Thanks, for the insights that the talk is itself hard to follow in places even by a German. Is the 2nd lecture any easier!?
IMo using mind is a better start as most people think they have one, and hence can learn that an expanded and embodied MIND can be a far more powerful experience than the little mind that the materialists consider a mere epi-phenomenon. eg chakras are real structures that are now called "neural nexus" in the literature, which is what I'd always thought they were! So, if the mind can direct the neural signals to activate those nexuses, then IMO that is a new power that most people are seemingly unaware that they have. That there is no apparent material structure at these nexuses is further proof that they are electromagnetic field maxima - and further help see our biofield as an energetic dimension that cannot be explained by just wires and molecules. Although taking this further, atoms and molecules themselves are not bricks, they are also "wavicles" ;-)
There is a small book by Aldous Huxley, Literature and Science, that was very useful when I started as a science communicator. In it he makes the simple distinction of a scientist working as a scientist should seek to generate new knowledge, whereas the artist as artist can articuoltae that new knowledge so that it is meaningful within the established language and culture. One individual can be both, but they are distinct functions.
One tragic consequence we have seen, and are seeing, is that the articulation of knowledge is the preserve of propaganda - and that most people cannot tell the difference, coz they are largely not scientists. This goes back a long way to early science publishers in Venice, Amsterdam, London. It is not true that knowledge is power - I suspect the arrow is more in the other direction - power is knowledge, the creation of knowledge, even when it is false.
You are describing the very thing which is staring us all in the face. New age and magic were always merged with medical 'science'. Now tho they are revealing that fact more openly with their 'gene' stuff. Someone posted this under my video.
https://odysee.com/@alanthier001:7/Crick-s-Caduceus:3
It kind of sums it up.
I think it is even simpler.
Most of humanity seem unaware that the tech being presented to them as material and beneficial is neither - most of it is spiritual and controlling. There are also branches of science that continue to be kept totally hidden - they also fall into the latter categories.
The sleep is much deeper than eyes wide shut - the third eye is not even aware it is being turned off.
Ah, finally someone says that. I run around like the proverbial fool repeating such. Not related to the utility, but more related to the material/spiritual aspect. Modern medicine is spiritual to the same extent as that which is thought to be shamanic or charlatanic.
There are also branches of science that are still kept completely hidden - they also fall into the latter categories.
Do I want to know? 😬
You are awake? ;-)
There is a Sadhguru video in which he asks the audience how they can tell if someone is enlightened? Of course, they can't, hence is not so hard to fake it.
A more interesting question is how someone knows THEY are enlightened! It's not just the experiences, but their finality. The "what's next!?"
HaHa! Very good. You cannot point out to something if you don't know what to point at. Very good.
If someone says or implies he is enlightened, he isn't. That who is, does not say so.
Easy. You feel it literally. It's "Heureka!" with a twinkle in the eye. But it is not a continuum. It's a brief moment. If you have many of those brief moments, lucky you, for example.
I have moments of "lightning" or "delight" or having pulled something out of the shadow when I feel a form of hilarious spontaneity. Caused by neither promoting something shocking nor suppressing it. Let go in an instant. Those moments are rare. I recalled just one of them, of which I spoke in another comment of mine.
Explain, please.
One of my teachers once said to me,"The thing about enlightenment is that it doesn't tell you what to do next!"
That has stayed with me, and also dovetails with another master, who tells that his own root-master was an unassuming healer in a small village - no big monastery, no robes, no rituals. He slowly notices that the whole village is like a lay community.
I've seen something similar here in Thailand. Was only after being initiated - everyone was shocked as they had never seen a foreigner have that privilege - that many people came forward to reveal themselves. There is a parallel tradition here of "forest monks" that seems to be derived from the most obvious land route via northern India, whereas the more prominent Theravada came from Sri Lanka.
As you say, enlightenment first comes in flashes - then the training is to stabilise such flashes so they last longer and longer while remaining aware.
I think what a moment of lightness provides me with, is that I neither need to suppress nor promote something I am confronted with. I can react in a light manner towards what a situation is presenting me.
