Minds So Infinitely Small.

a reply to: Bluesma

Ah well... so you don't appreciate my little internal fantasies. Doesn't matter. They are mine. You cannot touch them, manipulate them, change them, correct them, control them.

Your "internal fantasies", though probably interesting (and knowing you, likely sordid), is not a postulated entity.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So if I picture a tank in my head, will a doctor be able to cut open my brain and find that tank inside of it? If not, THEN WHERE IS IT? It's not in my head or brain, so where is it?

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

So if I picture a tank in my head, will a doctor be able to cut open my brain and find that tank inside of it? If not, THEN WHERE IS IT? It's not in my head or brain, so where is it?

There is no tank. It's nowhere, for the umpteenth time.

a reply to: pthena
That sense of "I" is actually the activity of attention - which constantly creates point-of-view when focusing on objects, etc. That focal point of attention is what we sense as our separate self - but it is just an activity.

In other words, that separate "I" feeling is not an entity, but only the result of creating point-of-view via the mechanism of attention. So no ego-I will ever be actually found - only the self-contractive activity that generates it can be noticed.

Attention is the first gesture of separation that our fundamental awareness associates with, and some have noted that this first occurs in the causal heart (on the right side of the chest). This can be observed when point-of-view making ceases and attention is allowed to come to rest in the heart. But this requires real equanimity beyond all conceptions and perceptions.

And as you say, the heart is considered by some to be the seat of the soul - though, I like to equate the soul with attention, for attention is the one constant that no matter what experiences (high or low) are described, the activity of attention is always present, and felt to be the "I". Of course, the soul is often equated with the subtle body-mind in its entirety, but that is another matter.

Just to round out this post, let me say that the source of feelings of love and emotion are generally associated with the middle or "astral" heart-chakra in the center of the chest; and the physical heart, is, of course, on the left side of the body.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

What is it that I haven't experienced then? And what is it that you have experienced that proves this negative to you? What is it that you have tried?

You can't prove a negative so I'm wondering what kind of experience cemented your dismissal of these teachings? If you've earnestly practiced spiritual cultivation and haven't broken your mental locks then you haven't gotten very far now have you?

So strange that people all over the World all throughout history all explain and report back the same experiences when dealing with these subjects. I guess that is just a huge coincidence. Isn't that what you materialists call reproducible experiments? The only difference is the medium and the subjective experience - which is normally the only perspective we've got.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

I encourage non physical intruders because I drink the fear and I savour it, my goal is scaring the demons..I love feeling their surprised reaction when their intimidation attempts are met with mental laughter. I only want the attacks to get worse, the excitement is intoxicating and addictive.

I've used this analogy on another thread, I kind of like it.

Think of Boy Blue in this song.

Rather than physical foes, they are spirit foes he has been fighting.

There's fighting to prove a point.

But once the point has been made, some have no trouble laying down their arms.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: TzarChasm

okay, then what system of spirituality do you adhere to? i have never seen in any of your threads or posts a single reference to a spiritual concept that you yourself invest in. its always critizing someone elses deity, someone elses afterlife, someone elses spiritual lexicon. what god do you answer to? where do you hope to go after you die? do you feel you have a soul?

Very true. Do I not get a thanks for this?

ehhhhh...no. being smart is not a strength if you only use it to tear people down. i would like to see a positive thread from you someday, a thread that isnt oriented around deconstructive criticism. something that gives people a reason to smile and think "thats nice". instead of "im not sure what i just read, but it definitely thinks im an idiot." and i know you are going to say thats me projecting...but all anyone has to do is review your thread history. or your post history. i invite anyone to have a look and tell me i am wrong. how about a pet thread? or a food thread? a reason to celebrate life and humanity. a nice change of pace for you. just a suggestion...

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

What is it that I haven't experienced then? And what is it that you have experienced that proves this negative to you? What is it that you have tried?

You tell me. It is your projection after all.

You can't prove a negative so I'm wondering what kind of experience cemented your dismissal of these teachings? If you've earnestly practiced spiritual cultivation and haven't broken your mental locks then you haven't gotten very far now have you?

You can prove a negative. The irony is "you can't prove a negative", is a negative. I suppose we can now infer logic is something you have never experienced.

So strange that people all over the World all throughout history all explain and report back the same experiences when dealing with these subjects. I guess that is just a huge coincidence. Isn't that what you materialists call reproducible experiments? The only difference is the medium and the subjective experience - which is normally the only perspective we've got.

