|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 15, 2024 20:02:24 GMT -5
The thing with the reactivity, volition problem is that all the nasty things, which on a Pol Pot scale are really bad, originate from it, and the smaller scales are just lesser ripples in that tidal wave. From the meditator perspective, it's not a problem as such because it's a fact like 'this is how I generate reactivity', but to claim it isn't a problem in a general sense is a stretch when they're torturing plain women and bashing the brains of their children against a tree to save bullets. Probably 20% or more of those murderers in Cambodia meditate, and some even spent a year as a Buddhist monk, so it's not like meditation made anything better, but then again, I talk about a precise and specific thing. I'm not saying anyone has to like it and I generally find that no one does. The Buddhists actually oppose it more than anyone because it's not cut and pasted from digitised text, but I keep scholastic disscussons in their own box because it's impossible to discern for yourself and turn to authority at the same time.
But isn't there a flip side to this? Industrial scale murder is only possible based on a lead-up, a premise. We can say that the murderer's chose to murder, but, they could tell you why they were doing at the time. They thought/felt themselves justified. The other side of the volition coin here is that this feeling of justification was the result of a sort of programming, or, a hypnosis. You don't have to let them off the hook to recognize this, but it's a way to question your initial hypothesis about the role of volition in the horror from the personal perspective. The horror is still recognized from the impersonal perspective, and is the result of a case of mistaken identity, a case of a really really bad nightmare. A case of delusion brought on by the illusion of common mind. I go with the 'know not what they do' angle, which is ignorance and delusion. In terms of justification, I guess there's moral ideology there somewhere which seems to converge on a control issue. Ironically, the control measures escalate chaos. As an analogy to meditation, there's a difference between controlling reactivity and knowing 'this is reactivity'. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 16, 2024 6:05:36 GMT -5
What do you mean by synchronicity exactly? Can you give an example? Many, because it's a very wide spectrum. I think of them as very low probability coincidences, and once I noticed one (by suggestion) many years ago, they became hard to miss. At the least intense end of the spectrum it's when what you're thinking about suddenly comes on the radio or somehow manifests physically in some way, like you think of a "cowboy" and then someone in a ten gallon hat walks by, or you're thinking of someone and they suddenly call you. At the other end of the spectrum there are events that are more elaborate. I've told a story in the past about a very unlikely double chance meeting with a Mormon missionary. ZD has told a story in the past about meeting his "doppleganger" at a museum when he was a kid. The most intense that don't involve physical events can sound like you're describing mind-reading or telepathy of some sort. I've found they can correlate with sitting meditation or walking ATA. One facet, for sure, is that a quiet, observant mind is more likely to notice these. Of course, some of them - the ones on the less intense end of the scale - can be explained away rationally. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 16, 2024 6:29:38 GMT -5
But isn't there a flip side to this? Industrial scale murder is only possible based on a lead-up, a premise. We can say that the murderer's chose to murder, but, they could tell you why they were doing at the time. They thought/felt themselves justified. The other side of the volition coin here is that this feeling of justification was the result of a sort of programming, or, a hypnosis. You don't have to let them off the hook to recognize this, but it's a way to question your initial hypothesis about the role of volition in the horror from the personal perspective. The horror is still recognized from the impersonal perspective, and is the result of a case of mistaken identity, a case of a really really bad nightmare. A case of delusion brought on by the illusion of common mind. I go with the 'know not what they do' angle, which is ignorance and delusion. In terms of justification, I guess there's moral ideology there somewhere which seems to converge on a control issue. Ironically, the control measures escalate chaos. As an analogy to meditation, there's a difference between controlling reactivity and knowing 'this is reactivity'. Yes, most definitely. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 16, 2024 10:54:10 GMT -5
What do you mean by synchronicity exactly? Can you give an example? Many, because it's a very wide spectrum. I think of them as very low probability coincidences, and once I noticed one (by suggestion) many years ago, they became hard to miss. At the least intense end of the spectrum it's when what you're thinking about suddenly comes on the radio or somehow manifests physically in some way, like you think of a "cowboy" and then someone in a ten gallon hat walks by, or you're thinking of someone and they suddenly call you. At the other end of the spectrum there are events that are more elaborate. I've told a story in the past about a very unlikely double chance meeting with a Mormon missionary. ZD has told a story in the past about meeting his "doppleganger" at a museum when he was a kid. The most intense that don't involve physical events can sound like you're describing mind-reading or telepathy of some sort. I've found they can correlate with sitting meditation or walking ATA. One facet, for sure, is that a quiet, observant mind is more likely to notice these. Of course, some of them - the ones on the less intense end of the scale - can be explained away rationally. Reminds me of this... |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Feb 16, 2024 14:52:20 GMT -5
