Message Boards Message Boards

Claims to Attainments

Claims to Attainment

Toggle
Claims to Attainment
Answer
1/7/20 11:55 AM
I have been meditating for about 40 years, on and off. I am CALLING OUT Daniel Ingram and any other self proclaimed advanced practioner of insight/concentration meditation.

There are billions of ignorant people on this planet, who by their nature are afraid of death. The majority of whom cling to thousands year old superstitions to give them some degree of comfort. They also carry the burden of a lack of concentration and the inabliltiy of handling emotions, which can lead to extreme levels of pain and suffering on a daily basis.

As explained by Daniel, and numurious practitioners ( not as consisely ) the advantages gained through the dedicated practise of mediation are amoung other things, abilitys that can be characterised as "supernatural". For the layman these could be discribed as miracles but for the standards of Buddhism they are considered as normal side effects of correct pratice.

What I fail to understand is, considering the constant pain and suffering endured by the majority of the people on this planet, why NO ONE has come forward and DEMONSTRATED to the wider public audience a simple example of such powers. Even the most common skills, as claimed, like seeing through closed eyelids or reading other people minds would make such a huge statement as to have world wide acclaim.

There are numerous institutions and academia circles who would be extreamly interested if such a phenomona could be demonstrated, not to mention financialy rewarded. Who would not want to see the great James Randi put in his place and receive a million dollar donation from his on going challenge? Not to mention a nobel peace prize.

I do not buy for one instant the claim of superior ethics/morality in this case. One that claims an advanced being does not show off for profit or self benediction. Stacked up against the suffering of 7.6 billion people, what harm could possibly come to one individual testing his karmic feedback of a simple demonstration of apparently insignicant skills.

This "scientifically" tested example would prove beyond a shadow of doubt that human beings are MORE than just physical bodies destined to obilvion after one lifetime. It would show to the world that we are eternal beings on a cycle of death and rebirth until we advance enough to escape it. That is, if the claims of what an Arhat's destiny is, is true, ( a transcendent state in which there is neither suffering, desire,nor sense of self, and the subject is released from the effects of karma and the cycle of death and rebirth. Representing the final goal of Buddhism. ) something I find a little hard to belive in the case of Daniel who has still been searching for answers to life's questions in the area of Actualism. 

Either the Buddha had it wrong or Daniel has not quite got it? There is desire or there isn't. Maybe he has convinced himself ( and others ) by his acamdemic prowess. Either way, don't you think it's a small price to pay for the saving of billions of souls?

 



 

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
1/7/20 12:41 PM as a reply to Thor Jackson.
It's been proven that if you go around walking on water people will kill you. Also you can demonstrate all kinds of wonderful things to people but most people don't want to wake up. Waking up is risky and sometimes terrifying business. Most people live somewhat happy lives being delusional and like it that way.

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
1/7/20 1:25 PM as a reply to Thor Jackson.
Thor, are you aiming to become The Amazing Randy of dharma?

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
1/7/20 5:50 PM as a reply to Thor Jackson.
Ending suffering and  "supernatural" powers, such as seeing through closed eyelids or reading other people minds, are two diffirent things.

A
wakening to the truth of the way things are, doesn't necessarily come with "powers". Alternatively, "powers" doesn't show or prove awakening.

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
1/7/20 5:41 PM as a reply to Thor Jackson.
There was a book I read as a teenager called "Illusions - The Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah". Among other things it got into this question and the basic answer was that if you demonstrate miracles or powers, people just focus (greedily) on that. They want you to just do miracles for them, instead of actually listening and doing the practises. When he finally does perform miracles, first he's constantly swarmed by crowds demanding more miracles and for him to heal the sick, and then he's eventually killed by someone who can't accept his message (as someone suggested above).

It was a fictional story, but his point seems valid. Just look how violent and irrational people can get over boxing day sales, let alone something like the powers.

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
1/8/20 9:58 AM as a reply to Thor Jackson.
You are mistaken in the belief that Buddhism is the pinnacle of our species, that is a severe pipe dream.

As explained by Daniel, and numurious practitioners ( not as consisely ) the advantages gained through the dedicated practise of mediation are amoung other things, abilitys that can be characterised as "supernatural". For the layman these could be discribed as miracles but for the standards of Buddhism they are considered as normal side effects of correct pratice.

