|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2021 18:48:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 6, 2021 20:31:50 GMT -5
On a less controversial and more positive note https://www.reddit.com/r/ivermectin/comments/ldwrzp/how_actor_louis_gossett_jr_survived_covid19/ Direct link: vimeo.com/509097234 |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 6, 2021 22:49:49 GMT -5
On a less controversial and more positive note https://www.reddit.com/r/ivermectin/comments/ldwrzp/how_actor_louis_gossett_jr_survived_covid19/ Direct link: vimeo.com/509097234Notice how different treatments work for different people. And from my perspective, that is to be expected. Different teachers and different healers will offer different methods and paths to well-being based on their own understanding of reality and also based on what the patient can deal with. In our age of science worship, the focus is almost exclusively on the level of chemistry. Which could be argued to be the least effective in terms of manipulating reality. It does work, no doubt, but it's the hard way of going about it. The most effective way is working on the vibrational level, our state of being. But that's a very difficult concept for many people, even spiritually oriented people. So we have these two extreme ends of the spectrum and everyone has to find his/her place in this. And the spectrum of 'cures' will be as broad as the spectrum of people's awareness in terms of their own state of being. If you see your body in a mostly mechanical way, like a car, then you'd probably welcome treatments with a more brute force approach that are intended to make things happen instead of allowing things to happen. Because with that mindset, allowing things to happen would only mean things getting worse. Which is similar to how a mechanic would look at a car that has an engine problem, i.e. fix or replace the parts that are broken and then it will run again. Fail to fix or replace the broken parts, it will break down. That's basically the mindset still in the medical community. If you see your body in a more holistic way, as a living being that is capable of sustaining, correcting and repairing itself, then you'd probably welcome more gentle treatments that are more akin to just 'nudging' you back into well-being. And people have to work on their level of understanding and level of awareness. If you'd suggest to the mechanically minded folks something like acupuncture or even just a 10 day fast for detox, they'd think you'd wanted to harm them. Conversely, if you'd suggested to the holistic minded folks surgery or strong drugs, they'd think you'd wanted to harm them, too. Abe always say that, of course, you can heal yourself without any outside intervention, just with the power of your mind, and that surely would be the ideal, but most people just don't fulfill the requirements in vibrational terms to pull that off. So instead of beating up on themselves for being a failure, they say, and spending the rest of their days in misery, why not take advantage of what our highly technological age has to offer, and let them help us improve our situation? So I'd say, it's difficult to recommend anything to anyone when it comes to doing suggestions in terms of health. Because in order to work, it has to match their current beliefs. Even if it can be proven that a drug works 99.9% of the time, if it goes counter someone's belief system, you'll likely see another one of those 0.1% where it doesn't work. And this is where statistics are highly misleading. You just can't make good decisions based on what happened to other people, because what other people have going on vibrationally is not necessarily what you have going on vibrationally. And that being the case, you will have totally different experiences even under similar circumstances. And that's where I (and the way I understood it also Abe) see the fundamental flaw in the pro-vaccine vs. anti-vaccine debate. What Abe usually say is (based on LOA) only a happy journey will lead to a happy ending. An unhappy journey cannot lead to a happy ending, it defies LOA. So choose a course of action that is in alignment with your beliefs and you'll have a happy journey and a happy ending (eventually). Never do something that goes counter your beliefs because then you will have an unhappy journey that will lead to an unhappy ending (eventually). And if you don't know which course of action is the right one to choose, then just choose one and then make it right. And this is also something that I find highly questionable in terms of health, those so-called 'irreversible' damage theories which comes from this mechanical machinery thinking again, that the body is just a machine similar to a car instead of an autonomous, self-correcting and highly intelligent organism. Also, just to put our current level of scientific and technological achievements into perspective, IMO, we are still pretty low tech and low level in terms of effectiveness. It is said that in the old days - the really old days, i.e. thousands of years ago - they used sound and light and color to heal people. Now think about what that says about the level of awareness of our current civilization vs. civilizations long 'gone'. ETA: The same applies to politics and different political ideals/ideologies/systems. Not every political system or ideal is for everyone. Different political ideals/systems appeal to different people with different levels of awareness and also different personality types.
