|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 1, 2023 17:18:13 GMT -5
linkHere's Bashar talking about the 'perfected state' Gopal....(2 minutes) The information (and the guidance) from Christ, Seth, Bashar, Abraham, and many-many others, was / is distorted by their respective channels. Although those non-physical entities describe the same reality, the channeled information is significantly different because of the distortions caused by the beliefs of each channel. So, it isn't that any of Christ, Seth, Bashar, Abraham, ... is better than another, but that the channel is more or less able to minimize the distortions it introduces. When somebody makes tons of money from channeling (as some gurus do too), there is a reasonable suspicion of catering to the needs of the business, and of consciously and unconsciously distorting the channeled material. Further, whoever is exposed to the channeled information adds their own distortions caused by their own beliefs. That's why on one hand, it is better for everybody to learn to directly access their inner-source of knowledge and guidance, and use other channels' work only for pointers and hypotheses that are likely to be distorted. Everybody can do it. On the other hand, we have to keep in mind that we deal with symbolic information, and that our conscious and unconscious beliefs distort it. We can't fully believe our experience, ever! This particular Bashar video, in my view, is a complete fabrication. But, I just state it, with no intention to convince anybody. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 1, 2023 21:55:18 GMT -5
linkHere's Bashar talking about the 'perfected state' Gopal....(2 minutes) The information (and the guidance) from Christ, Seth, Bashar, Abraham, and many-many others, was / is distorted by their respective channels. Although those non-physical entities describe the same reality, the channeled information is significantly different because of the distortions caused by the beliefs of each channel. So, it isn't that any of Christ, Seth, Bashar, Abraham, ... is better than another, but that the channel is more or less able to minimize the distortions it introduces. When somebody makes tons of money from channeling (as some gurus do too), there is a reasonable suspicion of catering to the needs of the business, and of consciously and unconsciously distorting the channeled material. Further, whoever is exposed to the channeled information adds their own distortions caused by their own beliefs. That's why on one hand, it is better for everybody to learn to directly access their inner-source of knowledge and guidance, and use other channels' work only for pointers and hypotheses that are likely to be distorted. Everybody can do it. On the other hand, we have to keep in mind that we deal with symbolic information, and that our conscious and unconscious beliefs distort it. We can't fully believe our experience, ever! This particular Bashar video, in my view, is a complete fabrication. But, I just state it, with no intention to convince anybody. Quick search: Bashar isn't a non-physical entity, as Christ, Seth, Abraham are. This explains the video. It is like channeling a living guru. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 1, 2023 23:05:19 GMT -5
Oh not us, we're unlike you. Our community is awesome, without flaw no less, and this is very, very desirable to you, so I'll tell you to be yourself and flow as if I have an answer.
This is where we we become braindead dolts standing mouth agape in the pretence that having heard the great master we are all the wiser, and the contradiction in this is the discourse is crude and without the nuance of a complete ontology.
In the Buddhis philosophy they categorised 3 parts of the ontology:
1) you hear the teaching, know what the words are saying, andgive it the benefit of the doubt (Bashar level).
2) You think it through, employ some critical analysis, employ reason, identify the contradictions that make no sense, and join the dots so that the words take on an overall coherent meaning.
3) Having a sound intellectual frame to guide you, actually investigate it, examine it in yourself and glean the insight into the way in which it true for you.
I see the same thing everywhere, in music, in physiology and nutrition, in you-tube popularity... I can tell that people just aren't seeing it. How many times have I hear people claim thet Kanye is a genius? How could anyone arrive at that conclusion based of his music videos? Well, no one explains that. Everyone pretends to believe it because everyone else pretends to believe it, and Bashar is the Kanye of spiritual discourse. One of many, average, typical, conforming actors in the genre.
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 2, 2023 2:11:44 GMT -5
... Bashar is the Kanye of spiritual discourse. One of many, average, typical, conforming actors in the genre. I don't think this is warranted. Anka channels Bashar and probably trusts his experiences, as many of us believe whatever we interpret from our personal experiences. We can't trust more our realizations than Anka trusts Bashar, or than Christians trust the Bible, or others trust Ramana, even Tolle. It is true that Anka's commercial enterprise is a put off, but many gurus make good money from spreading their beliefs. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 2, 2023 2:57:40 GMT -5
... Bashar is the Kanye of spiritual discourse. One of many, average, typical, conforming actors in the genre. I don't think this is warranted. Anka channels Bashar and probably trusts his experiences, as many of us believe whatever we interpret from our personal experiences. We can't trust more our realizations than Anka trusts Bashar, or than Christians trust the Bible, or others trust Ramana, even Tolle. It is true that Anka's commercial enterprise is a put off, but many gurus make good money from spreading their beliefs. I get it, people can't tell the difference, but it's OK because if Kanye is supposedly a genius, then why not Bashar... or Anka... Or Christians? Actually forget that. It's just keeps getting worse.