Here you seem to be referring to the activation of our perceptual systems or the willful actions of altering one's physiology. These are "supernatural" to Buddhism, but the reality is that we are a species that has divorced itself from its spiritual roots. These faculties are innate to the human creature, these abilities are not phenomenological but are in every respect, natural. Buddhism pushes these faculties further out of bounds by branding them as ascendatory when they truly just bring us closer to a lost connection. 
Buddhism's focus is primarily on the lessening of mental anguish and conceptual torture through self-realization. Development of such alleged "powers" are not necessary in that objective but as a result of the practice, they are pokily unfurled. For the layman, any type of hallucination is a matter of inexplicable phenomena.
The most basic knacks are supermundane to the unaware.

What I fail to understand is, considering the constant pain and suffering endured by the majority of the people on this planet, why NO ONE has come forward and DEMONSTRATED to the wider public audience a simple example of such powers. Even the most common skills, as claimed, like seeing through closed eyelids or reading other people minds would make such a huge statement as to have world wide acclaim.

Common skills...? Now, this is a totally different class of very elevated highs the likes this species hasn't been able to comfortably reproduce since before the last greatest cataclysm dismantled our civilization. When the aforementioned layman can facilely grasp altered states, or better yet when the average person is "enlightened", then we may begin to work towards regarding these skills as common.
Does less than a pocket of a splinter group of a minority among 8 billion sound common to you? emoticon
Through the collapse and ruination that resulted in us becoming a species with amnesia, we lost our connection with these faculties. And during the last few centuries, we have been occupied with technological advancement by way of mechanical advantage.

There are numerous institutions and academia circles who would be extreamly interested if such a phenomona could be demonstrated, not to mention financialy rewarded. Who would not want to see the great James Randi put in his place and receive a million dollar donation from his on going challenge? Not to mention a nobel peace prize.

We are so engrossed with physical and material solutions that now we deny alternative ways of looking at the world. These unorthodox ideas, we are told by the mainstream scientific community, form the premise of
"Fringe Theories" and such line of thinking is NOT held for peer-review and "SHOULD NOT" be taken seriously. But... that "world-wide acclaim" is in fact building, with the advent of this, the internet... The big bosses of mainstream science no longer control what ideas can be spread. Independent researches are guiding us towards a much needed forward leap, but they suffer horrible allegations...  

The Morphic Resonance theory put forth in the 20th century by Rupert Sheldrake was called, by editor John Maddox of the internationally renowned Nature Magazine, as "heresy" that deserves to be "condemned" and
"the best candidate for burning there had been for many years".

what harm could possibly come to one individual testing his karmic feedback of a simple demonstration of apparently insignicant skills.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIkz6YN1qaU

Either the Buddha had it wrong or Daniel has not quite got it? There is desire or there isn't. Maybe he has convinced himself ( and others ) by his acamdemic prowess. Either way, don't you think it's a small price to pay for the saving of billions of souls?

Daniel bears a genuine impression. I'm sure its safe to assume you've read his work..? The methods anyway, simply work. The Buddha walked the path of awareness. The path of awareness is good because it is systematic and straightforward. You can point to it and you can attain. But the path of awareness is one way, not the be-all-end-all. There is much beyond that. 

From the creation, came a shivling...

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
1/8/20 6:41 AM as a reply to Mista Tibbs.
... "Fringe Theories" and such line of thinking is NOT held for peer-review and SHOULD NOT be taken seriously.

I'm not so sure we should take Thor all that seriously. 'Course, we probably shouldn't take most things all that seriously.

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
1/8/20 2:34 PM as a reply to Thor Jackson.

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
1/11/20 8:57 AM as a reply to Thor Jackson.
Might check out the book Real Magic, by Dean Radin, as well as some others, such as Supernormal and Entangled Minds, that is if you are interested in entertaining arguments that this stuff has long been proven and people just continue to reject it for fixed-paradigmatic/dogmatic reasons.

Might get your concentration strong, like really strong, and see what happens, as there is nothing like doing the experiment yourself to inform questions and views. That is always more satisfying than reading some words on an internet forum, and can lead to other benefits as well. Basically, if you actually care about this stuff, care about it in a way that gives you the benefits that deep, caring practice leads to. If you don't actually care that much, consider moving to a forum that is more for theoretical discussions and skepticism than practice. Talk is cheap but also typically unsatisfying in these areas for all concerned.