This insight counts only for the very arising moment. I allow skillful spontaneity to take place. It frees me from "being good" or "being bad".
Yes, I agree on the "it doesn't tell you what to do next!" It only gives chance to what to do now. We Westerners act very much in the opposite way. Once we found the formula (method, answer, solution etc.), we try to stick to it. As if one certain success will promote all further (uncertain) successes.
I would not express it though as the flashes "last longer and longer". I would put it that way that you become more skilled in allowing them to arise.
You spent time in the company of a teacher. How long and what do I have to understand by "being initiated"? Are you still living in Thailand?
The distinction re "what to do next" is with mystical states and visions, where the person will often have a new-found purpose or mission. Tibetan teachers warn against following those, as they appear hyper-real, but remain manifestations of mind. Dark retreats are designed to experience such visions while retaining one's equilibrium. ;-) Doesn't mean they are not important, just means there is more road to travel. Many stop there as the visions can be so powerful.
Initiations can be as brief as a visualised meditation and mantra, and as long as a whole teaching cycle such as Mahamudra - tho, even then, the initiation part is the "secret" part, sometimes involving personal mantras for each individual.
I watched in total about an hour. Maybe I will go on, don't know yet.
Yes, haha, everyone thinks they have minds, which is true. How you use it is another affair.
The word "mind", I would argue, is used in such an inflationary way that it loses its depth. Bit like "I love you" is something commonplace or what is perceived as such loses its potential to shock (surprise, irritate, annoy, delight).
Whenever something is in frequent use, it seems to lose its fascination and a term that is used like an everyday object does not make me stumble in thought.
But if I throw a stone between your legs and your run is stopped or vehemently interrupted by it (the stream of thought), it moves you to pause. You are surprised, irritated, even annoyed (or delighted). It is this pause that helps your thinking. But where I habitually read or hear something and I don't get a bludgeon in my thinking habit, I have only moderate interest at best.
Psychologists or therapists who know this also work with conscious irritation, for example, and accept the annoyance that such irritation causes their clients.
Without this stylistic device of deliberate exaggeration, people hardly listen, are constantly preoccupied with their thoughts, which swing from one tree to the next like monkeys. The advertisers know this very well, too. That's why they use "DISRUPTORS", which is a technical term for the advertising industry here.
Neural nexus, I know that from Startrek - LOL - the Borg Queen's ship :) Yes, that's one of those words that still seems new, although I see popping it up everywhere; "neural" or "neuronal", I only have associations with the brain.
Is what you're talking about related to Sheldrake and his morphogenesis?
Whoever knows the secret of the unity of opposites - the unity of the inner and the outer world - can try to tell it further. In most cases, one fails. The funny sages who prefer to keep such knowledge (power) to themselves do not then say that they have anything to teach. Stubbornly, however, people want to learn from them.
Pseudo-disciples get everything the wrong way round and turn genuinely powerful knowledge into pseudo-knowledge, which, I agree, thereby wants to unfold its own power. That's why masters who realise this also prefer not to teach. I would still say that their kind of knowledge has great power.
The powerless (who are afraid of illness, old age and death) remain without this power. I count myself among them.
I have known contemporary self-styled alchemists who stick to the old tradition of not teaching in public - only a few students, and only maybe. All that was shared at the time was some talk and... a very interesting "elixir".
Haha, disruptors annoy most people. I used them for years while teaching, to see who was paying attention.
In terms of morphogenesis, I think we need to investigate more carefully existing phenomena:
flow without pumps.
strikingly similar to cell migration - gastrulation - during embryogenesis.
Now that sounds like the real stuff. ;-) HaHa!
Who was this alchemist, is he/she known by name? Probably not, as it would be a contradiction.
Very good! A former teacher of my husband was throwing chalk at his students. What kind of teaching did you do yourself?
Thanks for the links, always interested in phenomena. Will watch them later on.
When I was young we were experimenting with witch board and glass shifting. It worked pretty well. We had a blast. I always wanted to make a post about it. Maybe I put it into the next one. We'll see. I hope to find my way out of blogging one day, though.
Pleased to meet you!