request. They asked him to do it, and he did it, but he had no plans to.

A foolish man says what he is going to do, and doesn't do it.
A wiser man says what he is going to do, and does it.
The wisest man does what he does and says nothing.

"Do not pursue fame; do not scheme; do not be an undertaker of projects; do not be a proprietor of wisdom. Embody to the fullest what has no end and wander where there is no trail. Hold on to all that you have received from Heaven but do not think you have gotten anything. Be empty, that is all.

The Perfect Man uses his mind like a mirror - going after nothing, welcoming nothing, responding but not storing. In this way, he can attain victory over things and not hurt himself."

- Chaung Tzu

[brad walker]

Here's something rather scientific to consider: "you cannot antagonize and positively influence at the same time".

Can you provide something peer-reviewed on this subject?

Counterexample: What about someone who is in denial of their antagonizable nature? Isn't it necessary to unleash the demon and reveal it to them so they can exorcise it?

[Diebert van Rhijn]

A joyful connection to the whole of life means that dominance and submission rituals with finite manifestations (e.g., let's show that anonymous blogger whose boss!) would be a waste of time.

And yet it's unavoidable as people relate with each other through these and other rituals. This means one will still dominate and yield when the situation is there. But now it will be done knowingly and joyfully instead.

[Cory Duchesne]

Antagonizing people through subtle forms of aggression would appear avoidable in degrees. Better to accidentally harm someone through the uprising of your own spirit than to behave like a wrestler.

Reward bitterness with care.
See simplicity in the complicated.

It's the difference between two insecure people arguing, and two people in a creative, collaborative dialogue. The later can occur only when each man has his own centre. Arguments appear to ensue (and become prolonged) due to men being unable to relate to anything other than the finitude of worldly conflict (success). An analogy is a pair of wrestlers, constantly dwelling on the previous defeat or victory, preparing to fight the same person the next year.

The best athletes usually grow bored of their sport and find ways to challenge themselves that go beyond worldly rivalries. They find all kinds of private tricks and practical fantasies to soak themselves in, as these transport them away from gross entanglements.

Hey Brad Walker,

I have no studies off hand, but I do have 15 years experience dealing with people. My experience, based on trial and error, says that it's best to reward your enemies with care. If someone has deviated so far from the truth that you have to continuously correct them, it's best that you not only avoid them, but avoid them in such a way that they don't even realize they are being avoided.

Occasionally nurture them with kindness, and reserve your Truth talk with those who are at a level compatible with yours.

However, that's not to say warriors cannot take joy in conflict and make it the crux of their spirituality. I suppose the antagonistic nature of the genius forum isn't about nurturing the person, but is more like a fire that ensures all their softness is burnt away. Only then can they even begin to make a bid for greatness. The purpose is not to directly help, but to ensure that they are stripped of superfluities before even beginning.

If that's the purpose of your life, then by all means, be aggressive. Even fire serves the good.

[Cory Duchesne]

Here is a good social analysis of rivalry, conflict and aggression

Bird and Magic | A courtship of Rivals (Part 1)

Bird and Magic | A courtship of Rivals (Part 2)

Bird and Magic | A courtship of Rivals (Part 3)

[brad walker]

Antagonizing people through subtle forms of aggression would appear avoidable in degrees. Better to accidentally harm someone through the uprising of your own spirit than to behave like a wrestler.

Better to be a true wrestler than an uptight phony wiseman, like you. Subtlety can be a kindness. Be careful for what you wish for.

It's the difference between two insecure people arguing, and two people in a creative, collaborative dialogue. The later can occur only when each man has his own centre. Arguments appear to ensue (and become prolonged) due to men being unable to relate to anything other than the finitude of worldly conflict (success). An analogy is a pair of wrestlers, constantly dwelling on the previous defeat or victory, preparing to fight the same person the next year.

The best athletes usually grow bored of their sport and find ways to challenge themselves that go beyond worldly rivalries. They find all kinds of private tricks and practical fantasies to soak themselves in, as these transport them away from gross entanglements.

One of these days I'll find the time or inspiration to parody your ridiculous lectures. Your center is your responsibility. If you need time to find it take it. Whatever you post I will find a way to reflect or undermine it, so approach cautiously or concede.

I have no studies off hand, but I do have 15 years experience dealing with people. My experience, based on trial and error, says that it's best to reward your enemies with care.