On the other hand, Ramana is more like Don McLean and Tolle is like James Taylor, who is kinda like McLean, but nowhere near the same calibre.
Of course the readers will think this is all my personal view, but that's because in the world, very few can tell, but we that do recognise each other, though our personal tastes are very different. Most can't tell, so they think opinion counts.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 2, 2023 3:30:24 GMT -5
Oh not us, we're unlike you. Our community is awesome, without flaw no less, and this is very, very desirable to you, so I'll tell you to be yourself and flow as if I have an answer. This is where we we become braindead dolts standing mouth agape in the pretence that having heard the great master we are all the wiser, a nd the contradiction in this is the discourse is crude and without the nuance of a complete ontology. In the Buddhis philosophy they categorised 3 parts of the ontology: 1) you hear the teaching, know what the words are saying, andgive it the benefit of the doubt (Bashar level). 2) You think it through, employ some critical analysis, employ reason, identify the contradictions that make no sense, and join the dots so that the words take on an overall coherent meaning. 3) Having a sound intellectual frame to guide you, actually investigate it, examine it in yourself and glean the insight into the way in which it true for you. I see the same thing everywhere, in music, in physiology and nutrition, in you-tube popularity... I can tell that people just aren't seeing it. How many times have I hear people claim thet Kanye is a genius? How could anyone arrive at that conclusion based of his music videos? Well, no one explains that. Everyone pretends to believe it because everyone else pretends to believe it, and Bashar is the Kanye of spiritual discourse. One of many, average, typical, conforming actors in the genre. Bashar offers a complete ontology, you just listened to a 2 minute clip of it. There are hundreds....probably thousands...of hours of teaching. I've only listened to a relatively small portion of it, and some of it is over my head. I say that just to illustrate that it's not necessarily 'superficial' e.g he goes into the physics of stuff at times. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 2, 2023 3:48:23 GMT -5
I don't think this is warranted. Anka channels Bashar and probably trusts his experiences, as many of us believe whatever we interpret from our personal experiences. We can't trust more our realizations than Anka trusts Bashar, or than Christians trust the Bible, or others trust Ramana, even Tolle. It is true that Anka's commercial enterprise is a put off, but many gurus make good money from spreading their beliefs. I get it, people can't tell the difference, but it's OK because if Kanye is supposedly a genius, then why not Bashar... or Anka... Or Christians? Actually forget that. It's just keeps getting worse. On the other hand, Ramana is more like Don McLean and Tolle is like James Taylor, who is kinda like McLean, but nowhere near the same calibre. Of course the readers will think this is all my personal view, but that's because in the world, very few can tell, but we that do recognise each other, though our personal tastes are very different. Most can't tell, so they think opinion counts.
