Session 20 June 2009

[Laurentien2]

Hello Laura! Thank you for the last post.

Here is my understanding, tell me if I going in the right direction. Connecting to our higher self will enable us to create and to speak a Universal language base on objectivity- truth- Knowledge and because being based on those principals can't be different from one individual or another no matter is personal "background".

 

[Nicholas]

Thank you very much Laura for that last post. It really got me to step back farther away from the trees to see the forest better!

 

[Laurentien2]

will enable us to create ,Being a Universal language (language of the Universe) can't be created but relearn, my mistake here, the universe was and will always be here (all eternity).

 

[Nienna]

As others have said, thanks, Laura, for that last post.

Not that this is correct, but I have always thought that the 'confusion of tongues' with the whole Tower of Babel thing was more about people who speak that same language not understanding each other, as well as those who speak different languages.

This has been really brought home in recent years with doublespeak of the psychopaths and the way that they restructure the way we think - or don't think.

Your last post really tells it so everyone should understand just what we are all up against, both within and without.

 

[Yossarian]

Laura asked

Why would you think that this term implied any deification of the Cs??? I'm just trying to understand how you read things and come up with things that are never intended or implied in a text. Do you do this often or have you observed yourself doing it by comparing your reading comprehension to that of others via networking?

I know where my problem comes from and I thought it could possibly lead to misunderstanding or unclarity with others. I come from a nearly fundamentalist Christian background and so much of that indoctrination and brainwashing is "imbedded" within my functional vocabulary. In the Judeo-Christian tradition I understood "Holy" to mean "set apart" or even "ritually clean," or almost good enough for God. A more enlightened Christian definition of the word would be something like "of God" or "Divine" or even Transcendent. I didn't think that was the type of meaning in the prayer, but I just wanted to clarify it so that I could overcome my built in prejudice towards the word as I seek to overcome my conditioning.

Thank you for the clarification. It helps me.

Update, quoted from the Revised Edition of the Harper Collins Bible Dictionary entry for the word "holiness":

A term in Hebrew probably meaning separate from the ordinary or profane. Also in Hebrew and in Greek "holy" implies connection with God or the divine. Thus, God is holy and people, things, and actions may be holy by association with God. Holiness may also include the ideas of consecration to God and purity from what is evil or improper . . . .

2nd update. I think defining the term did help, and that this word does carry a lot of "baggage" in many quarters--like you say, a "pathological" bent. We could look up "profane" for example, another word with lots of baggage and also pathological, no doubt.

 

[Nević Nenad]

Prayer reminds me of some Indian (native American) prayers. I like it because it's simple and somehow opens you if you really think those words when saying them. I think that it must be comprehended (must be understood) not just repeating the words, that is mechanical and worth nothing.

I think that I will formulate this a little clumsy but I'm interested how it looks to be in contact with self higher centers or with higher self. Are the "symptoms" of that individual or maybe similar to all people? How one sees/feels it? How is that looking in the practice?

I have one "method" which I believe is related to it; in the same time I am aware that it can be just my wishful thinking or something like that. Well, if I am interested to know something I ask, I formulate the question, and then wait, let it go, sometimes answer came very fast, sometimes takes days, sometimes never. I don't hear voices in my head, or see pictures, just get in the state of knowing answer, it's a little difficult to describe, answer just come. But question must be asked without emotions and like it is no big deal if answer don't come (usually it isn't)

Example (sort of) I was thinking on one man that I knew a few years ago, how is he, is he ok, I would like to see him, and so on. Few days later I met him in the shopping center. I have noticed that, so I have tried another time. I have remembered one elderly man whit whom I have worked 7-8 years ago and never saw him since then, I even didn't recollect his name. He was ill, so I was wondering is he still alive, how he is now and similar questions. Few days later that man passed by me in the very busy street (altogether with papers under his arm). His appearance was like answers on all my questions about him "he is alive, he is well, and he is still the same" and I even recollect his name in that moment. It was just like he was shown to me to get all that things I was wondering. I know for coincidences, but this was somehow wanted coincidence. So I am now more careful in what I thinking :)

Any thoughts on higher centers in practical life?