You're my friend, not my enemy. "You" are my enemy, however. I find it better to rip off the bandage in one quick swipe opposed to one long grueling ordeal. But sometimes the patient rebels and a spiritual wedgie is necessary.

If someone has deviated so far from the truth that you have to continuously correct them, it's best that you not only avoid them, but avoid them in such a way that they don't even realize they are being avoided.

Occasionally nurture them with kindness, and reserve your Truth talk with those who are at a level compatible with yours.

Give yourself some credit, Cory. You don't always say stupid shit. I haven't bothered you since the last time you were being ridiculous, nearly a month ago. When the student acts foolish they are ready for the master to appear and teach. If you don't want a lesson then stop haunting this place. Or elevate yourself and stop being low-hanging fruit.

However, that's not to say warriors cannot take joy in conflict and make it the crux of their spirituality.

Overcoming illusion requires a warrior's spirit, transient or persistent. What are you doing that you call spirituality?

I suppose the antagonistic nature of the genius forum isn't about nurturing the person, but is more like a fire that ensures all their softness is burnt away. Only then can they even begin to make a bid for greatness.

Six years and 2317 posts--I hope it finally pays off for you somehow.

The purpose is not to directly help, but to ensure that they are stripped of superfluities before even beginning.

You should be grateful.

If that's the purpose of your life, then by all means, be aggressive.

Anyone who isn't selectively aggressive is a pawn.

Even fire serves the good.

Being asked where in Greece he saw good men, Diogenes replied, "'Good men nowhere, but good boys at Sparta." Feel free to add that to your spiritual scrapbook.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

-Brad

hahahahha, just helping out.


-Cory

"A wise man does not contrive of future projects and speak of them as forthcoming."
"There is no project, only a single, open ended activity without beginning or end"

Statement is still wrong. Plus the Tao Te Ching was a project that had a beginning, and an end.

"non-action"

actually means practice non-being , then take a lot of action once you know what to do, seeing as that's what all of the sages did, taught through example, "when the right action arises".

"Those who speak don't know.
Those who know don't speak."

Actually means, from Lao Tzu "I speak a lot, to a lot of people, and teach them, while taking action, while talking about not speaking and non-action."

The point I'm trying to make here is, don't take everything so literally, there are messages hidden in the words, they aren't clear-cut rules like you might think.

I find that most people on here are simply trying to imitate the ancient masters in their speech, half the time without understanding what they were even going on about.

They are caught in a mix of imitating the ancient masters (Without having a clue what their messages were about) but still sheepishly following the modern day scientific beliefs that they have no clue themselves about, and still don't understand that those scientific beliefs are completely contradictory to the teachings of the Sages. For example, Lao Tzu would have regarded evolution as bullshit and said it was only our limited understanding of one of the manifestations through which the Tao was acting to produce life, he would have been right :) (I might add that the scientific understandings are mostly fundamentally wrong and can only be used for manipulation of reality, not for understanding it, as the only real understanding comes from recognizing that all things are an expression of the higher source, including these words)

Diebert

Yes I'm not disagreeing with any current scientific understanding about cognitive processes am I....

Scientific understanding about cognitive process: you have a brain.
my understanding about cognitive process: you don't have a brain.

Seeing a contradiction yet?

( No real opposition intended here, it's a result of boredom and endless forum discussion)

What you are asking for is, "how does this philosophy effect my practical life", but this isn't relevant to the philosophy itself.... it's a change of perspective, like waking up in a dream and knowing its a dream, I don't look at life the same way and my priorities have changed, they are the only major differences.

[Cory Duchesne]

Statement is still wrong. Plus the Tao Te Ching was a project that had a beginning, and an end.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I see no beginning or end to the Tao Te Ching. The meaning conveyed is bottomless, endless.

Best wishes.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

hahahahah

It starts at chapter 1, ends at chapter 81, and it was a project, Lao Tzu probably spent hours worrying about what to put in or if it sounded right, I bet that fucks with your golden image of the perfect Sages :p They were just children like me or you.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Btw Cory there is no real opposition going on in my mind, I understand that we are all pretty much the same person thinking pretty much the same things, I'm just bored and teasing really haha.

[Cory Duchesne]

Give yourself some credit, Cory. You don't always say stupid shit. I haven't bothered you since the last time you were being ridiculous, nearly a month ago. When the student acts foolish they are ready for the master to appear and teach. If you don't want a lesson then stop haunting this place. Or elevate yourself and stop being low-hanging fruit.