|
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 7, 2021 1:00:06 GMT -5
Notice how different treatments work for different people. And from my perspective, that is to be expected. [...] I think so too. We aren't all the same way, so what's good for you might be bad for me, and vice-versa. Another problem is that what works for you today might not work for you tomorrow, because tomorrow you won't be the same person that you are today. Besides the subconscious factors and limiting beliefs that determine who you'll be tomorrow, there is also what you consciously think and feel today that will determine the you of tomorrow. If you succumb to fear today, you'll be worse tomorrow. That's up to you. Eventually everybody gets the reality they create for themselves, both unconsciously and consciously. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 7, 2021 7:45:04 GMT -5
On a less controversial and more positive note https://www.reddit.com/r/ivermectin/comments/ldwrzp/how_actor_louis_gossett_jr_survived_covid19/ Direct link: vimeo.com/509097234Notice how different treatments work for different people. And from my perspective, that is to be expected. Different teachers and different healers will offer different methods and paths to well-being based on their own understanding of reality and also based on what the patient can deal with. In our age of science worship, the focus is almost exclusively on the level of chemistry. Which could be argued to be the least effective in terms of manipulating reality. It does work, no doubt, but it's the hard way of going about it. The most effective way is working on the vibrational level, our state of being. But that's a very difficult concept for many people, even spiritually oriented people. So we have these two extreme ends of the spectrum and everyone has to find his/her place in this. And the spectrum of 'cures' will be as broad as the spectrum of people's awareness in terms of their own state of being. If you see your body in a mostly mechanical way, like a car, then you'd probably welcome treatments with a more brute force approach that are intended to make things happen instead of allowing things to happen. Because with that mindset, allowing things to happen would only mean things getting worse. Which is similar to how a mechanic would look at a car that has an engine problem, i.e. fix or replace the parts that are broken and then it will run again. Fail to fix or replace the broken parts, it will break down. That's basically the mindset still in the medical community. If you see your body in a more holistic way, as a living being that is capable of sustaining, correcting and repairing itself, then you'd probably welcome more gentle treatments that are more akin to just 'nudging' you back into well-being. And people have to work on their level of understanding and level of awareness. If you'd suggest to the mechanically minded folks something like acupuncture or even just a 10 day fast for detox, they'd think you'd wanted to harm them. Conversely, if you'd suggested to the holistic minded folks surgery or strong drugs, they'd think you'd wanted to harm them, too. Abe always say that, of course, you can heal yourself without any outside intervention, just with the power of your mind, and that surely would be the ideal, but most people just don't fulfill the requirements in vibrational terms to pull that off. So instead of beating up on themselves for being a failure, they say, and spending the rest of their days in misery, why not take advantage of what our highly technological age has to offer, and let them help us improve our situation? So I'd say, it's difficult to recommend anything to anyone when it comes to doing suggestions in terms of health. Because in order to work, it has to match their current beliefs. Even if it can be proven that a drug works 99.9% of the time, if it goes counter someone's belief system, you'll likely see another one of those 0.1% where it doesn't work. And this is where statistics are highly misleading. You just can't make good decisions based on what happened to other people, because what other people have going on vibrationally is not necessarily what you have going on vibrationally. And that being the case, you will have totally different experiences even under similar circumstances. And that's where I (and the way I understood it also Abe) see the fundamental flaw in the pro-vaccine vs. anti-vaccine debate. What Abe usually say is (based on LOA) only a happy journey will lead to a happy ending. An unhappy journey cannot lead to a happy ending, it defies LOA. So choose a course of action that is in alignment with your beliefs and you'll have a happy journey and a happy ending (eventually). Never do something that goes counter your beliefs because then you will have