Dubstepforum.com

What's difficult is to both qualify and quantify something that's much larger than human language can really describe with any degree of success: it's a fine line between talking about abstract "energies" that we both transmit & receive - and talking about, say, crystal vibrations or 2012 or other more defined but even less provable things. It's very easy to turn it all airy-fairy and fluffy.

However, I think it's fairly safe to say that in addition to the physical reality we are all participants in, there are also our individual private realities which arise from our own biological processes filtering or interpreting the shared physical reality. In these private realities our thoughts literally dictate the structure of what we perceive, in tandem with language and personal experience. And in the end we tend to place more value, trust, and confidence in our private reality than the cold-hard "here and now."

This is where the idea of karma comes into play most directly; that the energies we extend toward life and its other participants will in some way or another find us again, whether directly or indirectly. Action > reaction... only, the reaction may not be linear or predictable because the action probably wasn't as well, much as most of our private realities are rarely either linear or predictable for that matter.

When we turn down the babble [via meditation] of the brain filtering and interpreting 'hard' external reality, we often see how irrational much of our life really is, and that that's understandable given that we're all running around listening to our private realities, assuming that others are experiencing the exact same thing as you, and not trying to integrate any of it with the larger external Reality.

This is one of the keys to understanding the Buddhist concept of non-attachment to things - the less attached we are, the less of that energy we're extending trying to hold on to something that's absolutely incapable of being held onto (such as life and its pleasures, or people, or ideas that make us feel better but do not stand up to logical scrutiny, or anything really - even Buddhism!) - the less we surround ourselves with mental trinkets & curios that we feel belong to us, the less subject to laws of karmic reaction we become. It's as simple as that.

Does this mean we'll ever completely rid ourselves of attachments, completely transcend that desire to own/have something last forever? Not likely. It's more like spiritual harm reduction, though - the healthier you make yourself, the better your life becomes.

Now I can see that this might've opened another can of worms - namely, this Buddhist idea of attachments being counterproductive... but that's another discussion for another time.

alphacat wrote:What's difficult is to both qualify and quantify something that's much larger than human language can really describe with any degree of success: it's a fine line between talking about abstract "energies" that we both transmit & receive - and talking about, say, crystal vibrations or 2012 or other more defined but even less provable things. It's very easy to turn it all airy-fairy and fluffy.



This is where the idea of karma comes into play most directly; that the energies we extend toward life and its other participants will in some way or another find us again, whether directly or indirectly. Action > reaction... only, the reaction may not be linear or predictable because the action probably wasn't as well, much as most of our private realities are rarely either linear or predictable for that matter.

Really nicely put. Respect.

Do u mind me askin how often u meditate and what method u find suits u best?

Peace

RAW calls these personal realities "reality tunnels". he says we begin to worship our own personal model as if it were God, and then attack all opposing models with arrogant confidence. calls it Modeltheism.

dreamizm wrote:Really nicely put. Respect.

Do u mind me askin how often u meditate and what method u find suits u best?

Peace

Thank you kindly. I started to reply to this a few days ago, but realized it was something that was probably best not treated lightly.

I do not "sit" much any more - that's the term for silent, stationary meditiation that most of us think of, with full lotus posture and all that - but I meditate when the opportunity presents itself. I would like to return to sitting and devoting more time to meditation though, because the benefits are clear even to non-spiritual types. For the time being, I tend not to use verbal (mantra) based approaches because - being a pretty verbal person - sometimes it's too easy to go running off down the rabbit hole into further recursion instead of transcending the sounds. Visual meditation - focusing on something until the analytical mind isn't driving the car any more so to speak - has always been the easiest for me but not always the most rewarding.

Two really good books on the subject of approach: "Om: Creative Meditations" by Alan Watts (all of his books are good, really) and "Meditation and its Methods" by S. Vivekananda. They're practical, funny, and insightful and not rigid or dogmatic in the least.

parson wrote:RAW calls these personal realities "reality tunnels". he says we begin to worship our own personal model as if it were God, and then attack all opposing models with arrogant confidence. calls it Modeltheism.