 

[wanderer]

In response to questions in this thread and an earlier one, the word Kriya means purification in Sanskrit. I suppose our modern translation would be detox. It's use in the name of a yogic practice implies that it is a method of purification/detox, which may be physical (if memory serves, the use of the neti pot to clear the nasal passages is considered a kriya) or a meditation/pranayam technique. Prana is Sanskrit for life energy, so Pranayama is energy work. The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali explain the basic concepts of yoga quite clearly _http://hrih.hypermart.net/patanjali/.

I practiced Yogananda's Kriya Yoga for a decade, it seems similar to the AOL technique judging by the available info, but the specifics, and, I suppose, the intended results are quite different. After a few years of practice, I was able to easily achieve a state of bliss and led groups in meditation and chanting. Emotional release and the other aspects of the work discussed here were not part of the picture, however, and after a decade I realized that I was still the same jerk that I was when I started and quit altogether. I was probably being too hard on myself and throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but my life had definitely become imbalanced by so much interior focus and so little attention to the details of outer life and relationships with the people around me. My outer life needed a lot of work to make up for years of neglect. I have now come full cycle, ready for spiritual practice to prepare for the coming days.

One of the basic beginner's practices of Self Realization Fellowship (Yogananda's organization) is basically the same as the so-hum excercise. In fact, while initiates are prohibited from sharing the SRF techniques, we were allowed to share this particular exercise freely by substituting so-hum for the "secert" mantra that was actually used.

 

[PepperFritz]

I didn't think that was the type of meaning in the prayer, but I just wanted to clarify it so that I could overcome my built in prejudice towards the word as I seek to overcome my conditioning....

There is so much in our culture and society that has been "co-opted" and thus robbed of its significance and power. If we were to reject and cast aside everything that has been thus been "taken over", there would be nothing left. So, this "taking back" of that which has been stolen from us is so important. It requires a certain amount of research into how certain words, phrases, ideas, concepts, etc. have been twisted to STS agendas over the years and centuries, and that is part of the learning process. It IS possible to "rewire" our brains and psyches to hear and use our language anew.

Buddy recently wrote an interesting post that I think relates to this, about the "rewiring" required to "take back" and gain/regain an appreciation for great and powerful music that has been similarly "co-opted" by those who would dilute it of that power by using it to sell "products":

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=12739.msg91317#msg91317

 

[dant]

Awesome objectives, post #209 Laura!

Hopefully, the objectives outlined will helps us to better
understand the goals and to sharpen our focus, the need
to trust our networking partners in creating a self-correcting,
group-collimating collinear direction! Hopefully, this will blaze
a clear path towards the conduit - from which we might be
able to enter...

 

[Gawan]

James Surowiecki's book, The Wisdom of Crowds, suggests that multiple viewpoints from individuals with a wide range of backgrounds, rather than the restricted viewpoints of experts or specialists, are crucial in reaching informed decisions on complex topics. Oakley comments that getting input from a broad variety of people is like getting input from a wide variety of devices such as microscopes, telescopes, litmus paper, tensile testors, ultrasound devices, scales, and so on.

It also sounds like brainstorming, but it makes it much more interesting, as described, when people are coming not only from one educated background (experts).
But most often people are discouraged to talk, to take part in etc. for example: "I cannot say anything to this, because I'm not an expert"; "No, it is stupid, just a thought" ..., well sometimes it can be very restricted. Maybe it goes also in the direction the -language- politicians speak, too far away from ordinary people and ordinary problems.

But it's great that this network is existing, working with a much more open minded view.

It is also reflective of true evolutionary social activities that there are some who are trailblazers and others who support and "watch the back" of the trailblazers. Once the trail is blazed, and the destination is reached, the others not only benefit from the struggles of the trailblazer, they also set about organizing the details of the new environment and stabilizing it. So, everyone plays a role and if the network is tight, they all arrive pretty much together.