an unhappy journey that will lead to an unhappy ending (eventually). And if you don't know which course of action is the right one to choose, then just choose one and then make it right. And this is also something that I find highly questionable in terms of health, those so-called 'irreversible' damage theories which comes from this mechanical machinery thinking again, that the body is just a machine similar to a car instead of an autonomous, self-correcting and highly intelligent organism. Also, just to put our current level of scientific and technological achievements into perspective, IMO, we are still pretty low tech and low level in terms of effectiveness. It is said that in the old days - the really old days, i.e. thousands of years ago - they used sound and light and color to heal people. Now think about what that says about the level of awareness of our current civilization vs. civilizations long 'gone'. ETA: The same applies to politics and different political ideals/ideologies/systems. Not every political system or ideal is for everyone. Different political ideals/systems appeal to different people with different levels of awareness and also different personality types. Lots of good stuff in there. Reminds me also of Bashar, who talks in terms of 'permission slips'. For example, he might say that taking a Tylenol is a 'permission slip' for releasing a headache. Or EFT is a 'permission slip' for releasing a conditioned belief/emotion. And I think there are interesting issues here relating to 'possibility' and 'congruence'. Theoretically, I could take arsenic for a headache and it works (or just eat arsenic for dinner), if I congruently believe and expect that to be true. I could also jump off a building a fly if I believe and expect that to be true. Mostly though, I find that I'm not congruent with 'contemporary science-defying' events, and I'm okay with that. In a sense, I pay attention to my intuition, which is normally a good guide for me. If my intuition says, 'take a tylenol', that's fine. In general, I do require some level of 'permission slip'...for example, I strongly believe in energy medicine, but without an understanding of how that works, I probably would believe it less, so in a sense, the understanding is part of the permission slip. It's also why I support folks taking the vaccine if they want it...if their intuition is to take it, then no problem. And it seems to me that the creative structures/beliefs of reality run deep within us. So, a baby or a dog won't hold conscious beliefs about arsenic, but considerably more often than not, arsenic will kill them both. So these creative structures/beliefs run deeper than the conscious mind. As humans, we have the 'advantage' of bringing these deeper beliefs into our conscious minds to be examined, which is a useful thing to do. While the vast majority of those deeper beliefs are 'relatively true', we also hold 'relatively false' beliefs at a level that is deeper than the conscious mind. A simple example night be a collective (false) deep belief that resources are finite. I'm aware too that I still carry that false belief to some extent, hence why I create a headache from time to time. In a sense, part of functioning in the broader consensus reality, requires to us to carry some level of the consensus false belief. Money might be a good example of that. Viruses/illness/authoritarianism is another good example of a manifestation of a deep consensus false belief. About the most I feel I can do, is examine the beliefs and structures within myself. There are times when accepting a level of falsity within me is about the best thing I can do. Going to war with falsity isn't always the path of least resistance. But then equally, there are times when I will see falsity in me, and the opportunity is there to release it, or clear it, or use whatever permission slip I feel is useful to make a shift. I pay attention to these shifts, because it also gives me a clue as to what is going on in the wider consensus reality. The forum has been interesting lately to me because in the past, there have been many periods when we have been very good at exploring our beliefs and how it relates to our emotions, and how this relates to awakening. We've also discussed manifestation and possibility at length (the arsenic example has come up more than once). I think it's fair to say that many spiritual folks around the world have been unusually swept up in strong consensus beliefs. And to be clear, I'm not suggesting that we should be exploring this in conspiracy terms, but in a classic spiritual sense. Putting the manifestation stuff to one side, even in a Byron Katie sense we can ask....''There's a pandemic. Is that true? How do we react to that belief? How would it be without that belief?'' |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2021 10:46:06 GMT -5