Haven't had anything in particular to do with Actualism in years, but did derive some interesting results from my experiments with it, and definitely don't regret that period of my practice, though I am happy that politics isn't happening now like it was then.

Best wishes,

Daniel

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
1/11/20 3:58 PM as a reply to Daniel M. Ingram.
Daniel M. Ingram:
Might check out the book Real Magic, by Dean Radin, as well as some others, such as Supernormal and Entangled Minds, that is if you are interested in entertaining arguments that this stuff has long been proven and people just continue to reject it for fixed-paradigmatic/dogmatic reasons.

Might get your concentration strong, like really strong, and see what happens, as there is nothing like doing the experiment yourself to inform questions and views. That is always more satisfying than reading some words on an internet forum, and can lead to other benefits as well. Basically, if you actually care about this stuff, care about it in a way that gives you the benefits that deep, caring practice leads to. If you don't actually care that much, consider moving to a forum that is more for theoretical discussions and skepticism than practice. Talk is cheap but also typically unsatisfying in these areas for all concerned.

Haven't had anything in particular to do with Actualism in years, but did derive some interesting results from my experiments with it, and definitely don't regret that period of my practice, though I am happy that politics isn't happening now like it was then.

Best wishes,

Daniel

   
   If I actually, physically saw a man walk through a wall I would not believe it.

   The laws of nature are not mere dogmatism, not just a paradigm. There is a real ocean outside the bone vault ocean.

   I had a friend who spent ten years with the maharishi mahesh yogi, and was convinced he was going to learn how to levitate. He was bitterly disappointed. A lot of spiritual energy went into the levitation project, and no one actually rose into the air unsupported.

t

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/16/20 1:23 PM as a reply to terry.
Maybe I'll be opening a can of worms here, but I've been practicing the discipline of remote viewing, which I see as parallel to some traditional meditative practices, and it has demonstrated to me that reality and time are not as they seem. I'm not sure I'm ready to say "non-dual" yet.  

Russel Targ's "Limitless Mind," puts remote viewing into context with Buddhist and Yogic teaching. But it's success and replicability is owed to use of a scientific protocol that allows for verification of claims. 

"Controlled Remote Viewing," (CRV) in particular, provides a map that would appeal I think to any of you who is fond of meditation maps and phenomenology.

The essence of CRV is to start with an unknown target, so that you are blind to what you are viewing. You allow impressions of that target to arise spontaneously in your consciousness. These may come through all sense gates. You note those impressions and try to avoid naming the target. As the session evolves, the impressions tend to go from gestalt (such as landform, living thing or man-made object), to lower level (hardness, color, texture, smell), to higher level (size, complex shape and dimensions, emotional effect, purpose, or function). In the end, a comparison of the collected data can be judged against the identity and what is known about the target. 

Although this was famously used by the US government for espionage, it has some real limitations that sometimes make it difficult to apply usefully for those applications. 

My own interest is to use remote viewing to understand the nature of existance, to enhance creativity, for learning, and therapeutically to gain comfort with spending time inside myself.

I've been meaning to broach the topic here since hearing Daniel speak sometime last year, and since noticing similarities between CRV and stages described by Michael Taft for his personal meditation map, especially in his "Reversing the Stack" episode.

This is as good of a place to start as any, since the OP has dared people to demonstrate attainments. Remote viewing has been dragged through the mud by avowed skeptics, but in research trials has demonstrated significant departure from chance effects. 

On an individual level, it was ridiculously easy to learn for myself that remote viewing is possible. I remain an extraordinarily novice meditator. I'd encourage people to try for themselves. 

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/16/20 1:35 PM as a reply to Grin Spickett.
Can you describe one or more of your remote viewing experiences in more detail? I would find that helpful for a number of reasons.

TIA

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/16/20 3:13 PM as a reply to Chris Marti.
Chris Marti:
Can you describe one or more of your remote viewing experiences in more detail? I would find that helpful for a number of reasons.

TIA


Hi Chris,

I've written about a couple of experiences with an eye towards introducing remote viewing to people who are not well-acquainted. Hopefully they're entertaining, too. If you don't mind, I'll link you out to these on the Medium platform. (These links will get you past the paywall.)

