Rosemary Ellen Guiley

[Muadib]

Bob Zanotti said: ↑​

..​

​

​

​

the “Djinn” .. , attach themselves to humans, often to use human bodies as a proxy to enjoy carnal and other pleasures. They are largely responsible for seemingly unexplained shifts in personal behavior, and for addictions. This may well account for the rise in collective decadence in contemporary society, bevause more and more people are living in Darkness as opposed to living in the Light.​

..​

Jimi H said:

Pseudo-science? Or just beliefs?

​

​

I didn't want to get dragged back into this thread but after seeing Bob's post, I would have to say it may be a bit of pseudo-science and belief, but mostly it's complete and utter baseless crap. Speaking as someone who has worked with and been around a variety of people with a variety of addictions, both treated and untreated, I can say with 100% confidence that not one single time was the cause some nebulous imaginary spirit or Djinn. How does one even go about treating a potential Djinn infection? Magic crystals and homeopathy? Give me a break. The fact that this kind of 3rd century, dark ages thinking is still around in the year 2013 never ceases to amaze me. As stated earlier in the thread, there's a reason we don't turn to witch doctors when we're sick anymore, and it's because that kind of crap simply doesn't work. Period. I really hope you never try to push this ridiculous garbage on a real person with a real addiction, you just might get them killed instead of helping them.​

 

[Infolad1]

No, it is not the language of the universe, it's a human language to describe the universe.

Personally, I'm open to transcendentalism, but I'm always aware that when I see patterns in nature (the veins in a leaf, or the veins in your wrist, or a river-delta), I'm actually seeing matter ordering itself according to physical proporties. Gravity (or the pumping heart) creates these flows. Is there a system in place?
Yes, in so far as the physical proporties are concerned. It is not math. Math is the description of these physical proporties, and since physical proporties are always the same, physical matter (the known universe) conforms to to what appears to be a mathematical system. Math is the human language to describe it. Math is not a natural science, and traditionally it resided with philosophy.

Hello. Wonderful reasoning, wrong premise.

Mathematics is from the Greek mathematikos, meaning the study of order. Manifested reality is composed of things. Any sentient intelligent entity will have a method of studying the order of these things in order to have cognition of the world around it. It may be from a different perspective (4th dimensional, 5th, etc.), but it's the same thing. The minute you have a self aware intelligent entity that can comprehend phenomena, mathematics is there, either implicitly or explicitly.

As I stated earlier in the thread, I should have specified applied mathematics, versus pure mathematics, which is what you're talking about.

The foundation of the five branches of natural sciences (astronomy, biology, chemistry, the earth sciences and physics) are the formal sciences of mathematics and logic.

Inferred in what you're saying is also discussions on the hard & soft problems of consciousness, qualia, & the quantum mind-body problem, which would take quite some time to lay out, and still comes down to your particular point of view on all of this.

So to be more specific, applied mathematics is the language of the universe of phenomena.

As a rule, I don't subscribe to the Western penchant for "isms". True spirituality (not the pablum that attempts to pass for it these days) enables you to successfully live in the world, not escape it.

 

[Infolad1]

Hi Konrad. Sorry for the delay, but I only got a response from my Hindu monk friend today. Here is what he had to say:

“Rakshasa is a term for very demoniac entities ("man eaters") - the worst of demons, and quite powerful, but ultimately weak because of their hatred of God and the divine. Djinn is, as far as I know, a term for similar entities. Narasimha is an incarnation (avatara) of Vishnu/Krishna, to protect his devotees and destroy the ungodly who try to harm them”.

C.G. Jung: I have been friends with an instructor (their term for “professor”) at the Jung Institute in Zurich for many years. She is also a practicing Jungian analyst-psychiatrist. We have had literally hundreds of hours of dialogue over the years, so I’ve had a fairly good exposure to Jung’s ideas.

Jung was a spiritual – some would say “religious” man, raised in a Zurich Protestant family. But he was very open to what could be called the “paranormal” and Eastern philosophy. He accepted the ideas of karma and reincarnation, which, I believe, later inspired Harvard’s John Mack in his work. As an aside, Jung’s acceptance of the “paranormal” was one of the reasons for his falling-out with Sigmund Freud.