The bottom line is this: we are all in this mess together and we sink together, or we get our boat to harbor, but somebody's got to be the one who coordinates or we'll just go endlessly in circles, nobody will be bailing, paddling, or evaluating currents and signs to determine direction. I haven't been doing too bad at it, but I can't do it without data and help and there is no way I could gather all the data by myself, so the network is crucial in that respect also!

It reminded me of one of your statements in a podcast which I found very inspiring:

[…]everybody doesn't want to paint pictures, everybody doesn't want to write books, everybody doesn't want to make shoes or dig ditches or whatever. But some people are happy doing any of those things and we should be able to find ways so that each type of individual, each person with each kind of talent can find their natural place in society, in the body of society. You know in a body, there are different parts to a body. Bodies have eyes, they have fingers and toes, they have noses. A body has all different kind of parts, it has organs, heart, lungs, etcetera and human society is like that also. Everyone has their part and the body can't survive without many of these parts. Some of them are expendable but for the most part, they are not. And if any part of it is gone, the body misses it. It's suffers for it. So we have to find ways to keep the body alive, to keep it healthy, to make sure that all of it's parts are cared for, that the brain directs it to be able to be healthy, wealthy and wise. And that the brain takes care of the body and the body takes care of the brain.

Those who are able to accomplish this task of rebuilding social connections based on the new evolutionary standard of accounting for pathology in the equations, will evolve. Those who do not evolve will perish.

That's what I see from where I sit right now. United we stand, divided we fall. All for One and One for All.

Thank you, for that posting!

 

[IHI666]

Hello everyone!
If it's the "guidance" that' :)s the key in this, it might be way easier and cheaper to just make a mp3 and post it.
:)

 

[anart]

Hello everyone!
If it's the "guidance" that' :)s the key in this, it might be way easier and cheaper to just make a mp3 and post it.
:)

Hi IHI, that's already one of the things in the works, just fyi.

 

[seek10]

I practiced Yogananda's Kriya Yoga for a decade, it seems similar to the AOL technique judging by the available info, but the specifics, and, I suppose, the intended results are quite different. After a few years of practice, I was able to easily achieve a state of bliss and led groups in meditation and chanting. Emotional release and the other aspects of the work discussed here were not part of the picture, however, and after a decade I realized that I was still the same jerk that I was when I started and quit altogether. I was probably being too hard on myself and throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but my life had definitely become imbalanced by so much interior focus and so little attention to the details of outer life and relationships with the people around me. My outer life needed a lot of work to make up for years of neglect. I have now come full cycle, ready for spiritual practice to prepare for the coming days.

One of the basic beginner's practices of Self Realization Fellowship (Yogananda's organization) is basically the same as the so-hum excercise. In fact, while initiates are prohibited from sharing the SRF techniques, we were allowed to share this particular exercise freely by substituting so-hum for the "secert" mantra that was actually used.

I was also a student of Yogananda's SRF ( only couple of years ) , though I decided to not to go through the kriya yoga. When intense emotional stuff came up in the meditation, I called the SRF monks, which they asked me to ignore until the end of the meditation for divine help in the form of prayer . This confused/clash of thoughts me to the point I became irregular and inconsistent.
I was guessing that what Gurdjeff's saying 3 levels of development/centers ( physical , mental and emotional levels ) seems to applyhere. what I mean is Budhist monk's meditation of mindless meditation is for emotional center only , yogananda's SRF kriya yoga/ Hong-Sau techniques are for intellectual center etc. Probably the 4th way meditation techniques ( if any exist ) will integrate all the three centers. of course the " Big 4" is the critical to making this happen to the emotional center.

 

[Mr. Premise]

ABC..Joerg’s quote of Laura from the podcast reminded me of a fascinating talk I attended recently by Dave Jacke on Edible Forest Gardens. It's part of the Permaculture movement. He wrote two textbooks on theory and design of forest gardens. The research on this is new and not yet complete but apparently you can get good yields with far less work than conventional gardens, as little as 60 hours a year. By working with normal ecosystem dynamics, (in normal gardens we devote huge amounts of labor to opposing ecosystem succession, for example) you can design a system that yields lots of products but is self-maintaining and healthy.

