UnbornTao

My God. Charlatans.

Buddha didn't really use the term God. "God has no religion."

@Leo Gura I hope the sarcasm didn't pass you by.

I haven't deliberately taken up this practice, but probably a few months.

Yeah, that's the point. Especially since, for the followers involved in the fantasy, "the truth" has already been laid down, and by itself it is a mere abstraction subject to interpretation.

OK, let's get back to semen, don't derail the thread.

No religion or sect ever claims to be after falsehood. In practice, it's almost always "the truth" they're after: a preconceived fantasy which they then set out to validate. 'There's the truth... and "the truth".' - The Simpsons

And then there are the dynamics that are actually at play. When you hear 'philosophy', hear system of belief. You can judge for yourselves if that's true.

There are past threads dealing with this dynamic, you could start with the Teal Swan one. But just pay closer attention to what goes on underneath the rhetoric and with some of the interactions.

Just go with Times New Roman and to hell with us all.

Yes, this is what's proclaimed on paper, as usual - and then there's what people actually do, and what the communications tend to actively encourage.

You were the one mentioning science, which is a form of language. But it is deep (that's what she..) Language creates mind and so on. What's an experience of the world without language? It can't even be conceived in the first place.

Hmm, 4 and 12, and perhaps 15.

I don't, and you should consider that it isn't, despite liking it. Cultism is a powerful drug.

Yes, hence the question below the video. From what I gather, his point is more fundamental than that, it's about language. The same might well apply to perceiving and being aware and cognizant, and this is what we end up calling what existence IS.

Hey, pass the Kool-Aid!

That's what's called (by us), so due to consensus and agreement, there is something called grass - in English. But as you say, the thing itself, whatever it is, could be thought of as ineffable. Sounds good. Whenever you're aware of something, that's already been distinguished, it is a particular thing, prior to language and even conceptualizing. Emotion is actually based on the latter. Yes, and again, language seems to occur afterwards. I'm not talking about the word 'grass' being invented but the recognition or awareness of it as something in particular.

Ah, BS. Your body will slowly get used to longer periods of sitting. You just have to do it. You can also meditate while walking, cooking, etc. Awakening isn't really the aim of meditation; it's generally directed at calming and focusing the mind and shifting to a more relaxed state.

Haha, yep. Where the drugs at?

Poetry.

@r0ckyreed You're barking up the wrong tree here.

Sure.

Have you ever been angry without apparent external triggers? You can actually do this. What does this say about your role in that?

The presumed realness or validity is implicit in your having it (thinking it). This is not the same as a frivolous activity that's commonly thought of as thinking, like talking to oneself internally, or intellectualizing. At a very basic level you don't seriously "think" that what you "think" is false, because, among other things, you don't recognize your beliefs, particularly the deep-seated ones, as beliefs. "I'm already experiencing and perceiving reality as it is. What else?"