Here is an example of a clearly educated guy talking to Bashar (you won't find this kind of conversation at a Ramana/Tolle santang!) |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 2, 2023 6:43:39 GMT -5
I don't know who the guy is or his education level, but I only have a lay-science understanding, so I can't assess the validity of what they are saying. To me it sounds like nonsense, so I doubt it adds up, but I'm not qualified to say. However, if we measure the resonant frequency of a copper ball in one place, and then measure it in another place, does it really measure two different frequencies? We can measure that and find out if that happens, but if not, then the rest of it is probably hokum. I think if he just used a bit of math - that would have been some Ritchie Blackmore level shit.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 2, 2023 7:42:18 GMT -5
I don't know who the guy is or his education level, but I only have a lay-science understanding, so I can't assess the validity of what they are saying. To me it sounds like nonsense, so I doubt it adds up, but I'm not qualified to say. However, if we measure the resonant frequency of a copper ball in one place, and then measure it in another place, does it really measure two different frequencies? We can measure that and find out if that happens, but if not, then the rest of it is probably hokum. I think if he just used a bit of math - that would have been some Ritchie Blackmore level shit. So in one way, if they are right, then they are talking at a level beyond your understanding  You have to admit that the quality of the conversation is 'educated', even if it is hokum! |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 2, 2023 16:28:21 GMT -5
I don't know who the guy is or his education level, but I only have a lay-science understanding, so I can't assess the validity of what they are saying. To me it sounds like nonsense, so I doubt it adds up, but I'm not qualified to say. However, if we measure the resonant frequency of a copper ball in one place, and then measure it in another place, does it really measure two different frequencies? We can measure that and find out if that happens, but if not, then the rest of it is probably hokum. I think if he just used a bit of math - that would have been some Ritchie Blackmore level shit. So in one way, if they are right, then they are talking at a level beyond your understanding You have to admit that the quality of the conversation is 'educated', even if it is hokum! I can't be sure, but to me it sounded like a kooky guy who isn't really a physicist, but he wants to be something great and an alien can give him a boost. Bashar says words like dimensions and information exchange and etherial-somenting etc. which could be a load of sci-fi bollocks, but sprinkled with true things like gravity waves and space time dilation, just the keep the kooky guy on the edge. If he said one thing is a function of another so you have to divide by the square of pi, or even, one thing is a proportion of the other by a factor of... That would create some noise. However, having remedial science knowledge and a good sci-fi imagination... it doesn't really need any math. I'm just wondering, sounf=ds amazing, but is he actually saying anything useful? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 2, 2023 16:53:56 GMT -5
So in one way, if they are right, then they are talking at a level beyond your understanding You have to admit that the quality of the conversation is 'educated', even if it is hokum! I can't be sure, but to me it sounded like a kooky guy who isn't really a physicist, but he wants to be something great and an alien can give him a boost. Bashar says words like dimensions and information exchange and etherial-somenting etc. which could be a load of sci-fi bollocks, but sprinkled with true things like gravity waves and space time dilation, just the keep the kooky guy on the edge. If he said one thing is a function of another so you have to divide by the square of pi, or even, one thing is a proportion of the other by a factor of... That would create some noise. However, having remedial science knowledge and a good sci-fi imagination... it doesn't really need any math. I'm just wondering, sounf=ds amazing, but is he actually saying anything useful? The situation with Bashar meetings, is that he talks for a couple of hours on the subject he wants to bring to the table, and then they have another couple of hours of questions/answers, in which anyone there can ask the question they want to ask, and these questions vary wildly. But it's not unusual for someone to step up with a 'science/physics' question, and I find these interesting, partly because it's clear to me that the answers are NOT coming from Darryl (the channeller) as such. I can't say if the answers are correct or not. . I haven't seen many of the sessions in the last 7/8 years. They have a strong copyright system, which I find a little ugly (Abraham-Hicks seem to be quite happy to share their message freely). My view is that an important message should be available to anyone. Regardless, I find Bashar's fundamental teaching to be as good as any spiritual teaching from any of the revered 'gurus', and the question/answer sessions can be interesting to me, but sometimes not (depending on the questions asked). In this question/answer session, he explains how 'vibrational movement' relates to space travel. Again, my impression is that the questioner is educated. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 2, 2023 21:39:55 GMT -5
... In this question/answer session, he explains how 'vibrational movement' relates to space travel. Again, my impression is that the questioner is educated. video linkIn that video, Bashar / Anka says that every point in the space-time is defined by a unique set of coordinates (x,y,z,t) which he calls vibration-frequency (or something like that). He doesn't explain how to change the coordinates where an object, or a person, is located. He just says that the process used by the ETs is to go through an intermediate state in which the object isn't associated anymore with its current (x1,y1,z1,t1) coordinates, before associating to that object the desired new set (x2,y2,z2,t2). The bit about UFOs' sound doesn't make sense, as the vibration-frequency is a coordinates' signature, not a real frequency, and even less in the audible range of 20 to 20,000 Hz. So, there is no real technical or scientific information in the answer. The idea is presented from the point of view of the existence of an objective physical-reality, which I disagree with. As with any channeled material, it has to be intuitively interpreted, and not taken at face value. This means that it isn't what it apparently says, nor what Anka's intended message was. Any intuitive interpretation requires putting aside one's own beliefs and expectations, or the distortions will overwhelm the useful symbolical content. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 2, 2023 23:16:39 GMT -5
'Our scientists' don't do that. We know how to the cross the distances, but we can't do it.
Then words 'frequency'.
Then a few things from real science.
Back to words frequency signature, energy inputs, locational signature.