Here's a case where someone asked me to set a practice target for them. They didn't know anything ahead of time and gave me absolutely no criteria. All I gave them was a pseudo-random number that I'd assigned to the target. They did their session and then sent me the results. Only after that point did I tell them what the target was meant to be. This session was done loosely in the CRV style, from a fully awake state.
https://medium.com/remote-viewing-community-magazine/remote-viewing-session-spotlight-mix-lix-40461b049f1?source=friends_link&sk=a5a282c0ba4b7f37969d9ae31b6cd937

Here's an example of my own session when I experimented with an Extended Remote Viewing process, which involves some mild breathwork and body scanning and visualisation before seeing information for the unknown target. Since I am a novice meditator, it can be difficult for me to attain a conducive state. The result was more visual and dreamlike and symbolic than what I've experienced during the fully awake CRV. In this case, I intended to access a target that had not yet been selected. The selection was made after my session. This rearrangement of sequence of events seems to make little to no difference in remote viewing. After my session I went to a practice website and asked it to give me a random target, taking the first one.
https://medium.com/remote-viewing-community-magazine/secrets-of-the-spider-train-f90fab583465?source=friends_link&sk=13f96a0a3ed0d4c441e119bd0727db27

There's no one moment where I can say, that's where my worldview changed. It was more a collection of papercuts than any specific, fatal incident, although some stand out. 

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/16/20 10:23 PM as a reply to Thor Jackson.
Well, while I consider a very rational person myself, I experienced very weird things. People who I trust also did.

So, what is my opinion of the powers, soul, rebirth, suffering, etc?

At least for me, the question is, is the human being the "top dog" or not?

If we are the "top dog" and the world follow our rules, then there is no rebirth, no soul, no powers, etc.
If we are not the "top dog" then whatever intelligence/s probably created this world and interact with it in the way they want.

They are probably "gods" the same way that I'm some kind of "god" to my pet dog.

They probably follow some rules the same way that I follow some rules with my pet dog. And they can break them from time to time the same way that we do with our pets when they put a lot of effort.

Maybe reality is some kind of simulation, maybe they interact with very little particles, I don't know.

If humanity was able to do all that we did with an intelligence a little superior to pets, imagine what could be accomplished with the same leap of intelligence from us upwards.

My dog lives in my house, but for him it's his house. The dog (and my house) follow some rules. But this rules are mostly created by me (or we humans). My dog usually loves bacon. Sometimes I give bacon to him, but not very often. It wouldn't be good for him.

I always thought it is interesting how the dog tries to follow my patterns to get results (and he usually does). But it's never his decision, because I have control in his reality in ways that he can't even imagine.

We live in this reality and for us its "our reality" and we do things and we get results.

Maybe there are "holes" in this reality and with concentration we can alter it in ways that are incredible. Maybe whatever "gods" gives us some prizes if we put a lot of effort twisting reality for us (or not stopping us from twisting it like they do all the time emoticon). Maybe we can do a lot of "power" things but we have "leashes" so that we don't hurt ourselves.

Maybe if we put a lot of effort we can rise from our limitations and get a grasp of whatever is bigger than us, the same way that my dog sometimes seems to interact with me with some higher degree of intelligence.

In ancient times the earth was the center of the universe. Now we are the smartest beings. Superheroes have human forms, human feelings, etc to relate to us, to our uniqueness. Even gods have human forms. We are always "special".

We can't imagine something very different from us or how we perceive the world the same way that my dog can't imagine how my world "works".

My opinion anyway.

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/18/20 11:52 PM as a reply to Grin Spickett.
Grin Spickett:
Maybe I'll be opening a can of worms here, but I've been practicing the discipline of remote viewing, which I see as parallel to some traditional meditative practices, and it has demonstrated to me that reality and time are not as they seem. I'm not sure I'm ready to say "non-dual" yet.  

Russel Targ's "Limitless Mind," puts remote viewing into context with Buddhist and Yogic teaching. But it's success and replicability is owed to use of a scientific protocol that allows for verification of claims. 

"Controlled Remote Viewing," (CRV) in particular, provides a map that would appeal I think to any of you who is fond of meditation maps and phenomenology.

The essence of CRV is to start with an unknown target, so that you are blind to what you are viewing. You allow impressions of that target to arise spontaneously in your consciousness. These may come through all sense gates. You note those impressions and try to avoid naming the target. As the session evolves, the impressions tend to go from gestalt (such as landform, living thing or man-made object), to lower level (hardness, color, texture, smell), to higher level (size, complex shape and dimensions, emotional effect, purpose, or function). In the end, a comparison of the collected data can be judged against the identity and what is known about the target. 