On a less controversial and more positive note https://www.reddit.com/r/ivermectin/comments/ldwrzp/how_actor_louis_gossett_jr_survived_covid19/ Direct link: vimeo.com/509097234Notice how different treatments work for different people. [...] I'm glad he got better, but his story doesn't show that Ivermectin works, either in general or for him specifically. There is an important difference between anecdotes like this and a good double-blind placebo-controlled study like they did for the vaccines, where they take two big groups of people (vaccine/drug and placebo) and look at the health differences between the two. I had covid too, and I got better. I had chicken soup the day before my fever subsided. I could say: "chicken soup cures covid." If I managed to get 1,000 people to try chicken soup as a cure, many would report that it worked. I think science, math, and logic are aspects of reality. Yes, you can go astray if you get too arrogant about rationality, and think it is the only way to "God", or Self-Realization, or ___. But you can acknowledge the limitation without going contra-logic. From what I've seen, nothing about essential spirituality is "anti" rational. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 7, 2021 11:09:42 GMT -5
Notice how different treatments work for different people. [...] I'm glad he got better, but his story doesn't show that Ivermectin works, either in general or for him specifically. There is an important difference between anecdotes like this and a good double-blind placebo-controlled study like they did for the vaccines, where they take two big groups of people (vaccine/drug and placebo) and look at the health differences between the two. I had covid too, and I got better. I had chicken soup the day before my fever subsided. I could say: "chicken soup cures covid." If I managed to get 1,000 people to try chicken soup as a cure, many would report that it worked. I think science, math, and logic are aspects of reality. Yes, you can go astray if you get too arrogant about rationality, and think it is the only way to "God", or Self-Realization, or ___. But you can acknowledge the limitation without going contra-logic. From what I've seen, nothing about essential spirituality is "anti" rational. Sure, I don't mean for anyone to confuse it with a study, it's just a positive story. There are plenty of good Ivermectin studies though, and some countries are using it as medicine. I think you raised an interesting question at the end, as to what is 'rational' and what isn't. For example, the law of attraction is perfectly rational in its explanation and reasoning, but is obviously not scientifically proven (though I think even neuroscience might accept that 'what we focus on, we get more of'). In that model, whether we 'catch' the virus, or get sick from it, actually has nothing to do with how 'contagious' the virus is. Or to give another (related) example, if there is some (perhaps a lot of) truth to the idea that 'my beliefs create my reality', then it changes everything in regard to science as we know it. The arsenic example is a good one. Or the jumping off a building and flying (I don't know if you read the small exchange of messages between Reefs and me). My most people's standard, I'm sure I could be judged as having a crazy and irrational view, but by spiritual standards, I consider myself fairly moderate in the 2 regards I just mentioned. So while I believe in LOA, and I believe that our beliefs create our reality, I discern the wisdom (for me at least) to be cautious and sensible. If I was 'extreme' in a spiritual sense, I probably wouldn't advocate for Ivermectin. On the flip side, I think large swathes of society has dipped into an extreme mindset BECAUSE they have no reference for the idea of 'I create my reality'. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 7, 2021 11:32:11 GMT -5
I think, in part, the government-media axis have MASSIVELY ramped up the idea that 'death is something terrible and to be fearful of'. Prior to the pandemic, I don't even think non-spiritual people were hugely afraid of death. If we perceived death as that bad, nobody would drive cars. Nobody would eat unhealthy food. Nobody would do dangerous sports. Nobody would have babies. In days gone by, in which giving birth was dangerous, nobody would get pregnant. Some folks risk and sacrifice their lives for others. Some will risk and sacrifice their lives for a pet. Some folks take their own lives. If death was perceived as being that bad, we wouldn't allow 9 million to die of hunger each year. We wouldn't allow 1 million to die of bad sanitation.
Somehow, the government-media axis has persuaded the population that death is WORSE than we truthfully believe it to be.