On the specific issue of Shadows, Jung did not, to my knowledge, refer to them in the context of demons or Djinn. On the other hand, Jungians talk about Shadows as though they were living entities that have to be dealt with by the individual. Otherwise, the shadows will always return until they have been “addressed” or acknowledged by the individual. They reside in the inner depths of the unconscious, and occasionally break out of their unconscious confinement, and “demand” to be heard or acknowledged. I would speculate that, in effect, Jung’s Shadows could well be considered “demons”.

Hinduism is obviously very familiar with demons, and they even have names. It’s interesting that Roman Catholic tradition is similar. As in the case of Jung’s Shadows, in the Catholic monastic tradition, in particular, the individual must confront the demons in or around him, in order to understand what they want and why they are doing what they are doing. It is considered possible, as in Hinduism, that demons can be responsible for changes in behavior. We all know about demonic possession and exorcism.

In some RC monasteries, monks were actually locked in their cells to force a confrontation between them and the demon. It seems to me that this is very similar to what Jung taught about dealing with Shadows. The well-known German Benedictine monk, Anselm Grün, wrote about this in the book “Der Umgang mit dem Bösen: Der Dämonenkampf im alten Mönchtum”. What he describes is very close to Vedic teachings and those of Jung. The thought comes to me that maybe this is what Jesus was doing when he went into the desert and was confronted by the “devil”.

TM: I know the article you speak of, and read it several years ago. I also contacted the author. He turned out to be abusive, and in my opinion, had some personal, neurotic issue with the TM Movement. I understand he was/is a TM teacher. I asked him several questions about his position, but he became so hostile, I simply broke off contact with him. He’s got a grudge of some kind, and I would leave it at this, and not give much credence to his comments.

TM is a technique of mantra meditation. It derives from Ayurveda “The Science of Living”. This is a comprehensive set of advice for healthy living. It is part of Vedic Science, of which yoga in all its forms is a part. TM is completely separate from the TM Movement, and is philosophically and religiously neutral. It requires no belief of any kind. There is no religious awareness, per se, although religious people often report deeper spiritual insight and therefore, a reinforcement of their faith as a result of practicing TM. But TM will work just as well for an atheist.

A key part of the practice of TM is settling down the mind – i.e. lowering the entropy of consciousness. What happens is that this “mental chill-down” allows very deep-seated thoughts to be released from the unconscious and rise to the conscious surface. This is likened to champagne bubbles rising from the bottom of the bottle and dispersing when they reach the top. This is where the release of deep stress comes from. But I can also see a clear parallel here between Jung’s Shadows and the Hindu and Catholic techniques of confronting “Djinn”.

I hope this is what you were look for.

Best wishes,
Bob

Hi Bob,

Thanks for your input to the discussion. You've touched upon a few things that a lot of people aren't aware of.

Jung was quite amazing. There's a book called "Atom & Archetype", which discusses the correspondences, and friendship of Jung
with pioneering physicist Wolfgang Pauli. They came up with a pretty thorough system to explain all of these various phenomena.

Jung used the term psychoid to imply that some deep energy process manifests itself in both the mind and physical reality simultaneously.
He goes into detail about this in his book "On The Nature of the Psyche". He very rarely discussed the implications of this, saying most people
wouldn't understand.

A westerner would say someone has a very negative outlook that manifests in self-destructive behavior, someone from a different culture would
say they're possessed by a "demon". They're both saying the same thing, just using different terms to say the same thing. To disparage people,
calling them "Witch Doctors", etc., reeks of the racist, social darwinist contagion the world was infected with during the Anglo-American establishment's
various escapades of Empire. It needs to stop. So called "modern" people aren't necessarily any smarter or better than supposed "primitive" societies.
There's an implicit and explicit claim of superiority that has been shown time and time again to be unfounded.

We can all learn something from the various cultures of the world, both current and ancient.

Thanks again.

 

[Infolad1]

Exactly. Thus if someone makes super-natural claims, we can assess their claims on the scale of credibility, not least by our understanding of the material nature of our world, and by the knowledge that noone can credibly name one instance of supernatural entity like the 'djinn' that is in any way proveable and thus worthy of consideration in a scientific objective sense.