Although this was famously used by the US government for espionage, it has some real limitations that sometimes make it difficult to apply usefully for those applications. 

My own interest is to use remote viewing to understand the nature of existance, to enhance creativity, for learning, and therapeutically to gain comfort with spending time inside myself.

I've been meaning to broach the topic here since hearing Daniel speak sometime last year, and since noticing similarities between CRV and stages described by Michael Taft for his personal meditation map, especially in his "Reversing the Stack" episode.

This is as good of a place to start as any, since the OP has dared people to demonstrate attainments. Remote viewing has been dragged through the mud by avowed skeptics, but in research trials has demonstrated significant departure from chance effects. 

On an individual level, it was ridiculously easy to learn for myself that remote viewing is possible. I remain an extraordinarily novice meditator. I'd encourage people to try for themselves. 


you allude to proof but don't provide any...

I would need major proof as I don't think this supernatural stuff has any real validity...

and I really don't care, as it woudn't change anything, even if it were proved (we have devices that do this already)...


t




tao te ching, trans mitchell:



47.


Without opening your door, 
you can open your heart to the world. 
Without looking out your window, 
you can see the essence of the Tao.

The more you know, 
the less you understand.
The Master arrives without leaving, 
sees the light without looking, 
achieves without doing a thing. 

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/19/20 12:06 AM as a reply to Ernest Michael Olmos.
Ernest Michael Olmos:
Well, while I consider a very rational person myself, I experienced very weird things. People who I trust also did.

So, what is my opinion of the powers, soul, rebirth, suffering, etc?

At least for me, the question is, is the human being the "top dog" or not?

If we are the "top dog" and the world follow our rules, then there is no rebirth, no soul, no powers, etc.
If we are not the "top dog" then whatever intelligence/s probably created this world and interact with it in the way they want.

They are probably "gods" the same way that I'm some kind of "god" to my pet dog.

They probably follow some rules the same way that I follow some rules with my pet dog. And they can break them from time to time the same way that we do with our pets when they put a lot of effort.

Maybe reality is some kind of simulation, maybe they interact with very little particles, I don't know.

If humanity was able to do all that we did with an intelligence a little superior to pets, imagine what could be accomplished with the same leap of intelligence from us upwards.

My dog lives in my house, but for him it's his house. The dog (and my house) follow some rules. But this rules are mostly created by me (or we humans). My dog usually loves bacon. Sometimes I give bacon to him, but not very often. It wouldn't be good for him.

I always thought it is interesting how the dog tries to follow my patterns to get results (and he usually does). But it's never his decision, because I have control in his reality in ways that he can't even imagine.

We live in this reality and for us its "our reality" and we do things and we get results.

Maybe there are "holes" in this reality and with concentration we can alter it in ways that are incredible. Maybe whatever "gods" gives us some prizes if we put a lot of effort twisting reality for us (or not stopping us from twisting it like they do all the time emoticon). Maybe we can do a lot of "power" things but we have "leashes" so that we don't hurt ourselves.

Maybe if we put a lot of effort we can rise from our limitations and get a grasp of whatever is bigger than us, the same way that my dog sometimes seems to interact with me with some higher degree of intelligence.

In ancient times the earth was the center of the universe. Now we are the smartest beings. Superheroes have human forms, human feelings, etc to relate to us, to our uniqueness. Even gods have human forms. We are always "special".

We can't imagine something very different from us or how we perceive the world the same way that my dog can't imagine how my world "works".

My opinion anyway.


aloha emo,

 I've long been fascinated with ancient greek mythology and stories of the greek gods. I've read the early theogonies and speculated on where they originated. Rather than think in terms of a dog and his master, I think "the gods" resemble adult humans as seen by children.

   The greek gods are lustful, greedy, vain and obsessed with power, just like the adults in any child's world. They are big, powerful and seem to have lived almost forever. They interfere with our lives in arbitrary ways, they punish and reward us, and they provide good and bad examples of behavior which serve as introductions to living an adult life. The gods have appetites and abilities far beyond ours, and we want to be like them: powerful, immortal and getting whatever they want by force, intimidation and guile.