Might want to add 'pharma' to that axis.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2021 12:35:25 GMT -5
I'm glad he got better, but his story doesn't show that Ivermectin works, either in general or for him specifically. There is an important difference between anecdotes like this and a good double-blind placebo-controlled study like they did for the vaccines, where they take two big groups of people (vaccine/drug and placebo) and look at the health differences between the two. I had covid too, and I got better. I had chicken soup the day before my fever subsided. I could say: "chicken soup cures covid." If I managed to get 1,000 people to try chicken soup as a cure, many would report that it worked. I think science, math, and logic are aspects of reality. Yes, you can go astray if you get too arrogant about rationality, and think it is the only way to "God", or Self-Realization, or ___. But you can acknowledge the limitation without going contra-logic. From what I've seen, nothing about essential spirituality is "anti" rational. Sure, I don't mean for anyone to confuse it with a study, it's just a positive story. There are plenty of good Ivermectin studies though, and some countries are using it as medicine. Yeah, I wasn't arguing against your post directly. I'm not aware of "plenty of good studies" on it. If you have a link, I'd be interested. Like with the chloroquine, there are people who give it to 30 patients that are already skewed or selected by other factors, so they don't do the double-blind placebo part right, or don't have enough patients in the study. Yeah, there is definitely some truth in the law of attraction and in this idea that beliefs and state of mind create our reality. I don't mean to deny that completely. And depending on how exactly you interpret it or elaborate on it, there is nothing anti-rational or illogical about it. On your arsenic example, or flying off a building – I'd be so happy to see a demonstration, but maybe they start on the ground so there is no risk of getting hurt! I suspect though that in these cases... it's people going astray and getting into beliefs that affirm the false self/ego. Eg, "I can have magic powers!", "I'm special!", "This will help me impress women!" etc.  I don't know... I like to be wrong about that. I'd like magic powers too! Similar to your arsenic example, I was thinking about a virus like rabies, which as about a 99% fatality rate (if untreated by mainstream medicine). Or even Ebola which I think is in the 30-40% range and likes to liquify your internal organs. It's easier to talk about alternative medicine when for most people Covid is not much of a threat. How many people, if they got bit by a rabid raccoon, would decide to test themselves and refuse the conventional rabies treatment? Anyway, I appreciate your posts; even if sometimes I like to argue. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2021 12:46:43 GMT -5
I think, in part, the government-media axis have MASSIVELY ramped up the idea that 'death is something terrible and to be fearful of'. [...] From Song of Myself, by Walt Whitman. (Whitman is featured in the book Cosmic Consciousness. I think his poems point to it.) All goes onward and outward, nothing collapses,
And to die is different from what any one supposed, and luckier.
Has any one supposed it lucky to be born?
I hasten to inform him or her it is just as lucky to die, and I know it.And in case I get too fond of quoting poets or gurus, here is another quote from the same poem, about not quoting people. Have you reckon’d a thousand acres much? have you reckon’d the earth much?
Have you practis’d so long to learn to read?
Have you felt so proud to get at the meaning of poems?
Stop this day and night with me and you shall possess the origin of all poems,
You shall possess the good of the earth and sun, (there are millions of suns left,)
You shall no longer take things at second or third hand, nor look through the eyes of the dead, nor feed on the spectres in books,
You shall not look through my eyes either, nor take things from me,
You shall listen to all sides and filter them from your self.
I have heard what the talkers were talking, the talk of the beginning and the end,
But I do not talk of the beginning or the end.
There was never any more inception than there is now,
Nor any more youth or age than there is now,
And will never be any more perfection than there is now,
Nor any more heaven or hell than there is now.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 7, 2021 13:11:33 GMT -5
Sure, I don't mean for anyone to confuse it with a study, it's just a positive story. There are plenty of good Ivermectin studies though, and some countries are using it as medicine. Yeah, I wasn't arguing against your post directly. I'm not aware of "plenty of good studies" on it. If you have a link, I'd be interested. Like with the chloroquine, there are people who give it to 30 patients that are already skewed or selected by other factors, so they don't do the double-blind placebo part right, or don't have enough patients in the study. Yeah, there is definitely some truth in the law of attraction and in this idea that beliefs and state of mind create our reality. I don't mean to deny that completely. And depending on how exactly you interpret it or elaborate on it, there is nothing anti-rational or illogical about it. On your arsenic example, or flying off a building – I'd be so happy to see a demonstration, but maybe they start on the ground so there is no risk of getting hurt! I suspect though that in these cases... it's people going astray and getting into beliefs that affirm the false self/ego. Eg, "I can have magic powers!", "I'm special!", "This will help me impress women!" etc. I don't know... I like to be wrong about that. I'd like magic powers too! Similar to your arsenic example, I was thinking