Here's what I hear: Reptile winged djinn-midgets must be considered. We haven't seen any, but it's possible, science just haven't acknowledged them yet! Whatever. You can say that about anything you please.

For phenomena that can be "solid" one minute, and gone the next, what exactly would be your methodology for proving it's "reality", utilizing the scientific method ?

There's actually a number of different ways of proving the existence of these various entities. Pick up a copy of Dr. Gregory Little's "Grand Illusions". He lays out
some classics in there. The Taoist have methods. Takes on the average of 18 years to accomplish. Tratakam will do it. There's all kinds of ways of finding things out, for folks who really want to learn them, with "physical" effects and everything. If you don't know what you're doing (and you won't), there's a good chance you could end up having a psychotic break. The Western mind in general isn't built to deal with stuff without a lot of prep.

But like I said, if you're not just selling wolf tickets, there's ways to verify their existence. Just go looking. REALLY looking. They'll find you.

Bla bla bla. This is so typical. Science discovered quantum physics which you used previously to attack - uhh, science.. Classic antiscientific hypocrisy. That's why we need the scientific method, to avoid bs.

Actually, Everything from Kabballah, Buddhism, Taoism, Dogon & Bantu cosmology, etc. discussed these concepts long before quantum physicists "discovered" them.
They're just another system verifying the reality of what these various people said. But of course, nothing's real until the Western paradigm says it is. I'm sure this'll be chalked up to "confirmation bias", "magical thinking", etc. But as you said "blah, blah, blah."

And for the record, I love science, and scientists. Real science, not the dogmatic garbage that people are attempting to pass off as science. Throwing around terms like "psuedoscience", "woo woo", & "supernatural", like Christians throwing around "heretic", and "blashphemer". Equally sad. Equally blind.

Scientism, the new religion. You're a very pious adherent, if your comments are any indication.

For the record gents, it's safe to say Rosemary did a significant amount of couch research considering both the amount of publications, and the character of the publications (culling info from personal but certainly also written sources).

You know, for someone so science minded, you're making a lot of absolute statements. I may not agree with everything that REG says, but she obviously did research,
both on site and off. It's not "safe to say" anything. You weren't there. All you're offering, is an opinion, nothing more. You may not agree with her work, but to say that she didn't work? That's a pretty messed up, nasty thing to say to someone.

Ah, the anonymity of the internet. Don't you just love it?

 

[Jimi H.]

..

Mathematics is from the Greek mathematikos, meaning the study of order.

Manifested reality is composed of things. Any sentient intelligent entity will have a method of studying the order of these things in order to have cognition of the world around it. It may be from a different perspective (4th dimensional, 5th, etc.), but it's the same thing. The minute you have a self aware intelligent entity that can comprehend phenomena, mathematics is there, either implicitly or explicitly.

Feel free to order your marbles by color, if you wish. There is no Ideal way to order your marbles.

..

The foundation of the five branches of natural sciences (astronomy, biology, chemistry, the earth sciences and physics) are the formal sciences of mathematics and logic.

Mathematics is the language that we use. It is also a toolbox to calculate physical objects with physical proporties. But the mathematical system didn't fall from the sky. We use the Arabic system.

The physical world:
Why are planets round? Because God likes math and making perfect circles, or because of gravity? If transcendental/mathematical idealism was correct, planets should be perfectly spherical. They are not, because they don't adhere to mathematical principles or ideals, but to physical forces. But it is tempting to look at e.g. a planet as mathematical principles/ideals at work. What we find are physical proporties.

Historically, this created big troubles for scientists. Often, non-secular scientists (non-secular in the modern sense, like how I argue) would be looking for a specific order or principle, because that's how religious people look and looked at the world. For instance, the fact that celestial objects do not all travel in perfect circles around the sun was seen as going against 'the order' thus the calculations had to be wrong (and perhaps even heretical). When you have a grand system in place and try to conform the world to it, the flaws show.

..

As a rule, I don't subscribe to the Western penchant for "isms". True spirituality (not the pablum that attempts to pass for it these days) enables you to successfully live in the world, not escape it.

Your idealism appears like escapism to me. Or, a strong need for order.

Imo, we have to get rid of false idealism, and try to love the Earth and life itself. It seems to me that life is a lived mystery. We have no essential understanding of why the universe exists. Why not cherish the mystery without an overlay, or a frame?