   Plato and his catspaw socrates disliked mythology and theogony, though they used them occasionally. They argued that god is one, and good. They unfortuntely did not win the argument; socrates was made an example of, and plato was marginalized.

terry

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/19/20 9:00 AM as a reply to terry.
I also have some kind of fascination with greek gods.

I'm not saying that our reality is ruled by gods or that we are powerless.

What I'm saying is that for practicing (and for a lot of things in life) it is useful to approach things with an open mind.

Our minds tend to limit the scope of reality to fit for what we already know, so we have control over it. Humanity as a whole does the same.
We trust in science, proof, our senses, our logic, but they are all derived from human knowledge and doing.

Of course curiosity, wonder, passion, etc are also human qualities but they reach to the unknown (maybe human, maybe not).

Maybe we can do a lot more with what we have. Maybe humans are some kind of gods.

If my dog could have some understanding of his identity (I don't know if enough to pass the mirror test) I wouldn't know.
If a person can levitate but other people can't see it (because of the way they see the world) there is not way to prove it.

We tend to see science or the rules of the world (gravity, etc) as something "outside" from human knowledge, something inherent to reality, but SCIENCE IS A HUMAN CREATION.

It is derived from what WE see, or even what WE measure with instruments that WE created. Proof is usually other humans replicating the same thing many times.

Being aware of the limits of human science, human communication, human knowledge, etc, seems at first discouraging (like, hey, why do things if this reality is rules by gods?, or why type responses to posts if communication between people is really lousy?).

But at some point curiosity kicks in and you start testing that limits or attacking those limits in a different way

You reach into the unknown and you realize that those limits are really in your views.
You realize a lot of things about that world, about yourself and both.

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/19/20 12:58 PM as a reply to Ernest Michael Olmos.
Ernest Michael Olmos:
I also have some kind of fascination with greek gods.

I'm not saying that our reality is ruled by gods or that we are powerless.

What I'm saying is that for practicing (and for a lot of things in life) it is useful to approach things with an open mind.

Our minds tend to limit the scope of reality to fit for what we already know, so we have control over it. Humanity as a whole does the same.
We trust in science, proof, our senses, our logic, but they are all derived from human knowledge and doing.

Of course curiosity, wonder, passion, etc are also human qualities but they reach to the unknown (maybe human, maybe not).

Maybe we can do a lot more with what we have. Maybe humans are some kind of gods.

If my dog could have some understanding of his identity (I don't know if enough to pass the mirror test) I wouldn't know.
If a person can levitate but other people can't see it (because of the way they see the world) there is not way to prove it.

We tend to see science or the rules of the world (gravity, etc) as something "outside" from human knowledge, something inherent to reality, but SCIENCE IS A HUMAN CREATION.

It is derived from what WE see, or even what WE measure with instruments that WE created. Proof is usually other humans replicating the same thing many times.

Being aware of the limits of human science, human communication, human knowledge, etc, seems at first discouraging (like, hey, why do things if this reality is rules by gods?, or why type responses to posts if communication between people is really lousy?).

But at some point curiosity kicks in and you start testing that limits or attacking those limits in a different way

You reach into the unknown and you realize that those limits are really in your views.
You realize a lot of things about that world, about yourself and both.


    I think that my dog not understanding his identity is more enlightened than our understanding of our identities. My cat certainly thought of herself as "cat" if not "the cat" and disdained identitiy. To them I am "human" if not "the human." For better and for worse. When I call the dog, even after many years, I can still see him thinking whether he wants to come or not, then deciding it would be better to go along with the human than cross him and get yelled at. To the dog, cows are cows, horses are horses, birds are birds. Not individual with identities, not entities, but representatives of their species, their genera and families and of Life. To the dog, some you chase and some chase you. To the cat, some are prey and some are not. All by immediate cognition, not by recognition or conceptualization.

   Which is to say, I think you are anthropomorphizing your dog if you imagine him some sort of slave. The dog's affection and loyalty are self-interested, if habitual. He plays his role with natural zeal and expects you to play yours equally naturally, and is confused if you don't. An animal is not a child or servant but will readily be your friend if not traumatized or confused. Animal trainers, familiar with their charges, have little difficulty getting along with critters.

   Which all in fact makes your point about imposing the limits of our thinking on what we perceve to be reality. Your solution, to be open minded, is also correct. 

   Opening one's mind, aye, there's the rub. Perhaps a corkscrew... (Better a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy. Or, as the merry pranksters had it, no left turn unstoned.)