about a virus like rabies, which as about a 99% fatality rate (if untreated by mainstream medicine). Or even Ebola which I think is in the 30-40% range and likes to liquify your internal organs. It's easier to talk about alternative medicine when for most people Covid is not much of a threat. How many people, if they got bit by a rabid raccoon, would decide to test themselves and refuse the conventional rabies treatment? Anyway, I appreciate your posts; even if sometimes I like to argue. Thanks...and if I didn't want the argument, I wouldn't come here The 'arsenic/jumping off a building' question is one that has occupied hundreds of pages of forum time (and argument!) so it's not an easy one to address in just a short space. But in brief, and in a sense, I see it as more of a very useful theoretical idea than a practical one. Simply, if one congruently believes, on all levels, that they can drink arsenic and enjoy it and be well, then they will do. In this sense, anything is possible. But, whether anyone actually has that congruence is a whole other question! I know fine well I don't have that congruence, so you won't see me downing pints of toxic poison any time soon (or jumping off buildings). And to be fair, I actually have no interest in that congruence, I'm really okay just to approximately pay attention to what is 'conventionally' thought to be good for me and what is bad for me. But I don't ignore the VALUE of the theoretical point. If someone drank arsenic and survived, I would be able to explain that, even if conventional science couldn't. I'm open to the extraordinary and seemingly unexplainable, and that matters to me to be open to it. It matters to me to understand that our beliefs...on all levels....create our reality. Practically speaking, if I have a headache I might take a Tylenol just like most folks do. I also have a bunch of herbal and complimentary stuff too which I find useful, and believe it has some 'objective' value (i.e beyond the effect of placebo). In a sense, I talk to people I meet within the context in which they operate. So on twitter, you would rarely, if ever, find me talking about LOA, though I might talk about self-responsibility. I am likely to talk about the value of alternative medicines, and also medicines that countries are using abroad (like ivermectin). That, to me, is a context that I can relate to people in. If I come here, I'll talk differently....I have no particular wish to discuss whether ivermectin or dexamethasone is better.....I'm likely to want to talk about reality creation and how our beliefs are related to our experience etc. It's a context that not many 'ordinary' folks can relate to me on, but here I feel that people can relate to it better. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 7, 2021 13:14:24 GMT -5
I think, in part, the government-media axis have MASSIVELY ramped up the idea that 'death is something terrible and to be fearful of'. [...] From Song of Myself, by Walt Whitman. (Whitman is featured in the book Cosmic Consciousness. I think his poems point to it.) All goes onward and outward, nothing collapses,
And to die is different from what any one supposed, and luckier.
Has any one supposed it lucky to be born?
I hasten to inform him or her it is just as lucky to die, and I know it.And in case I get too fond of quoting poets or gurus, here is another quote from the same poem, about not quoting people. Have you reckon’d a thousand acres much? have you reckon’d the earth much?
Have you practis’d so long to learn to read?
Have you felt so proud to get at the meaning of poems?
Stop this day and night with me and you shall possess the origin of all poems,
You shall possess the good of the earth and sun, (there are millions of suns left,)
You shall no longer take things at second or third hand, nor look through the eyes of the dead, nor feed on the spectres in books,
You shall not look through my eyes either, nor take things from me,
You shall listen to all sides and filter them from your self.
I have heard what the talkers were talking, the talk of the beginning and the end,
But I do not talk of the beginning or the end.
There was never any more inception than there is now,
Nor any more youth or age than there is now,
And will never be any more perfection than there is now,
Nor any more heaven or hell than there is now.
That's lovely! Truth be told, my only real reference for Walt Whitman is in Dead Poet's Society, which is a film I love (I just mentioned that film a couple of days ago to 'Gopal' on one of the other spiritual forums). I have a poetic side to me, but I've rarely allowed it to come out for whatever reason. I think I'm going to have to have a look at 'Cosmic Consciousness'. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Feb 7, 2021 13:32:51 GMT -5
From Song of Myself, by Walt Whitman. (Whitman is featured in the book Cosmic Consciousness. I think his poems point to it.) All goes onward and outward, nothing collapses,
And to die is different from what any one supposed, and luckier.
Has any one supposed it lucky to be born?
I hasten to inform him or her it is just as lucky to die, and I know it.And in case I get too fond of quoting poets or gurus, here is another quote from the same poem, about not quoting people. Have you reckon’d a thousand acres much? have you reckon’d the earth much?
Have you practis’d so long to learn to read?
Have you felt so proud to get at the meaning of poems?
Stop this day and night with me and you shall possess the origin of all poems,
You shall possess the good of the earth and sun, (there are millions of suns left,)
You shall no longer take things at second or third hand, nor look through the eyes of the dead, nor feed on the spectres in books,
You shall not look through my eyes either, nor take things from me,
You shall listen to all sides and filter them from your self.