Please don't replace the mystery with junk superstition like Zanotti who claims that addictions are devils taking hold of the addict. Hand that person to a licensed real psychologist, and that person is far more likely to come away wiser and more prepared to face the real world, not escape into frustrating fantasy..

I urge everyone seeking a sensuous and even mysterious relation to reality and Earth to read Edward Abbey. And Thoreau. And Mary Austin. And Aldo Leopold. And Joseph Wood Crutch and many others.

 

[Jimi H.]

..
A westerner would say someone has a very negative outlook that manifests in self-destructive behavior, someone from a different culture would

say they're possessed by a "demon". They're both saying the same thing, just using different terms to say the same thing.

Only Western believers in the Judeo-Christian tradition. A scientist would never consider devils. So, I'd argue that you explain things from a 'believer's' point of view.

..
To disparage people, calling them "Witch Doctors", etc., reeks of the racist, social darwinist contagion the world was infected with during the Anglo-American establishment's

various escapades of Empire. It needs to stop.

..

There's an implicit and explicit claim of superiority that has been shown time and time again to be unfounded.

Post-colonial criticisms are a very worthy cause, but relevant here? Forego the results of scientific medicine next time you're sick and put your money where your mouth is. Will you do that? Otherwise, the primitivist idealism looks insincere.

But you're talking about 'wisdom', right? Don't look for spiritual or simply human wisdom in science. Likewise, I won't look for scientific knowledge among spiritual works etc.

..
So called "modern" people aren't necessarily any smarter or better than supposed "primitive" societies.

Not in a biological sense, but we certainly know more in a concrete sense. You can't fly to the moon with stone age tech, or combat serious ailment with prayer and bloodletting. I don't believe you believe it yourself. So, it's escapism. But on the 'wisdom account' I won't argue, that's cool.

..
We can all learn something from the various cultures of the world, both current and ancient.

There's always more to learn, and I for one certainly have little love for the way modern technological societies work and behave vis-a-vis our ecological problems and more. But it's simply an other discussion.

 

[Jimi H.]

For phenomena that can be "solid" one minute, and gone the next, what exactly would be your methodology for proving it's "reality", utilizing the scientific method ?

What phenomena?

There's actually a number of different ways of proving the existence of these various entities. Pick up a copy of Dr. Gregory Little's "Grand Illusions". He lays out some classics in there. The Taoist have methods. Takes on the average of 18 years to accomplish. Tratakam will do it. There's all kinds of ways of finding things out, for folks who really want to learn them, with "physical" effects and everything. If you don't know what you're doing (and you won't), there's a good chance you could end up having a psychotic break. The Western mind in general isn't built to deal with stuff without a lot of prep.

So it takes 18 years to reach the point where you basically lost touch with the real world of us common brutes? Isn't the 'breaking of the psyche' a pillar in the instruction manual for brain washing?
Mind you, I have great respect for many of the Eastern texts in question, and value them greatly as philosophical works, as accumulated 'wisdom'.

But like I said, if you're not just selling wolf tickets, there's ways to verify their existence. Just go looking. REALLY looking. They'll find you.

If you believe that, you are certainly prepping your own psyche to interpret natural phenomena or whatever as super-natural phenomena.

Actually, Everything from Kabballah, Buddhism, Taoism, Dogon & Bantu cosmology, etc. discussed these concepts long before quantum physicists "discovered" them.
..

What concepts are we talking about, specifically?

Scientism, the new religion. You're a very pious adherent, if your comments are any indication.

I frequently rail against what we call 'Scientism', namely the purely reductionist view: If you are made of flesh, that is all you are. I frequently explain that the universe is essentially mysterious, and that we can't know it, essentially. One of my favorite essays (by Edward Abbey) is about the folly of scientism, I wish everyone would read it.

But the opposite is not one bit better! Replacing scientism with spiritualism is not the solution. Or rather, it may be a fine personal solution: You are free to believe whatever you want, but if you want to argue against science with Eastern philosophy as a hammer, it won't work. Science deals with what is known, not what is not known. Science does not know of any super-natural beings, and thus science has no opinion about super-natural beings. It's that simple.