If there is only one movement and no individuals then how is it that there are a multitude of different attractions playing out? Why would 'you' attract the opposite of 'me' if there isn't a you or a me in the first instance? You see in my eyes LOA or Karma can only be in effect if there is someone that can be effected. If there isn't anyone present that can be effected then what the fcuk is everyone talking about  Ultimately everything moves as one. No doubt. If there is only one movement and no individuals then how is it that there are a multitude of different attractions playing out? |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Feb 16, 2024 14:54:06 GMT -5
What does 'not deliberately hurting others' mean? You probably know the parable of the monk and the snake, right? For reference: Also, life is on continuous recycling process. You can't survive without hurting a fly or else you will be road kill yourself at some point. So, let's not be silly. And LOA works in the personal as well as in the impersonal context. So, no, you don't need a self. But you need one for LOK, because LOK works in the personal context only. But according to the anatta doctrine, there is no personal self, so this is where Buddhism gets silly. In TAV they solved that issue very elegantly by declaring LOK a merely provisional truth, i.e. something that is a useful concept or explanation at a certain level of understanding but not the ultimate truth, and so it will be discarded later as an unnecessary and unproven assumption as the understanding deepens. No-one is being silly, I am just stating the obvious. So let's get this straight, LOA works for whom or what exactly?I spoke about mud has to stick to something or other, so what is it that can attract and be attracted if not the individual .
The individual that is not a separate entity of sorts.The attraction that can be of opposites from one individual to another. Bump |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 16, 2024 17:01:03 GMT -5
On the other hand, just because she was told about 3 things, quite common things which would usually be unremarkable, she then noticed them in particular. I usually have a different tact and say if you want a thing, then sure, make it foremost in mind, but do what it takes to make it happen. E.g. if you want to dead lift 200kg, lift 60 kg today, lift 65 next week, 70 two weeks later, and train consistently and persevere, and maybe if you really dedicate yourself to it, in about 8 years or so you'll make the lift. Apply that strategy to the things in your life and they'll more likely happen. Imagining it alone will not work. It's silly to say think of three common everyday things and pretend they are miracles when they occur.
Because I want a muscular physique, sure I have already visualised today's training, but unless I actually go to the gym and eat the right things, I'll not be muscular. Because the work is hard, I also have to sleep right. Hence just because I want a slight thing doesn't mean it will happen. All the conditions that make it possible have to come together.
That's where LOA sounds amazing as you dream deliberate creation into existence with everyday things, and karma is saying this is how life works. The bottom line is exactly the same, but some resort to ambiguity like 'your vibration' and others go over the nuances in more detail.
|
|
|
|
Post by DonHelado on Feb 16, 2024 18:25:40 GMT -5
On the other hand, just because she was told about 3 things, quite common things which would usually be unremarkable, she then noticed them in particular. I usually have a different tact and say if you want a thing, then sure, make it foremost in mind, but do what it takes to make it happen. E.g. if you want to dead lift 200kg, lift 60 kg today, lift 65 next week, 70 two weeks later, and train consistently and persevere, and maybe if you really dedicate yourself to it, in about 8 years or so you'll make the lift. Apply that strategy to the things in your life and they'll more likely happen. Imagining it alone will not work. It's silly to say think of three common everyday things and pretend they are miracles when they occur. Because I want a muscular physique, sure I have already visualised today's training, but unless I actually go to the gym and eat the right things, I'll not be muscular. Because the work is hard, I also have to sleep right. Hence just because I want a slight thing doesn't mean it will happen. All the conditions that make it possible have to come together. That's where LOA sounds amazing as you dream deliberate creation into existence with everyday things, and karma is saying this is how life works. The bottom line is exactly the same, but some resort to ambiguity like 'your vibration' and others go over the nuances in more detail. You mean I can't just sit at home and attract muscle gains while posting to online forums? I have to work the muscles and eat protein? That's not very spiritual. If you're spiritual enough you can get anything you want with your magical thinking. Don't be a loser who "works"; that's for the lower classes. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Feb 16, 2024 18:36:01 GMT -5
I interpret that little "blue" story to say that even a short and unemotional mental focus on anything initiates a process of materialization into the physical reality. We don't notice that because of our inherently low level of awareness (one of the reasons we had to join a reality like this), our beliefs and expectations. As the materialization process is initiated, immediately our doubts and distractions begin working against it, slowing it down, and even preventing its fruition.