I have heard what the talkers were talking, the talk of the beginning and the end,
But I do not talk of the beginning or the end.
There was never any more inception than there is now,
Nor any more youth or age than there is now,
And will never be any more perfection than there is now,
Nor any more heaven or hell than there is now.
That's lovely! Truth be told, my only real reference for Walt Whitman is in Dead Poet's Society, which is a film I love (I just mentioned that film a couple of days ago to 'Gopal' on one of the other spiritual forums). I have a poetic side to me, but I've rarely allowed it to come out for whatever reason. I think I'm going to have to have a look at 'Cosmic Consciousness'. IMO, Whitman definitely had a big CC. I don't know that he ever wrote about it, but "Leaves of Grass" is enough evidence for me. Bucke's speculations about CC's were clearly erroneous, but that's probably because he was unfamiliar with all of the spiritual literature in other traditions (written in foreign languages) that describe and discuss CC's. They've clearly occurred for thousands of years, and are not some new evolutionary development as Bucke suggests. His book is interesting simply because he includes many accounts of CC's as well as his own account. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2021 14:55:21 GMT -5
That's lovely! Truth be told, my only real reference for Walt Whitman is in Dead Poet's Society, which is a film I love (I just mentioned that film a couple of days ago to 'Gopal' on one of the other spiritual forums). I have a poetic side to me, but I've rarely allowed it to come out for whatever reason. I think I'm going to have to have a look at 'Cosmic Consciousness'. IMO, Whitman definitely had a big CC. I don't know that he ever wrote about it, but "Leaves of Grass" is enough evidence for me. Bucke's speculations about CC's were clearly erroneous, but that's probably because he was unfamiliar with all of the spiritual literature in other traditions (written in foreign languages) that describe and discuss CC's. They've clearly occurred for thousands of years, and are not some new evolutionary development as Bucke suggests. His book is interesting simply because he includes many accounts of CC's as well as his own account. I read the book many years ago and I don't remember much of it all. I should probably stop mentioning it because for all I know it's a not a great book. I remember only that it was one of my first exposures to the phrase "cosmic consciousness", and that it listed some other somewhat famous writers as having this experience. I checked out a few of them, but Whitman was the only one that stuck with me. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Feb 7, 2021 15:21:43 GMT -5
IMO, Whitman definitely had a big CC. I don't know that he ever wrote about it, but "Leaves of Grass" is enough evidence for me. Bucke's speculations about CC's were clearly erroneous, but that's probably because he was unfamiliar with all of the spiritual literature in other traditions (written in foreign languages) that describe and discuss CC's. They've clearly occurred for thousands of years, and are not some new evolutionary development as Bucke suggests. His book is interesting simply because he includes many accounts of CC's as well as his own account. I read the book many years ago and I don't remember much of it all. I should probably stop mentioning it because for all I know it's a not a great book. I remember only that it was one of my first exposures to the phrase "cosmic consciousness", and that it listed some other somewhat famous writers as having this experience. I checked out a few of them, but Whitman was the only one that stuck with me. I think the book is worth reading because it has a lot of great quotes by different people who clearly had CC's, but Bucke's main conjecture about CC's being evidence of a newly evolving capability in humans was simply incorrect. Like you, it was one of the first books I read that discussed CC's, but even today I still use quotes from the book when writing to people about ND. Apparently Bucke never encountered anyone or any writing that could put CC's into a coherent context , and this was also true for many of the people (several Christian mystics) he wrote about. The Japanese Zen tradition is primarily divided into two sects--Soto and Rinzai. Soto people downplay or ignore such experiences (because they consider CC's to be temporary states of mind and therefore not as important as whatever its happening in the present moment), whereas Rinzai people see them as breakthrough experiences into the world of the non-dual. Unfortunately, neither tradition clearly defines the word "satori" although both traditions define kensho as "seeing into one's true nature." Generally speaking, a kensho is regarded more as a glimpse into ND rather than a continuing or permanent way of life. |
|
I don't know... I like to be wrong about that. I'd like magic powers too!