Science can't prove you wrong. But when you argue that super-natural beings are a reality just like a tree or a star, that's belief. There is no objective evidence for it, like there is for UFOs and such. But there's evidence that people make stuff up! Look into the history of the chupacabra, you'll see that we can basically prove who the first 'experiencer' was, and that she was not credible. The chupacabra creature is half lore, half Hollywood's 'species' alien. Pretty fascinating look into the human psyche and the psyche of the 'believer' versus the down-to-Earth researcher.

All you're offering, is an opinion, nothing more. You may not agree with her work, but to say that she didn't work? That's a pretty messed up, nasty thing to say to someone.

Ah, the anonymity of the internet. Don't you just love it?

You're not anonymous?

Anyways, you're off the mark here, we're not on the same page. I wrote that REG clearly did a lot of arm-chair research. But in NO WAY is that a problem for me, non-experimental scholarly work basically consists of armchair research!
But when you deflect sceptic arguments with the argument that all the sceptics just do armchair research it's funny, considering the character of REG's publications. Besides her witness testimony and looking into and writing from her own witness cases, she relies on referencing e.g. Arabian lore/fables and religious scripture. I know that without asking, because you don't write encyclopedic works without significant amounts of arm-chair research, which is another word for reading and weighing and finally propagating info from other sources.

 

[Infolad1]

Feel free to order your marbles by color, if you wish. There is no Ideal way to order your marbles.

Mathematics is the language that we use. It is also a toolbox to calculate physical objects with physical proporties. But our numbers are arbitrary, the mathematical system didn't fall from the sky. We use the Arabic system.

The physical world:
Why are planets round? Because God likes math and making perfect circles, or because of gravity. If transcendental/mathematical idealism was correct, planets should be perfectly spherical. They are not, because they don't adhere to mathematical principles or ideals, but to physical forces. But it is tempting to look at e.g. a planet as mathematical principles/ideals at work. What we find are physical proporties.

Historically, this created big troubles for scientists. Often, non-secular scientists (non-secular in the modern sense, like how I argue) would be looking for a specific order or principle, because that's how religious people look and looked at the world. For instance, the fact that celestial objects do not all travel in perfect circles around the sun was seen as going against 'the order' thus the calculations had to be wrong (and perhaps even heretical). When you have a grand system in place and try to conform the world to it, the flaws show.

Your idealism appears like escapism to me. Or, a strong need for order.



Imo, we have to get rid of false idealism, and try to love the Earth and life itself. It seems to me that life is a lived mystery. We have no essential understanding of why the universe exists. Why not cherish the mystery without an overlay, or a frame?



Please don't replace the mystery with junk superstition like Zanotti who claims that addictions are devils taking hold of the addict. Hand that person to a licensed real psychologist, and that person is far more likely to come away wiser and more prepared to face the real world, not escape into frustrating fantasy..



I urge everyone seeking a sensuous and even mysterious relation to reality and Earth to read Edward Abbey. And Thoreau. And Mary Austin. And Aldo Leopold. And Joseph Wood Crutch and many others.

Thanks for laying out your worldview, it explains a lot.

What you keep missing, is that no one is talking about an actual demon. Not a shaman, not a lama, none of them. With enough energy powering it, could it manifest as a solidified thought form, or manifest actual physical effects? Absolutely. But it's still just a thought. It's just that thoughts are a bit more objective than people realize.

Folks are under the mistaken impression that there is some kind of demarcation line
between "in here" and "out there". There's not.

My supposed idealism may seem like escapism to you, but you are quite wrong. We're here. There's nothing mysterious about any of manifested reality. It's just a hologram with force feedback capabilities, and various levels, but we're in it. Consciousness is the determinant for it even being here.

As I said previously, real spirituality, not the new age BS you keep trying to lump me in with, enables us to live in this world successfully, without being of it, getting overly
attached, which leads to a lot of the various psychological issues that "modern" man
finds himself wrestling with.

At the end of the day, this is school, and we're all here testing premises to live by.
"that crime pays". "That metaphysical reality is BS, and only what I can touch is
real". Life itself will always show you whether your premise is correct in the end.
The funny thing is, since consciousness is the determinant, and we are consciousness,
then you get what you think you're supposed to get, what fits your reality box.