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Feb 16, 2024 20:02:45 GMT -5
Many, because it's a very wide spectrum. I think of them as very low probability coincidences, and once I noticed one (by suggestion) many years ago, they became hard to miss. At the least intense end of the spectrum it's when what you're thinking about suddenly comes on the radio or somehow manifests physically in some way, like you think of a "cowboy" and then someone in a ten gallon hat walks by, or you're thinking of someone and they suddenly call you. At the other end of the spectrum there are events that are more elaborate. I've told a story in the past about a very unlikely double chance meeting with a Mormon missionary. ZD has told a story in the past about meeting his "doppleganger" at a museum when he was a kid. The most intense that don't involve physical events can sound like you're describing mind-reading or telepathy of some sort. I've found they can correlate with sitting meditation or walking ATA. One facet, for sure, is that a quiet, observant mind is more likely to notice these. Of course, some of them - the ones on the less intense end of the scale - can be explained away rationally. Reminds me of this... Are you familiar with Richard Bach? So the conclusion would seem to be what I referred to as synchronicity relates to what Esther calls deliberate creation by the non-deliberate nature of the attractions. "Synchronicities" happen unconsciously, in Tolle-speak. The metaphor of a human body/mind as a lens or an antenna comes to mind here. We could say that various forms are attuned to various vibes. The form of a domesticated dog is attuned to scents and human emotions. The form of a squirrel is attuned to trees and chewing. Some human beings are attuned to various unusual states of consciousness. Certain people might be more finely attuned to a CC or NS, for example. Others, less so. So, I can try to bridge your and lolz positions by saying that the explanation for why most people don't usually manifest low BMI and defined muscle growth on the couch is that these manifestations are out of tune (out of alignment) with individuals who are attuned to sedentary inaction + high calorie intake. It's not like the vibes and the manifestations aren't related to one another, after all. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 16, 2024 20:45:36 GMT -5
On the other hand, just because she was told about 3 things, quite common things which would usually be unremarkable, she then noticed them in particular. I usually have a different tact and say if you want a thing, then sure, make it foremost in mind, but do what it takes to make it happen. E.g. if you want to dead lift 200kg, lift 60 kg today, lift 65 next week, 70 two weeks later, and train consistently and persevere, and maybe if you really dedicate yourself to it, in about 8 years or so you'll make the lift. Apply that strategy to the things in your life and they'll more likely happen. Imagining it alone will not work. It's silly to say think of three common everyday things and pretend they are miracles when they occur. Because I want a muscular physique, sure I have already visualised today's training, but unless I actually go to the gym and eat the right things, I'll not be muscular. Because the work is hard, I also have to sleep right. Hence just because I want a slight thing doesn't mean it will happen. All the conditions that make it possible have to come together. That's where LOA sounds amazing as you dream deliberate creation into existence with everyday things, and karma is saying this is how life works. The bottom line is exactly the same, but some resort to ambiguity like 'your vibration' and others go over the nuances in more detail. You mean I can't just sit at home and attract muscle gains while posting to online forums? I have to work the muscles and eat protein? That's not very spiritual. If you're spiritual enough you can get anything you want with your magical thinking. Don't be a loser who "works"; that's for the lower classes. To me that Hicks passage was similar to one of my old tricks: "look for flowers". Once you make that intent, you notice they are everywhere. I bet there's some in your presence right now because floral designs are everywhere. It's just a little saying that means notice the beauty in the world rather than fixate on the nasty stuff.