Overcoming illusion requires a warrior's spirit, transient or persistent. What are you doing that you call spirituality?

Think of spiritual activity as heterogeneous.

Now think of the warrior spirit as one half of that heterogeneous whole. Since I am a graduated warrior (and will fight when it suits my purposes), I generally do the other half.

I am hetero in nature, not just homo.

"Often when he was begging, Diogenes would be spat on by the people who passed him. Diogenes would ignore this and simply wipe his face with his sleeve. When ridiculed for his passive behaviour, Diogenes said, "Since men endure being wetted by the sea in order to net a mere herring, should I not endure being sprinkled to net my dinner?"

[brad walker]

If that's the purpose of your life, then by all means, be aggressive.

Anyone who isn't selectively aggressive is a pawn.

Think of spiritual activity as heterogeneous.

Now think of the warrior spirit as one half of that heterogeneous whole. Since I am a graduated warrior (and will fight when it suits my purposes), I generally do the other half.

Fight yourself more so others can't.

Regarding your misrepresentation of me I've been calmly informative with you thrice: 1, 2 and 3.

[Cory Duchesne]

If that's the purpose of your life, then by all means, be aggressive.

Anyone who isn't selectively aggressive is a pawn.

Think of spiritual activity as heterogeneous.

Now think of the warrior spirit as one half of that heterogeneous whole. Since I am a graduated warrior (and will fight when it suits my purposes), I generally do the other half.

Fight yourself more so others can't.

You are only fighting with your own shadow.

[brad walker]

You are only fighting with your own shadow.

I fight humanity's shadow. You just happened to be a part of it.

[Cory Duchesne]

You are only fighting with your own shadow.

I fight humanity's shadow. You just happened to be a part of it.

To attack a shadow (in this case your own) with aggression will certainly be effective at burning your own flesh away, or perhaps your motions are that of one digging his own grave for burial? I can admire that.

Hence it is said:
The bright path seems dim;
Going forward seems like retreat;
The easy way seems hard;
The highest Virtue seems empty;
Great purity seems sullied;
A wealth of Virtue seems inadequate;
The strength of Virtue seems frail;
Real Virtue seems unreal;
The perfect square has no corners;
Great talents ripen late;
The highest notes are hard to hear;
The greatest form has no shape;
The Tao is hidden and without name.
The Tao alone nourishes and brings
everything to fulfillment.

I have to run. I don't plan on returning here, it's been a rewarding experience to learn from the people on this forum over the years, and I am indeed grateful for the resources offered by David Quinn and Kevin Solway (to a lesser extent Dan Rowden).

While Kevin provided me with some incredibly dry, ghost-like and effective ways of thinking earlier on (it was never aggression that effectively facilitated profound transmission), it was David Quinn who carried the forum with his prominent talent for psychology, comedy and orchestrating absurd social dynamics.

In jest, I once compared DQ to Worf from Star Trek. (worf is always wrong)

Of course, in matters of psychology, it is never so cut and dry. With DQ's latest collection of inspired writings, I happily promote him to a hybrid between Picard and Q.

Q being the ID, and Picard the Super Ego?

Either way, my request is for Quinn to continue his path from his designated position in the noosphere and I will take careful note and consideration of his expressions from the infinite resignation.

Solway remains too far away for me to even estimate. I might have to go by the word of Dan and David that he's fell flaccid by the wayside, but I am in no position to really say.

Farewell to you all, my brothers in arms.

These mist covered mountains
Are a home now for me
But my home is the lowlands
And always will be
Some day you'll return to me
Your valleys and your farms
And you'll no longer burn
To be brothers in arms

[brad walker]

To attack a shadow (in this case your own) with aggression will certainly be effective at burning your own flesh away, or perhaps your motions are that of one digging his own grave for burial? I can admire that.

I'm not suprised you would judge me. But you barely know me.*

A bunch of crap

Good luck with your phony teacher act, sychophant.

I fight humanity's shadow. You just happen to be a part of it.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Brad

Cory may be a phony teacher, or at least is raising himself up as all egotistical people do, myself included, but he is really just one of us who have no clue how to best spend our time or use our knowledge.... you are on here because you are bored and need to spend your time just like I am.. I'm looking for some kind of solution to this problem of purposelessness with no luck haha