Now 'neutral field of energy'.
Bit of a Close Encounters reference with the space ship sounds.
Then the closer 'does this make sense to you?' and the responder 'yes it does'. (Think NLP)
Actually, nothing substantial was said, and the few repeated catch words don't actually join any dots.
I think Daryl has a meditation skill where he can send himself into a trance and assume the alien persona. He must have a reasonable remedial grasp of physics, and draws from that to create the sci-fi story.
Of course it's set up in very authoritative way. Like a satsang, where critique isn't part of the culture, and we create these little theaters where the audience becomes is part of the act, and elicit a sort of collective mania where everyone is gathered in demented awe. Once that is established, which is relatively easy because everyone attending already knows how to act, it's a simple close of the sale, 'Does this make sense to you?' The correct answer is 'yes'.
It's the same in principle as a political rally. We, the audience, already know exactly how to act out and it's completely predictable. You get someone as skilled as Tony Robbins or Hitler, and within 15 minutes they're brain-ded automons eating out of his hand. There's so many examples, and a lot of them are extreme.
I defy any Bashar advocate to present anything substantial, but I also think by the time you buy into a discourse such as Bashar's, you can no longer tell if it's substantial of not. Similarly, Kanye is insubstantial whereas Don McLean is a maestro, but people think that's merely my opinion, my taste. But I can actually tell. I think the probability of Bashar saying something substantial is about the same as Kanye dropping something outstanding. No harm though. I still like rubbish. Some of my favorite bands are atrocious. Another way of looking at is I love a bag of chips when I watch Netflix, even though I know that food is crap. It's still good, is what I'm saying.
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 3, 2023 2:19:34 GMT -5
... I still like rubbish. Some of favorite band are atrocious. Another way of looking at is I love a bag of chips when I watch Netflix, even though I know that food is crap. It's still good, is what I'm saying. 's where Niz' realization, that there are no body and no mind, comes into play. In spite of his smoking, Niz lived to the age of 84.5. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 3, 2023 4:27:28 GMT -5
'Our scientists' don't do that. We know how to the cross the distances, but we can't do it. Then words 'frequency'. Then a few things from real science. Back to words frequency signature, energy inputs, locational signature. Now 'neutral field of energy'. Bit of a Close Encounters reference with the space ship sounds. Then the closer 'does this make sense to you?' and the responder 'yes it does'. (Think NLP) Actually, nothing substantial was said, and the few repeated catch words don't actually join any dots. I think Daryl has a meditation skill where he can send himself into a trance and assume the alien persona. He must have a reasonable remedial grasp of physics, and draws from that to create the sci-fi story. Of course it's set up in very authoritative way. Like a satsang, where critique isn't part of the culture, and we create these little theaters where the audience becomes is part of the act, and elicit a sort of collective mania where everyone is gathered in demented awe. Once that is established, which is relatively easy because everyone attending already knows how to act, it's a simple close of the sale, 'Does this make sense to you?' The correct answer is 'yes'. It's the same in principle as a political rally. We, the audience, already know exactly how to act out and it's completely predictable. You get someone as skilled as Tony Robbins or Hitler, and within 15 minutes they're brain-ded automons eating out of his hand. There's so many examples, and a lot of them are extreme. I defy any Bashar advocate to present anything substantial, but I also think by the time you buy into a discourse such as Bashar's, you can no longer tell if it's substantial of not. Similarly, Kanye is insubstantial whereas Don McLean is a maestro, but people think that's merely my opinion, my taste. But I can actually tell. I think the probability of Bashar saying something substantial is about the same as Kanye dropping something outstanding. No harm though. I still like rubbish. Some of my favorite bands are atrocious. Another way of looking at is I love a bag of chips when I watch Netflix, even though I know that food is crap. It's still good, is what I'm saying. How do you know none of our scientists do that? Perhaps consider that what is being said here is slightly above your level of current understanding of how things work. That would be okay wouldn't it? I mean, you don't see yourself as a universal genius or anything do you? I do understand what was said (it makes sense to me), as I'm sure you do, so what I mean is that it is perhaps a new way for you to understand how this works. As for 'substance', well that is obviously subjective. I believe there's a lot that's substantial, and I recall a specific instance of someone getting a lot of value on the forum out of advice that was given by Bashar (would you like me to tell you who/what it was?). Also, people seem comfortable enough in that environment to sometimes say....'errrr no, I'm not getting it'. |
|