I was thinking during the talk, that given the five year timetable facing us that getting something like a forest garden going probably isn't practical, but I remembered Laura in Secret History talking about learning from nature, so I listened to the talk from that point of view, seeing if there was an esoteric meaning.

One thing Jacke said really struck me in this regard. He said that the idea is to plant groups of plants to mimic an ecosystem, such as a forest, with each plant doing what it naturally does, but supporting the whole (while yielding food or medicine). Some plants are nitrogen fixers, some shelter beneficial insects, some do this, some do that, but if you design it right, each species doing what comes naturally strengthens the whole, the polyculture. On the other hand, his definition of stress was when things are forced to do things they are not suited for, or when needs are denied.

James Surowiecki's book, The Wisdom of Crowds, suggests that multiple viewpoints from individuals with a wide range of backgrounds, rather than the restricted viewpoints of experts or specialists, are crucial in reaching informed decisions on complex topics. Oakley comments that getting input from a broad variety of people is like getting input from a wide variety of devices such as microscopes, telescopes, litmus paper, tensile testors, ultrasound devices, scales, and so on.

But it's great that this network is existing, working with a much more open minded view.

It is also reflective of true evolutionary social activities that there are some who are trailblazers and others who support and "watch the back" of the trailblazers. Once the trail is blazed, and the destination is reached, the others not only benefit from the struggles of the trailblazer, they also set about organizing the details of the new environment and stabilizing it. So, everyone plays a role and if the network is tight, they all arrive pretty much together.

The bottom line is this: we are all in this mess together and we sink together, or we get our boat to harbor, but somebody's got to be the one who coordinates or we'll just go endlessly in circles, nobody will be bailing, paddling, or evaluating currents and signs to determine direction. I haven't been doing too bad at it, but I can't do it without data and help and there is no way I could gather all the data by myself, so the network is crucial in that respect also!

It reminded me of one of your statements in a podcast which I found very inspiring:

[…]everybody doesn't want to paint pictures, everybody doesn't want to write books, everybody doesn't want to make shoes or dig ditches or whatever. But some people are happy doing any of those things and we should be able to find ways so that each type of individual, each person with each kind of talent can find their natural place in society, in the body of society. You know in a body, there are different parts to a body. Bodies have eyes, they have fingers and toes, they have noses. A body has all different kind of parts, it has organs, heart, lungs, etcetera and human society is like that also. Everyone has their part and the body can't survive without many of these parts. Some of them are expendable but for the most part, they are not. And if any part of it is gone, the body misses it. It's suffers for it. So we have to find ways to keep the body alive, to keep it healthy, to make sure that all of it's parts are cared for, that the brain directs it to be able to be healthy, wealthy and wise. And that the brain takes care of the body and the body takes care of the brain.

Those who are able to accomplish this task of rebuilding social connections based on the new evolutionary standard of accounting for pathology in the equations, will evolve. Those who do not evolve will perish.

That's what I see from where I sit right now. United we stand, divided we fall. All for One and One for All.

Thank you, for that posting!

 

[Buddy]

Relating to the idea of cooperative systems (ecosystems and people working together as a team), I thought I'd mention that I'm looking into that very subject at the moment. In the book I'm reading, "The Fifth Discipline", Peter Senge seems to have collected a number of archetypical deep structure patterns that occur frequently in human life. The ability to discern these patterns in everyday situations seems to come from the willingness to shift your way of viewing by seeing in "wholes" - whole systems. I thought I'd post a summary of it when I'm done if anyone thinks they might find the information useful.

Speaking of archetypical structures, Dr. Benoit Mandelbrot talks about the relationship of fractal patterns to human archetypes in a podcast here:
_http://scienceandsociety.net/2008/08/21/fractal-geometry-mathematics-and-nature/


Apologies if this is too far off topic.