|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 3, 2023 5:00:22 GMT -5
Whats being said isn't actually coherent... and substance isn't subjective. That's what they tell me about bands as well, but preference and personal taste is completely different to substance. I get it that few understand this, but it's a real thing, and we understand full well that some things we don't like are still mighty impressive - and we like some things that are crappy and trivial.
I'm not particularly interested in which person that is, but don't be too rough on me. I'm not against it and saying it's bad. I'm saying it's like crisps. We love them anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 3, 2023 5:27:00 GMT -5
Whats being said isn't actually coherent... and substance isn't subjective. That's what they tell me about bands as well, but preference and personal taste is completely different to substance. I get it that few understand this, but it's a real thing, and we understand full well that some things we don't like are still mighty impressive - and we like some things that are crappy and trivial. I'm not particularly interested in which person that is, but don't be too rough on me. I'm not against it and saying it's bad. I'm saying it's like crisps. We love them anyway. Substance has a subjective aspect to it. I'm not saying there's an absence of objectivity to these things, but it's not clear cut. That's why we can debate it.... we aren't going to debate whether 1+1=2....but we can debate what level of substance a film, or book, or music has. And without listening to many hours of Bashar, you can't really judge that. You can judge the 'presentation' or 'showmanship' (and that's not irrelevant to the overall judgement), but you can't judge the content without listening to a lot more. And there have been films and music etc that I have dismissed, and then come back to. Or maybe I wasn't mature enough at the time to appreciate it. And sometimes, ' substance' is really just pretention i.e something can present itself as substantial, but is really just playing on people's self-image of themselves as a substantial person, or educated in that field, or whatever. I won't mention the person's name, but they were talking about difficulties with their significant other, and the advice Bashar gave, made them change their approach to the relationship with positive results. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 3, 2023 6:06:52 GMT -5
Whats being said isn't actually coherent... and substance isn't subjective. That's what they tell me about bands as well, but preference and personal taste is completely different to substance. I get it that few understand this, but it's a real thing, and we understand full well that some things we don't like are still mighty impressive - and we like some things that are crappy and trivial. I'm not particularly interested in which person that is, but don't be too rough on me. I'm not against it and saying it's bad. I'm saying it's like crisps. We love them anyway. Substance has a subjective aspect to it. I'm not saying there's an absence of objectivity to these things, but it's not clear cut. That's why we can debate it.... we aren't going to debate whether 1+1=2....but we can debate what level of substance a film, or book, or music has. And without listening to many hours of Bashar, you can't really judge that. You can judge the 'presentation' or 'showmanship' (and that's not irrelevant to the overall judgement), but you can't judge the content without listening to a lot more. And there have been films and music etc that I have dismissed, and then come back to. Or maybe I wasn't mature enough at the time to appreciate it. And sometimes, ' substance' is really just pretention i.e something can present itself as substantial, but is really just playing on people's self-image of themselves as a substantial person, or educated in that field, or whatever. I won't mention the person's name, but they were talking about difficulties with their significant other, and the advice Bashar gave, made them change their approach to the relationship with positive results. I can't listen to hours of Bashar, but I'm into it and will listen to maybe 10 or 15 minutes on 2X speed, and I bet a red penny that he'll stick with what works rather than give any further explanation on space travel, and that no one will ask him to anything more than repeat what he already said. Maybe he gives good relationship advice, I could use some of that myself. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Feb 3, 2023 9:56:12 GMT -5
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. I listened to this and the other Bashar video on this page. First, I haven't been around much lately, the last couple of weeks. I watch How The Universe Works pretty regularly on the Science (cable) Channel. Presently it comes on M-F 8-9AM and then again 9-10AM, repeats. Curious, this morning 8-9 was about space travel, the possibility of traveling from star to star. It was a repeat, most likely S3, E8 from 2014 (I didn't note it, but presently on 9-10 is S3, E9, The Search for a Second Earth) If you don't know the program it's all first rate current science by top scientists in their field. One part of the show today, the possibility of Warp Drive has been experimentally verified on a small scale, that is, there is a loop-hole allowing faster-than-light travel. I'd call this a kind of synchronicity, me watching the program and watching the Bashar videos. (Incidentally, I usually look ahead, and set my alarm clock if a program is going to be exceptionally interesting, I've seen many several times. I didn't set my alarm, and so missed the first 15 minutes). But something came to mind not even related to either video. Basically, but not specifically described so, this is a nonduality web site. But nobody can deny there is in some sense individuality. So what came to mind was that Bashar has also given a basis for individuality. Not just every place has a certain vibratory frequency, but every person, as an individual, has a certain vibratory signature-as-frequency. Individual meaning nobody else in space or time has your particular frequency. Thanks andrew. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Feb 3, 2023 14:51:16 GMT -5