   Or - and -  we can hang out with animals and learn from them.


terry




BLACK CAT
(rainer maria rilke, trans mitchell)

A ghost, though invisible, still is like a place
your sight can knock on, echoing; but here
within this thick black pelt, your strongest gaze
will be absorbed and utterly disappear:
just as a raving madman, when nothing else
can ease him, charges into his dark night
howling, pounds on the padded wall, and feels
the rage being taken in and pacified.
She seems to hide all looks that have ever fallen
into her, so that, like an audience,
she can look them over, menacing and sullen,
and curl to sleep with them. But all at once
as if awakened, she turns her face to yours;
and with a shock, you see yourself, tiny,
inside the golden amber of her eyeballs
suspended, like a prehistoric fly.

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/19/20 6:37 PM as a reply to terry.
BUDDHA IN GLORY
(rainer maria rilke, trans mitchell)

Center of all centers, core of cores,
almond self-enclosed and growing sweet—
all this universe, to the furthest stars
and beyond them, is your flesh, your fruit.
Now you feel how nothing clings to you;
your vast shell reaches into endless space,
and there the rich, thick fluids rise and flow.
Illuminated in your infinite peace,
a billion stars go spinning through the night,
blazing high above your head.
But in you is the presence that
will be, when all the stars are dead.

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/19/20 6:50 PM as a reply to terry.
terry:
BUDDHA IN GLORY
(rainer maria rilke, trans mitchell)

Center of all centers, core of cores,
almond self-enclosed and growing sweet—
all this universe, to the furthest stars
and beyond them, is your flesh, your fruit.
Now you feel how nothing clings to you;
your vast shell reaches into endless space,
and there the rich, thick fluids rise and flow.
Illuminated in your infinite peace,
a billion stars go spinning through the night,
blazing high above your head.
But in you is the presence that
will be, when all the stars are dead.

LOVE SONG
(rainer maria rilke, trans mitchell)

How can I keep my soul in me, so that
it doesn’t touch your soul? How can I raise
it high enough, past you, to other things?
I would like to shelter it, among remote
lost objects, in some dark and silent place
that doesn’t resonate when your depths resound.
Yet everything that touches us, me and you,
takes us together like a violin’s bow,
which draws one voice out of two separate strings.
Upon what instrument are we two spanned?
And what musician holds us in his hand?
Oh sweetest song.

RE: Claims to Attainment
Answer
6/20/20 5:24 PM as a reply to terry.
Hi Terry, nice to meet you.

Thank you for engaging with me. I was a little concerned no one would. 

Chris asked me to share some experiences. You can find them in my response to him. I don't expect you to take them as proof of anything, but maybe they'll give you an impression of what is possible. If there's even a seed of, "Mayyyyyyybe," then that's cool. The two experiences I've shared are just examples. Multiply them times fifty or a hundred, it is hard to say where the point was that I went from saying "Let's test if this is true," to "It is possible this is true," to "I'm pretty sure this is true," to where I am now, "Yeah, weird stuff happens." 

What I've noticed is that a lot of people feel like proof is something that is owed to them.

I'm not selling anything, but quite often new users join the online community that I help to moderate and act as though we are full of con-men looking to bilk them out of their money or deceive them out of their 100 truth-based vision of reality. They come into our yard but want everything done on their terms. "I'll only believe you if you come on my YouTube channel and do this and that" and yada yada yada. 

There is literally nothing that I could do as an external agent to change their mind. Let's say I did everything they wanted (and I'm too amateur for that to be likely). The answer would probably be, "Now do it again." Or, well maybe you got lucky. 

The best way for someone to get a feel for whether there's anything real to remote viewing is to become familiar with some basic methods and protocol and give it a shot. When they've tried for themselves and then have to face the question of whether they've had any results better than chance, that's the real thing that provides proof. Most of our challengers are not interested in this. "Change my mind," they insist. 

Ever try to convince a smoker to stop smoking? To tell someone to change religions? To stop being racist? You cannot do these things from the outside.
Someone has to allow a seed to grow. They have to realize for themselves that there is a reason to change in order to get something that they want.

Now I realize in this case I'm on your doorstep instead of the other way around. But I'm not here to do anything except to explore overlap between our paths and common experiences, for example the strange, strong experiences that can occur with the arising and passing away and the dark night, or sudden awakening, or insight and realizations that can occur while walking a path.