That's why you're told in meditation practice to let go of attaching to thoughts & images. The more that you can, the more of reality you're then able to see, interact with, and manifest. And there are physical changes that verify this. Without them,
then you ARE just imagining stuff.

By that same token, if you're limited to an exclusively materialist, reductionist, syllogistic reality box, that's all you get. Which is fine. It takes all kind of people to make a world.

It's never about going to extremes. As I constantly teach in my cosmology & gongfu classes, yes meditate, take supplements. But if you get hit by a car, let them take
you to a triage unit. A mantra isn't going to work fast enough, taking herbs isn't going to cut it for that (those force feedback capabilities can be a bear). Do that stuff after.
The middle way is always best.

So you really don't get what I'm saying, or where I'm coming from at all. Which is cool.

No one will find out about the nature of reality from reading a book, or hearing about it from someone else. All anyone can do is point you in the right direction. You've got to open that door and walk through it yourself. Direct experience is the only thing that counts as true knowledge. Everything else is hearsay until proven otherwise.

Now I've laid out an outline of my worldview, which obviously doesn't jibe with yours.

Let's agree to disagree & leave it at that.

 

[Jimi H.]

Right, I'm a dumb scientist-guy with dogmatic conceptions and a shallow approach to the world, because in reality the universe is, I quote:

"A hologram with force feedback capabilities"

Uhh, LOL !?

 

[Muadib]

There's actually a number of different ways of proving the existence of these various entities. Pick up a copy of Dr. Gregory Little's "Grand Illusions". He lays out

some classics in there. The Taoist have methods. Takes on the average of 18 years to accomplish. Tratakam will do it. There's all kinds of ways of finding things out, for folks who really want to learn them, with "physical" effects and everything. If you don't know what you're doing (and you won't), there's a good chance you could end up having a psychotic break. The Western mind in general isn't built to deal with stuff without a lot of prep.

Anyone can make themselves believe anything is real after 18 years of working at it, that doesn't mean that it is actually physically happening. Just look at the people that practice so called "Yogic flying" You can tell yourself you're flying all you want but in what is commonly referred to as reality, you're just a douche hopping up and down on one foot, or you're meditating yourself into an altered state where you really believe that you're flying, nothing more. If you set out on an 18 year quest where your sole objective is to verify the existence of these entities, I have no doubt that you will end up convincing yourself of their reality, but really all you've done is programmed your mind to see things and possibly feel things that are not really there. There's nothing special or mystical about that.

 

[Infolad1]

Only Western believers in the Judeo-Christian tradition. A scientist would never consider devils. So, I'd argue that you explain things from a 'believer's' point of view.

And you'd argue wrong. I don't believe in anything. For the important things in life, you'd better know. And of course a scientist wouldn't use the term devils.
That's my point.

Post-colonial criticisms are a very worthy cause, but relevant here? Forego the results of scientific medicine next time you're sick and put your money where your mouth is. Will you do that? Otherwise, the primitivist idealism looks insincere.

Absolutely relevant here. Your whole worldview is framed by it. Is it. And don't be absurd. As I've stated previously, allopathic medicine obviously has it's place. now you're just being silly.

But you're talking about 'wisdom', right? Don't look for spiritual or simply human wisdom in science. Likewise, I won't look for scientific knowledge among spiritual works etc.

Again, what are you talking about? Real science is wisdom, and to be obtained from a number of areas. Tilting at windmills with that comment.

Not in a biological sense, but we certainly know more in a concrete sense. You can't fly to the moon with stone age tech, or combat serious ailment with prayer and bloodletting. I don't believe you believe it yourself. So, it's escapism. But on the 'wisdom account' I won't argue, that's cool.

You seem to have this cartoon, hollywood version of ancient cultures that's amazing to behold. Current society just has more techniques (technology) to make more things. Very useful things to be sure, but things none the less. Doesn't translate into knowledge. People always confuse the two. And with the state of the current world, there's an argument to be made about modern man's supposed intelligence.

There's always more to learn, and I for one certainly have little love for the way modern technological societies work and behave vis-a-vis our ecological problems and more. But it's simply an other discussion.

I couldn't agree with you more.