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. Not just every place has a certain vibratory frequency, but every person, as an individual, has a certain vibratory signature-as-frequency. Individual meaning nobody else in space or time has your particular frequency. Thanks andrew. .. Absolutely and being an individual aspect of all that is doesn't automatically reflect a SVP. This has been my point in making for many years . Individuality doesn't necessarily equate to believing in separation . It's never made any sense to me . The whole foundation of individuality at times has been based upon separation . Unique experiences, unique frequencies are part of the individual makeup . So then there is the premise that individuals can't exist in their own right . So therefore everything appears as that is an appearance only . |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Feb 3, 2023 18:34:12 GMT -5
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. I listened to this and the other Bashar video on this page. First, I haven't been around much lately, the last couple of weeks. I watch How The Universe Works pretty regularly on the Science (cable) Channel. Presently it comes on M-F 8-9AM and then again 9-10AM, repeats. Curious, this morning 8-9 was about space travel, the possibility of traveling from star to star. It was a repeat, most likely S3, E8 from 2014 (I didn't note it, but presently on 9-10 is S3, E9, The Search for a Second Earth) If you don't know the program it's all first rate current science by top scientists in their field. One part of the show today, the possibility of Warp Drive has been experimentally verified on a small scale, that is, there is a loop-hole allowing faster-than-light travel. I'd call this a kind of synchronicity, me watching the program and watching the Bashar videos. (Incidentally, I usually look ahead, and set my alarm clock if a program is going to be exceptionally interesting, I've seen many several times. I didn't set my alarm, and so missed the first 15 minutes). But something came to mind not even related to either video. Basically, but not specifically described so, this is a nonduality web site. But nobody can deny there is in some sense individuality. So what came to mind was that Bashar has also given a basis for individuality. Not just every place has a certain vibratory frequency, but every person, as an individual, has a certain vibratory signature-as-frequency. Individual meaning nobody else in space or time has your particular frequency. Thanks andrew. Cool....nice synchronicity too. And yeah, now you mention it, I like that way of understanding individuality. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2023 11:10:55 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. Yes, the common state of body/mind is one with an underlying anxiety that something isn't quite right, that things aren't really the way that everyone supposes them to be. So people crave some sort of illumination on that, which sets the stage for the sort of feedback you describe. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2023 11:16:51 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. Reduce everything to the objective and you blind yourself to the subjective. As per usual, there's an old folksy commonsense grass-roots aphorism for that: "there's no accounting for taste".  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2023 11:19:08 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.
 .. hey, did you know that it was a Christian who invented the Big Bang?  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2023 11:26:38 GMT -5
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!) It's both really funny and really intriguing at the same time. The guy asking the question seemed to know about the experiment, couldn't find hide nor hare of it on youtube.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2023 11:45:52 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. The dialog suggested that the flatness (and I'd intuit likely also the extent) of the surface and then the thinness of the ball are factors that would preclude doing the experiment on the cheap (and I wonder as to the size of the sphere and the method of exciting and measuring the frequency, as well). One facet that made me think it was nonsense was that the method of excitation didn't matter, which raises the question of whether or not they're measuring a harmonic (god help me!  ) It's amusing -- really funny -- if you just assume that Darryl is faking it. I mean .. like ... " Zork!" ..  .. right? On the other hand, what was the original reaction to Pasteur, or Einstein? No, I'm not actually comparing Darryl to them, but there were possibly "nut jobs" who came before them that might have intuited the ideas they later proved. I will say this: from Fourier through to Faraday through to Hertz through to Heisenberg/Bohr/Born the cyclical nature of the physical world is constantly re-asserted through investigation. Interesting how that echoes some aspects of Hindu mythology, and yes, there have been all sorts of new-ager's who've applied the notion intuitively, and likely, in most instances, quite wrongly.
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2023 11:56:07 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! Little known fact. Zork frequency harmonics are excited when the Moon is retrograde to Saturn during cyclonic hollow high pressure events brought about by the synchronic acoustic vibrations occurring consonant with the hatching of large numbers of frogs in the spring.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2023 12:04:45 GMT -5
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. Why would you doubt that Darryl would have the intellect and education to be able to respond in those situations? Similar vein: Jane Roberts was college educated. Dunno' if she ever took a course in Quantum Mechanics, but she might have had a boyfriend that did. I'm biased to assume that the source of the channeled material is the channeler's subconscious. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2023 12:08:19 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. Niz isn't saying that there is no body. Niz isn't saying that there is no mind. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 4, 2023 12:11:06 GMT -5
Whats being said isn't actually coherent... and substance isn't subjective. That's what they tell me about bands as well, but preference and personal taste is completely different to substance. I get it that few understand this, but it's a real thing, and we understand full well that some things we don't like are still mighty impressive - and we like some things that are crappy and trivial. I'm not particularly interested in which person that is, but don't be too rough on me. I'm not against it and saying it's bad. I'm saying it's like crisps. We love them anyway. .. I'd say that what you're getting at here about "substance" as a value assessment is part self-honesty and part what inavalen referred to as distortion. |
|
.. hey, did you know that it was a 
)