The same amount of people thought the earth was flat, or that it was the center of the universe. By your logic, they were right.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Yet you can still see it. You've closed your mind to what I'm suggesting.

a reply to: pthena

Perhaps I will grow up some day. Until then I'll keep enjoying high strangeness even if it's terrifying or a supposedly negative influence. They're just busy doing their job being malevolent. Serves a purpose too.

a reply to: TzarChasm

ehhhhh...no. being smart is not a strength if you only use it to tear people down.

I seem to recall you complaining that people should keep their beliefs to themselves. Perhaps I was mistaken.

The only thing I've torn down are ideas. I've never spent time following around someone and deriding everything they write, while insulting their character.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Yet you can still see it. You've closed your mind to what I'm suggesting.

"Seeing" involves the eyes. It can be expressed in a way that is not confusing.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So you're saying when you think of a tank you don't see the tank within your head? Or will you keep saying "seeing requires eyes"? That's ignoring what I'm suggesting. What is it that "sees" a tank when you think of it? Where is that tank that you "see"? Of course I'm using the term "see" loosely, it's a mental sight that I speak of, not a physical one.

Where is that tank and what is seeing it when you think of it? What about green? Do you know what green looks like when you think of it? Where is the color green when you think of it?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So you can't even tell me your experiences that proved this to you. Ok, then you cede that point.

Ok, give me your absolute proof, this will be interesting.

Yeah, and they were laymen. Do not compare exoteric religion with esoteric systems, there's a wide chasm between them. The most obvious one being: one is totally based on blind belief while the other one is practical and experimental. And without these medieval and renaissance adepts that were staunch enemies of the Church modern science wouldn't even exist. You should thank those mystics you always disparage.

Thinking the physical plane is all there is to reality IS the modern flat earth belief. Our current view is flatter than the ancient view in its own way.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: TzarChasm

ehhhhh...no. being smart is not a strength if you only use it to tear people down.

I seem to recall you complaining that people should keep their beliefs to themselves. Perhaps I was mistaken.

The only thing I've torn down are ideas. I've never spent time following around someone and deriding everything they write, while insulting their character.

i am of the opinion that religion should be kept out of government. i am also of the opinion that mankinds interests should be first priority. i am also of the opinion that those who do not desire to be criticized and attacked should not criticize or attack.

i do not insult your character, i question your method and strive to demonstrate that you yourself are not above reproach in your philosophies. your poop dont smell like roses, and it would be nice to see some of that reflected in your dissertations. otherwise all you do is provide examples of how being non-spiritual can have unsavory effects.

a reply to: bb23108

That sense of "I" is actually the activity of attention
. . .
I like to equate the soul with attention

I = activity of attention = Soul

That sounds right to me. Thank you.

a reply to: TzarChasm

i do not insult your character

You always do. Even in this thread. The evidence is there, but will you admit to it?

For the second time, I criticize ideas. What are you criticizing?

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Ok, give me your absolute proof, this will be interesting.

Of what?

Yeah, and they were laymen. Do not compare exoteric religion with esoteric systems, there's a wide chasm between them. The most obvious one being: one is totally based on blind belief while the other one is practical and experimental. And without these medieval and renaissance adepts that were staunch enemies of the Church modern science wouldn't even exist. You should thank those mystics you always disparage.

I suppose it's unfortunate that these mystics never got their mysticism validated, and only their science. I wonder why?

Thinking the physical plane is all there is to reality IS the modern flat earth belief. Our current view is flatter than the ancient view in its own way.

According to zero evidence and credulity.

a reply to: TzarChasm

i invite anyone to have a look and tell me i am wrong.

The thread entitled, "I Believe in Religion"

LeMisanthrope stated that people can make their own religion, just that you can't make a religion out of religion.

I'm still trying to achieve that goal. I find myself still dealing with religion out of religion. I probably will never achieve the goal while talking religion with other people. Ah, aspirations!

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

So you're saying when you think of a tank you don't see the tank within your head? Or will you keep saying "seeing requires eyes"? That's ignoring what I'm suggesting. What is it that "sees" a tank when you think of it? Where is that tank that you "see"? Of course I'm using the term "see" loosely, it's a mental sight that I speak of, not a physical one.

Where is that tank and what is seeing it when you think of it? What about green? Do you know what green looks like when you think of it? Where is the color green when you think of it?

Cover your bases, enlightened. These questions can be stated clearly. If I get silly questions, I give silly answers.

I am thinking about a tank, not thinking a tank.