Miss that guy. In fact, I was the last person he added to his Top Friends on MySpace before he passed on, something which I really wanted to read meaning into but then, sometimes things just are the way they are. His writing gave me so, so much... great citation Parson. His take on James Shelby Downard's reality tunnel (and the danger thereof) was really interesting to me, among other things.

that's awesome!

parson wrote:RAW calls these personal realities "reality tunnels". he says we begin to worship our own personal model as if it were God, and then attack all opposing models with arrogant confidence. calls it Modeltheism.

RAW?

rbnc wrote:

parson wrote: non-believers in an actual karmic structure to reality oughtta look into what science is telling us about what's really going on.

the science confirms the experiences. time and space don't even really exist. the distance between me and you is like the distance between items on my desktop. we're living in a hologram. a hologram, which apparently has a designer. a video game which apparently has rules and ways to bend the rules.

You're talking shit.

Not entirely. It's a new way scientists are using to look at the universe. As a three dimensional projection of a four (or higher) dimensional space. In the same way that conventional holograms capture 3D info on a 2D substrate. It apparently makes a few things easier to formulate, consider and explain. Some higher dimensional functions have already been proven to have lower dimensional counterparts which result in the same explanations.

Whether it has anything to do with spirituality though is another can of worms

Robert Anton Wilson

Thanks, I might look up his stuff at some point.

kay wrote:Not entirely. It's a new way scientists are using to look at the universe. As a three dimensional projection of a four (or higher) dimensional space. In the same way that conventional holograms capture 3D info on a 2D substrate. It apparently makes a few things easier to formulate, consider and explain. Some higher dimensional functions have already been proven to have lower dimensional counterparts which result in the same explanations.

Whether it has anything to do with spirituality though is another can of worms

check out the hexagon on saturn

kay wrote:Thanks, I might look up his stuff at some point.

this is a real good talk with him. he mostly discusses his and tim leary's interpretation of the chakra system as an 8 circuit model of intelligence
http://www.futurehi.net/media.html

alphacat wrote:What's difficult is to both qualify and quantify something that's much larger than human language can really describe with any degree of success: it's a fine line between talking about abstract "energies" that we both transmit & receive - and talking about, say, crystal vibrations or 2012 or other more defined but even less provable things. It's very easy to turn it all airy-fairy and fluffy.

However, I think it's fairly safe to say that in addition to the physical reality we are all participants in, there are also our individual private realities which arise from our own biological processes filtering or interpreting the shared physical reality. In these private realities our thoughts literally dictate the structure of what we perceive, in tandem with language and personal experience. And in the end we tend to place more value, trust, and confidence in our private reality than the cold-hard "here and now."

This is where the idea of karma comes into play most directly; that the energies we extend toward life and its other participants will in some way or another find us again, whether directly or indirectly. Action > reaction... only, the reaction may not be linear or predictable because the action probably wasn't as well, much as most of our private realities are rarely either linear or predictable for that matter.

When we turn down the babble [via meditation] of the brain filtering and interpreting 'hard' external reality, we often see how irrational much of our life really is, and that that's understandable given that we're all running around listening to our private realities, assuming that others are experiencing the exact same thing as you, and not trying to integrate any of it with the larger external Reality.

This is one of the keys to understanding the Buddhist concept of non-attachment to things - the less attached we are, the less of that energy we're extending trying to hold on to something that's absolutely incapable of being held onto (such as life and its pleasures, or people, or ideas that make us feel better but do not stand up to logical scrutiny, or anything really - even Buddhism!) - the less we surround ourselves with mental trinkets & curios that we feel belong to us, the less subject to laws of karmic reaction we become. It's as simple as that.

Does this mean we'll ever completely rid ourselves of attachments, completely transcend that desire to own/have something last forever? Not likely. It's more like spiritual harm reduction, though - the healthier you make yourself, the better your life becomes.

Now I can see that this might've opened another can of worms - namely, this Buddhist idea of attachments being counterproductive... but that's another discussion for another time.

Beautifully put. Thanks for this post.

Could any dsf Buddhists please let themselves be known - I need your help

alphacat wrote:Karma is simply another aspect to Newtonian physics: everything you put out there will cross your path in some form again, just that you don't know when, where, or how.

parson wrote:non-believers in an actual karmic structure to reality oughtta look into what science is telling us about what's really going on.

the science confirms the experiences. time and space don't even really exist. the distance between me and you is like the distance between items on my desktop. we're living in a hologram. a hologram, which apparently has a designer. a video game which apparently has rules and ways to bend the rules.

