no, you are assuming all of this
Quote:
You seem to write in a great flurry of inspiration, but without editing or taking the time to reread.
Quote:
You pile so many generalities on top of each other that no clear meaning seems to emerge.
both of these statements are flat out wrong. firstly, yes, inspiration, no-editing, no, that's wrong. no rereading, no, that's wrong. Everything is grammatically correct, and spelt correctly. (i don't worry about capitalising everything, or else i'd take forever to get my thoughts out, but you never mind that) -- and secondly, no meaning emerges? well, you should at least understand how to infer what is in from out, if you meditate on forms, but even if you meditate on the formless- you should know what 'objects' are. you should know what precedes the "space", if you are one to discuss what one 'sees' (or hears) or comprehends in meditation. 
Quote:
Do you really think I'm trying to form a cult?
Do you really think I'm devilish?
(That my post provoked this hostility, on your part seems a little odd.)
oy.
you are misinformed what "luciferian" means'. it's not 'devilish'.
Quote:
the opposite of being hypnotized by language, and thought
step by step into experiencing
funny, i was talking about doing the same thing. only i'm giving you the keys. i've read Power Of Now. it's literally an instruction manual on how to hypnotize yourself. what do you think experiencing is?
it's being.
by manifesting, objects, or questions/answers, you are being.
there is only everything right being Luciferian. those who think it wrong are misapprehending what being a 'light-bearer' means. it's certainly nothing devilish. it's exactly like that that you propound you're managing to achieve the concordance of, but without speech (might i add, your addresses here do very little in the way of showing me you have any place to speak on someone's 'delivery'. you often speak in vague terms, yourself, and with grandiloquent aspect, only without the sesquipedalian inflection) -- only the answer you have given to your own propounding is a video on Eckhart Tolle. wow.
ancient knowledge, you've been trumped by Eckhart Tolle.
Quote:
“we have to deal with objects”, that we don't already know & how is that relevant, to Vipassana or mindfulness practice?
do you Zen? do you object-oriented philosophy, bro? (damn, probably not)
but yeah...ZEN
and from the Vipassana, of course "objects" would refer to "thought-forms" (gods, angels, demons, ect) and other such "fetters" of existence.
Quote:
...In the above sentence who does ’them’ refer to? and what is their “geography”? And who or what wants to escape 'impermanence’?
i'll spell it out for you, dude.
their geography is very prone to the culture they partake in, and that which grew along that region. due to the regions sparse densities (due to chaste and the ways in which settlements are built, and governance handled), monasticism has always been common - and since it's a very old culture (and the substrata even older still), it's handled [via old laws] as a "subsistence" culture, like i said, but a very 'grown' one...as in 'big'...and thus it has an emphasis on "sufferance" like most "big cultures" at around the time/era, that these cultures start popping up- at around the time monotheism is picking up, in the east of Asia [that's old timey geography]--).
and who wants to escape impermanence? lol
the entire religion is about the very task.  regardless of 'technique' (which the Buddha only laid out for very few to comprehend, themselves, because it's pointless to disturb the mind with more than just the outline given, espoused as such, because of this reason,- the reason being that most people won't comprehend it and will not be able to assert themselves properly, so hence, guidelines were given, and discourses, in order to help focus the mind of the practitioner.
Quote:
...Hypnotic language is often built with unspecified parts. The way you write makes use of the same sort of structure (or lack of structure). I wonder: are you hypnotizing yourself or hoping to affect others in some ‘poetic’ ways?
just the same when you talk with your particular inflections, styles (in writing- very important) and, of course, your idiosyncratic use of syntax and clauses -- very neuralgic reading to me, in the sense that it's minimalized (like most structured "dialogue"; while i prefer the "discursive" style), and very... lugubrious, and not cloying [i would say my style can be cloying], but more like... waxy and lutarious].
and in the original, and in most, Buddhist discourse, there is ALWAYS repetition, in fact, there is a distinct flair for it...and you...so i don't know why you'd...ya know...be against the notion (as if that's what i was doing; but you did say something about 'hypnotism' and well, that's kinda how "changing your mind" works on the purely 'teaching' level. what is Active in Buddhist thought, like in most traditions [but the emphasis is heavy in Buddhism], the knowledge must be "transmitted" to be known in full, and not just in theory or some grounded rationale, that has no basis in experience.)
Quote:
...Here are some references to what is meant by unspecified parts in hypnotic language. It is a documented phenomenon and not something I made up.
hey, laughingdog....
POW-ER-OF-NOW
Quote:
...As far as I’m concerned, 'it goes without saying', you are of course free to write in anyway you wish, but if you really intend to reply to me, in regards, to meditation techniques and explanations used by experts to help those suffering from stress, in hospitals and clinical situations, it seems rather an odd style to adopt.
i didn't realize this thread was solely for the purposes of clinical practices like therapy. and of course, you realize i'll reply how i wish, to whom i wish, as well. i'm not going to start talk clinical situations unless prompted to. imagine like i'm an ai...now imagine that i'm not an ai, and not a mindreader, and that this thread isn't actually just about clinical practice concerning meditation practices (not even the real concern of Buddhism, anyway...meditation is more of Vedanta school, or maybe Chinese Tradition....
Quote:
...I make no claims to being smart or original, I have simply spent a lot of time studying the matter from many perspectives, and enjoy trying to clarify some of the subtle points (of well established meditation principles and practices) for myself, as well as others. There are many similarities across teachers, traditions, and methods. In many ways for example Tibetan Buddhism is different from what Eckhart Tolle teaches,- that is if we focus on externals - yet there are core similarities. I have no interest in some of the odd practices, of some odd sects, or trying to defend some arbitrary position in regards to some arbitrarily chosen definition of "Buddhism".
you can focus on "meditation principals" (this is that idiosyncratic language again; you mean, "clinical practice in the use of meditation techniques"?) -- i'll comment about the original doctrine as espoused by a teacher. you can make all the claims you want to my "inauthenticity" and your "license" (your figurative "profession"- which to me, isn't really more than "charm", considering this thread isn't about clinicians trying to pass off spiritual practice as medicine? or is it? i dunno.)
Quote:
...My interest is in those aspects of meditation ( and the understandings on which those practices are based) that are consistent across various places and times and clinically proven to have positive results.
understanding what Buddhism is about beyond what has been extricated from it, in medical practice, is one entirely different ballgame, and notionally, much more "enlightening". literally. but hey, no one ever said you "should" do anything.
Quote:
....Awareness is not something Buddhism invented.
of course not, Buddhism is a response and reaction to the Vedic schools.
Edited by akira_akuma (11/23/18 01:05 AM)
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
BrendanFlock 
redgreenvines 
[Re: 
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 all )
InnerBeing
Kremlin
JCoke
PsillyNilly
Northernsoul
Meph