 

[Infolad1]

Anyone can make themselves believe anything is real after 18 years of working at it, that doesn't mean that it is actually physically happening. Just look at the people that practice so called "Yogic flying" You can tell yourself you're flying all you want but in what is commonly referred to as reality, you're just a douche hopping up and down on one foot, or you're meditating yourself into an altered state where you really believe that you're flying, nothing more. If you set out on an 18 year quest where your sole objective is to verify the existence of these entities, I have no doubt that you will end up convincing yourself of their reality, but really all you've done is programmed your mind to see things and possibly feel things that are not really there. There's nothing special or mystical about that.

You're absolutely correct. So called "Yogic flying" is BS, and not what I'm talking about.

And as I've said previously, there are various physical effects (changes in endocrine system function, respiration, etc.) at different stages of this process,
that can and have been verified. There's nothing imaginary about the real process. It's not belief.

And you're right. There isn't anything mystical about it at all.

 

[Infolad1]

Right, I'm a dumb scientist-guy with dogmatic conceptions and a shallow approach to the world, because in reality the universe is, I quote:



Uhh, LOL !?

Nice jpeg. I'll have to use it sometime.

Again with the attempting to put words in people's mouths. I never said you were stupid or shallow. You're obviously well read.
You reason very well. You just have a different worldview than I do. that's it.

You consider the hologram with force feedback capabilities to be BS. You're entitled. But there are a number of different explanations
for why all of this exists. Take your pick. It makes the most sense to me and what I've observed. None of this is "real". Molecules are atoms are sub-atomic particles
are forces are no thing. It's all a play of light, a hell of a trick. What are you even arguing about ?

It's been real?

 

[Jimi H.]

Again, what are you talking about? Real science is wisdom, and to be obtained from a number of areas. Tilting at windmills with that comment.

Imo it makes sense to distinguish between material fact and human 'wisdom'.

You seem to have this cartoon, hollywood version of ancient cultures that's amazing to behold.

No I don't. And that's not my worldview. My point is, and that's why I appear very staunchly conservative here: You seem to be engaged in exoticism.

That's perhaps my preconception about you here, because what we get a lot on the paranormal scene is this idea that e.g. the Mayans were this stellar culture where everyone knew their place and everyone was happy and super spiritual etc. Fact is, it was a brutal culture, and your voice was not heard if you were not on top. And they lived in an age where symbol was equal to reality and where priests perform heinious acts to 'honor' the gods. But that's often forgotten in hindsight when looking at it through the lens of exoticism.

Wrt. 'wisdom', I'd say there's more relevant applicable eco-philosophy now than ever before. We've discussed James Lovelock before, or Edward Abbey and Thoreau here, all of whom grasp that the universe is reality, but more significant and mysterious than scientific fact.

 

[Jimi H.]

..It makes the most sense to me and what I've observed.

Fair enough.

As you seem to have sensed from the beginning, I don't care too much for the 'reality is not reality' kind of thinking, I think it creates despair.

..

It's been real?

Yes

 

[Infolad1]

Imo it makes sense to distinguish between material fact and human 'wisdom'.


No I don't. And that's not my worldview. My point is, and that's why I appear very staunchly conservative here: You seem to be engaged in exoticism.

What we get a lot on the paranormal scene is this idea that e.g. the Mayans were this stellar culture where everyone knew their place and everyone was happy and super spiritual etc. Fact is, it was a brutal culture, and your voice was not heard if you were not on top. Fact is, they lived in an age where symbol was equal to reality, and priests perform heinious acts to 'honor' the gods. But that's always forgotten when people are engaged in these exotic fantasies. Exotic fantasies which often bestow these mystical proporties on the peoples in question.

Wrt. 'wisdom', I'd say there's more relevant applicable eco-philosophy now than ever before. We've discussed James Lovelock before, or Edward Abbey and Thoreau. People just have to read it, and comprehend the gravity of the matter. The Mayans or the Taoists wont save us now, and that is just my view of reality, that is not about being condescending to this or that culture.

I'm actually not engaged in exoticism. I'm more than aware of the problems, crimes, and self destructive tendencies of all cultures, present one included.
The rose colored glasses viewpoint is part of new age types, who do have an overly romanticized version of these people, and what they taught. They tend to
be polarized completely in the mental sphere of La-La Land, spouting all kinds of inane silliness. Now they ARE trying not to deal with the world as is. They
give spiritual culture a bad name.