Please elaborate. What do you have to back all this up?

magma wrote:

alphacat wrote:What's difficult is to both qualify and quantify something that's much larger than human language can really describe with any degree of success: it's a fine line between talking about abstract "energies" that we both transmit & receive - and talking about, say, crystal vibrations or 2012 or other more defined but even less provable things. It's very easy to turn it all airy-fairy and fluffy.

However, I think it's fairly safe to say that in addition to the physical reality we are all participants in, there are also our individual private realities which arise from our own biological processes filtering or interpreting the shared physical reality. In these private realities our thoughts literally dictate the structure of what we perceive, in tandem with language and personal experience. And in the end we tend to place more value, trust, and confidence in our private reality than the cold-hard "here and now."

This is where the idea of karma comes into play most directly; that the energies we extend toward life and its other participants will in some way or another find us again, whether directly or indirectly. Action > reaction... only, the reaction may not be linear or predictable because the action probably wasn't as well, much as most of our private realities are rarely either linear or predictable for that matter.

When we turn down the babble [via meditation] of the brain filtering and interpreting 'hard' external reality, we often see how irrational much of our life really is, and that that's understandable given that we're all running around listening to our private realities, assuming that others are experiencing the exact same thing as you, and not trying to integrate any of it with the larger external Reality.

This is one of the keys to understanding the Buddhist concept of non-attachment to things - the less attached we are, the less of that energy we're extending trying to hold on to something that's absolutely incapable of being held onto (such as life and its pleasures, or people, or ideas that make us feel better but do not stand up to logical scrutiny, or anything really - even Buddhism!) - the less we surround ourselves with mental trinkets & curios that we feel belong to us, the less subject to laws of karmic reaction we become. It's as simple as that.

Does this mean we'll ever completely rid ourselves of attachments, completely transcend that desire to own/have something last forever? Not likely. It's more like spiritual harm reduction, though - the healthier you make yourself, the better your life becomes.

Now I can see that this might've opened another can of worms - namely, this Buddhist idea of attachments being counterproductive... but that's another discussion for another time.

Beautifully put. Thanks for this post.

what magma said.

Buddhism has been fascinating me of late. out to whoever mentioned alan watts, ordered a couple of his books the other day. looking forward to getting stuck into them.

plenty of Alan Watts audio books /talks online too Frazer- his voice definitely adds to his words! And what were you gonna ask Cityzen?

also, re-wacthed this the other day.Out lays his entire life and story.Much recommended... he wasn't always the wise big bellied laughing guy .Really easy to watch too and will leave you feeling chillllllled-out.



Coincidentally or not, it's the 'Vesak' tommorow. (5th may ) "Sometimes informally called "Buddha's Birthday", it actually encompasses the birth, enlightenment (nirvāna), and passing away (Parinirvāna) of Gautama Buddha"

also a perigee supermoon

d-T-r wrote:plenty of Alan Watts audio books /talks online too Frazer

on the DL as we speak

this might be of interest to some people here, came across it at work today, got abit engrossed. hence my productivity warning tehehe

http://www.sacred-texts.com/tao/taote.htm

alien pimp wrote:

Uncle Mike wrote:yeah opposed to the god thread I acutally believ in reincarnation.

reincarnation is when you're eaten by worms and their shit feeds 1000 flowers

truth

fractal wrote:

alien pimp wrote:

Uncle Mike wrote:yeah opposed to the god thread I acutally believ in reincarnation.

reincarnation is when you're eaten by worms and their shit feeds 1000 flowers

truth

what is truth ?

and

fassyman wrote:

d-T-r wrote:plenty of Alan Watts audio books /talks online too Frazer

on the DL as we speak

this might be of interest to some people here, came across it at work today, got abit engrossed. hence my productivity warning tehehe

http://www.sacred-texts.com/tao/taote.htm

Plenty of gems from Lao-Tzu!

whatever you decide it is tbh

d-T-r wrote:... he wasn't always the wise big bellied laughing guy ....

he was never big bellied, thats budai