These people who promote the power of the mind are fine, it's true, but it doesn't work with 'vibration' (whatever that is). It's just that glass and feathers are everywhere if you care to notice (though I reckon Hicks probably made up that story anyway). Try vibrating up a real-living Minotaur and see how it works.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 17, 2024 5:43:08 GMT -5
I interpret that little "blue" story to say that even a short and unemotional mental focus on anything initiates a process of materialization into the physical reality. We don't notice that because of our inherently low level of awareness (one of the reasons we had to join a reality like this), our beliefs and expectations. As the materialization process is initiated, immediately our doubts and distractions begin working against it, slowing it down, and even preventing its fruition. Correct. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 17, 2024 6:39:36 GMT -5
Are you familiar with Richard Bach? So the conclusion would seem to be what I referred to as synchronicity relates to what Esther calls deliberate creation by the non-deliberate nature of the attractions. "Synchronicities" happen unconsciously, in Tolle-speak. The metaphor of a human body/mind as a lens or an antenna comes to mind here. We could say that various forms are attuned to various vibes. The form of a domesticated dog is attuned to scents and human emotions. The form of a squirrel is attuned to trees and chewing. Some human beings are attuned to various unusual states of consciousness. Certain people might be more finely attuned to a CC or NS, for example. Others, less so. So, I can try to bridge your and lolz positions by saying that the explanation for why most people don't usually manifest low BMI and defined muscle growth on the couch is that these manifestations are out of tune (out of alignment) with individuals who are attuned to sedentary inaction + high calorie intake. It's not like the vibes and the manifestations aren't related to one another, after all. No, I'm not familiar with Richard Bach. The conclusion (at least for me) is that we usually are unaware of the whole creation process, i.e. how our state of being attracts the circumstances, people and events that we call our experience or our life. But when we suddenly notice it, we call it magical or synchronicity, but in reality this is just the normal functioning, the process of creation, be it personal or impersonal. And the only requirement for your desires to manifest is to be a vibrational match to your desires. That's it. This is how 'miraculous' healings and recoveries work (see Anita Moorjani's story that ZD mentioned). So in order to have that kind of body that you want you just have to hold that image and it will be. How long that takes, depends solely on your ability to focus purely (see Abe's 17 seconds rule). This is where the Patanjali connection is. So, in theory, it's really simple. However, simple doesn't mean easy, as Inavalan already mentioned, because you can only manifest within the confines of your own beliefs which are the framework of your reality. So if you believe, like Lolly, that you have to exercise a lot and only eat the right things in order to get to that body shape that you want, then that's what you have to do. Your beliefs don't allow you any different route. Now, the challenge here is that false, hindering beliefs that slow you down or flat-out declare such ways of manifesting impossible are constantly reinforced onto us by our environment. So if you are someone who is realistic, rational and factual, you are doomed to failure because the limits of the consensus trance beliefs will also be your own limits. But once there is one who goes beyond that, everyone suddenly can do that too. A good example is the "10-second barrier", i.e. 100m sprint below 10 seconds. It was to be thought impossible for a long time, then someone broke that barrier, and suddenly it became normal. And so, what Abe and Patanjali and Yogananda see as normal, from the consensus trance perspective seems miraculous or fantastic. But once you understand how LOA works and alignment, it will seem perfectly rational and even predictable. Now, here's a bit of a twist: Action in alignment is fun, action in misalignment is not. And as Abe always say, we didn't come here to create thru action, we came here to create thru thought, the action was only intended as a way for us to enjoy what we've created thru thought. So while you could teleport yourself from NYC to LA in an instant, taking the the long road trip can be so much more fun! Similarly, lifting weights and doing pushups can also be fun. Even being dead tired after a workout can be very satisfying. It's a way of enjoying the physical realm, in the most physical way, thru our body, directly. And here's another twist: The old computer games usually had a cheat code, that gave you unlimited lives, time and power etc. So when you entered that code, the default rules of the game suddenly didn't apply to you anymore and you could just run thru that game in 1/10 of the usual time with zero challenges or risks. Now, how often would you actually do that? Maybe once or twice and you'd be bored. So that would be missing the point of the game, right? Now, given what Patanjali and Abe tell us, we could do basically the same. But why should we? Why would we? What would be the point, right? If you know who you are, there's no need for that. But if you don't know who you are, you may feel the need for that. Here's a quote from RM: |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Feb 17, 2024 6:48:44 GMT -5
You mean I can't just sit at home and attract muscle gains while posting to online forums? I have to work the muscles and eat protein? That's not very spiritual. If you're spiritual enough you can get anything you want with your magical thinking. Don't be a loser who "works"; that's for the lower classes. To me that Hicks passage was similar to one of my old tricks: "look for flowers". Once you make that intent, you notice they are everywhere. I bet there's some in your presence right now because floral designs are everywhere. It's just a little saying that means notice the beauty in the world rather than fixate on the nasty stuff. These people who promote the power of the mind are fine, it's true, but it doesn't work with 'vibration' (whatever that is). It's just that glass and feathers are everywhere if you care to notice (though I reckon Hicks probably made up that story anyway). Try vibrating up a real-living Minotaur and see how it works.
Given your current belief system, for you that's impossible to do. And given how LOA works, based on your strong beliefs, LOA will prevent you from ever witnessing or even hearing about people having accomplished what you deem as impossible to accomplish. Which means you will forever stay in your our belief bubble, using your own experience which is the result of those beliefs as proof for the absolute validity of those very beliefs. Fascinating, isn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Feb 17, 2024 7:17:26 GMT -5
Given benefit of the doubt, those who biuld appreciable muscle without resistance exercise (+ nutrition) are so few that they don't even register statistically, so obviously these idea about beliefs are incongruent with observable reality. On the other hand, completely regardless of what anyone believes, adequate volumes of resistance training coupled with appropriate nutrition will stimulate muscle growth with a statistical significance of near enough 100%. When I state the obvious to support a claim that is self-evident I conclude I'm wasting my time on nonsense.
|
|