I teach real gongfu to people, and spend a lot of my time having to eliminate misconceptions people have about everything from "Tai Chi is just something that old
people do" (wrong), to "Qi & spirit is this invisible woo woo power that i just have to believe in, and it's there " (wrong again. It's very real. Basically functions in your body like a battery). Misconceptions usually traced back to someone reading a lot of books, and not learning to actually DO it, demonstrate it, and train people to replicate it for health, well being, & martial purposes (which I do).

However, all cultures (present one included) have something to contribute to understanding how to live better now. Including the Mayans (who got their cosmology from the Olmecs), Taoists, Celts, etc. a lot of the systems that they developed can actually help us now. you can learn something new from anyone, as long as you have an open mind. I learn from everyone. "Believers", "skeptics", "conservatives"."liberals". Take your label. No one is composed of just one viewpoint. We're all complex systems to acquire information and knowledge from.

That is my viewpoint.

 

[Infolad1]

Fair enough.

As you seem to have sensed from the beginning, I don't care too much for the 'reality is not reality' kind of thinking, I think it creates despair.

Not at all. That which despairs is the ego, which is just a mental construct.

Understood properly, it's actually very liberating, and enables you to live life that much more fully, with true happiness, since you're no longer wrapped up in
clinging to things.

It's all just a movie, a video game. When you're done with the current one, rest for a minute, and go play another one. Enjoy them all, but don't get overly
attached. You'll always be, you'll always exist (whether you remember or not is a whole other help line (pesky hard drives).

But like I said, it takes all kinds of viewpoints to make a world. Ours are just a few of many.

Besides, how boring would it be if we all agreed. Doesn't make for a good movie or game. Total lack of motivation.

Yes

Indeed

 

[Infolad1]

Oh, and before I forget Jimi H. Tying in to what I just replied to, and from what you said in an earlier post,
deconstruction of the personality/ego can be utilized for positive AND negative purposes.

Most governments got their brainwashing techniques from these old texts. They're just tools. And like any
powerful tool, they can be used to both help and hurt people. I can use electricity to light my apartment,
or electrocute someone. Depends on the user.

When people say "me" or "I", they're actually talking about an automaton not I.

Most people are just amalgamations of associative thinking patterns, and conditioned responses to various stimuli,
powered by external motions (so-called emotions). Once you understand this, it's actually quite easy to take them apart
using various methods. Some positive. Some not so much. "Manchurian Candidate" methodology has been perfected
quite well since the time of Dr. Jose Delgado.

Cheers.

 

[red_pill_junkie]

Been a while since I posted here. But I just wanted to say that when Chris asked REG if she knew of loggers who had had weird experiences that could be the result of cutting down a fairy or a djinn's favorite tree, I immediately thought:

Travis Walton?

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Bob Zanotti said: ↑​

..​

​

​

​

the “Djinn” .. , attach themselves to humans, often to use human bodies as a proxy to enjoy carnal and other pleasures. They are largely responsible for seemingly unexplained shifts in personal behavior, and for addictions. This may well account for the rise in collective decadence in contemporary society, bevause more and more people are living in Darkness as opposed to living in the Light.​

..​

Jimi H said:

Pseudo-science? Or just beliefs?

​

​

I didn't want to get dragged back into this thread but after seeing Bob's post, I would have to say it may be a bit of pseudo-science and belief, but mostly it's complete and utter baseless crap. Speaking as someone who has worked with and been around a variety of people with a variety of addictions, both treated and untreated, I can say with 100% confidence that not one single time was the cause some nebulous imaginary spirit or Djinn. How does one even go about treating a potential Djinn infection? Magic crystals and homeopathy? Give me a break. The fact that this kind of 3rd century, dark ages thinking is still around in the year 2013 never ceases to amaze me. As stated earlier in the thread, there's a reason we don't turn to witch doctors when we're sick anymore, and it's because that kind of crap simply doesn't work. Period. I really hope you never try to push this ridiculous garbage on a real person with a real addiction, you just might get them killed instead of helping them.​

I've had an addiction or two - maybe I had a monkey but sure it wasn't a Djinn on my back - I'd love it if it was! Proof!