Comments on: First things first… who are we trying to please? Exploring life, spirituality, and contemporary cultural issues via "The Basket of Tolerance" and other guideposts Tue, 26 Aug 2014 17:49:25 +0000 hourly 1 By: Parinirvana Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:02:51 +0000 I wouldn’t have said that fluoridated water, GMO foods, mind control à la NLP et cetera are ‘choice’ issues, for most people.

For the former two, perhaps they have simply been too busy to do the research, or just don’t have the money for the extortionately priced organic superfoods and supplements.

The latter, much like subliminals, bypasses the conscious mind, so I don’t see where the choice would be.

You speak of choice like it exists in a vacuum, independent of stimuli or conditioning of any nature.

The term ‘free will’ is itself something of an oxymoron. Will is a pre-determined course of action for the sake of bringing about a specific result. It cannot be ‘free’ by definition.

Even more facile, is the idea that such an absolute concept can exist in degrees, when free will and causality are logically, mutually exclusive. If it is conditioned by circumstances, it isn’t free will. Period.

Lots of the blather in ‘spiritual’ circles is just ridiculous, riddled with imprecise thinking, which reflects on the level of sincerity of the exponents.

Even the stuff that is technically feasible, is so utterly impractical for everyday people, that it is effectively redundant.

Ordinary working people, subject to economic problems, workplace problems, health problems, family problems… how much time do they have to devote to meditation? How are they going to find a still mind amongst a mental mosh-pit of noise, reaction, and aggro?

I myself have tried for years, but I think my mercurialism issues are preventing my reaching deeper levels of consciousness, which would imply that the change is reliant on the physical brain in some way (thus not an issue of free will and ultimately, a transient occurrence in consciousness only).

Find me ONE self-appointed guru or mystic that doesn’t have or exhibit notable contradictions or irrationality, in their material and/or their behaviour.

By: BoT Student Thu, 19 Jun 2014 22:40:20 +0000 Suit yourself.

Hey! That’s more “free will” goodness, perhaps? If there wasn’t free will we couldn’t suit ourselves. :)

The way I see it is we can’t control everything, but it seems like we can control how we react to situations. Or we can control whether we choose to identify with this or that – identify with our clothing, our waist size, our ethnicity, our bank account size, etc. If there was no free will, people would have no control over their actions, I guess, and the best solution to violence in the world might be massive worldwide overt enslavement – because nobody could be trusted and people’s individual choice would be unimportant. Just drug everyone, put something in the water to make people numb and make us feel “good”, broadcast mind control, etc. I mean all that stuff is already done – everyone knows that, I hope – but currently it’s almost all optional; we’re free to opt out of much of it.

Do you ever wonder why that is? Why is so much of the poison optional? Why is it setup that way?

Not all of it is optional, but the fluoridated water, the GMOs, the xanax, the television, the cocaine, the fake news, the false prophets, the flu shots, the fake websites, the flirtatious women (or men) who want to seduce us and abuse us, etc. – so much of it is optional!

Weird, huh?

By: Parinirvana Thu, 19 Jun 2014 21:08:06 +0000 Isn’t this all bullshit anyways?

I don’t see how free will could be said to exist on any level, when beingness itself is not in one’s control.

All it takes is damage to a certain part of your brain, and you become a completely different person. Or you lose a significant amount of cognitive functioning. Free will?

We are subject to innumerable causal factors and chains.

Where exactly does the free will come in?

I’d like to believe we have free will, but I don’t see it.

By: BoT Student Wed, 18 Jun 2014 04:54:13 +0000 Waiting for debate?

Maybe it’s not destined to happen?


If a person believed there was no such thing as free will, maybe he’d have to coerce or manipulate people to do XYZ. Whereas if he did believe in free will, maybe he could simply invite people to participate in some situation – as you’re doing here – without trying to force the situation.

So, whether there is free will or not, one’s opinion about it seems to carry a lot of repercussions for how we treat people and how we make choices.

Regarding identity… I think you might be right that as human beings we tend to invest a lot of energy in protecting our sense of “identity”.

However, I’ve met people who turned away from all associations, turned inward, contracted inside themselves, and they didn’t necessarily seem any less identified than before. I’m kind of of the opinion that letting go of our fixation on our sense of identity has more to do with *radiating* than with *contracting*. It’s like if I hold on to something tightly, that reinforces a sense of identity, or tension, or fixation. But if I let go, or am less “armored” as Reich would put it, then maybe there’s less “identity” automatically, without having to turn away from anything…?

I dunno, that’s just my sense of it.

By: Parinirvana Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:53:01 +0000 All desire is on behalf of the self… an assumed identity that nobody really cares to investigate sincerely.

On investigation, it gradually dissolves, contracting from it’s associations until it implodes on itself completely. People already know this is so, on some level, which explains their hostility toward those who threaten their identity; ‘their’ nation, ‘their’ culture, ‘their’ morals, ‘their’ property, et cetera.

People use the most nonsensical associations as a basis for their identity, when the dissolution of all identity is really the best course.

But when the mechanism of suffering is seen, and one has truly had enough, then a powerful inner urge propels the mind inwards.

I’m still waiting for the free will versus determinism debate… ^_^

By: Lynne Tue, 17 Jun 2014 05:31:17 +0000 Yes the heart must win.

I have been sitting with Bhagavans death consideration where he speaks about our fear of death being dishonest because what we, the ego, are really fearful of is God/dissolution even when we profess love.

And the heart must win

By: TC Tue, 17 Jun 2014 00:20:48 +0000 Lynne, you wrote:

‘No one wants to be so lost in love that there is no one there to know about it.’

I think that’s both true and not true. The heart wants to be totally dissolved in and by Love, but ego want to survive as a presumed-separate being. The two are incompatible.

The heart must win or there is only madness.

By: BoT Student Tue, 17 Jun 2014 00:08:37 +0000 Yes… lots of opposition to truth in this world, some say.

I don’t know whether to touch on this here, as it’s kind of a loaded subject… but in some cultures they believed that women are more interested in social harmony than men, while men are more interested in integrity and truth than women. And that this is based on men and women being built differently, with different strengths and different kinds of “etheric bodies” or however you want to look at it.

I’m not going to say just now whether I agree with this perspective or not. Ultimately, I don’t think it’s true, in the ultimate sense.

But from that p.o.v. it would be understandable and somewhat healthy for women to want to fit in, but less healthy for *men* to be completely driven by that orientation.

Interesting topics.

So in traditional cultures, the men were supposed to help protect the women and give them a space in which they could be free to participate in a sacred culture – a culture that is sane and upholds sane values – rather than women having to be “lone warriors” hitchhiking along the roads of life, getting into conflict with everyone, type of thing.

yeah… interesting topics, for sure.

Again I’m not saying I agree or disagree with any of this, just saying these seem to be ways people dealt with these issues in some parts of the world, traditionally.

But ultimately integrity is probably an individual matter, it seems.

By: Lynne Mon, 16 Jun 2014 23:14:10 +0000 I always remember Bhagavan Adi Da saying somewhere that we must do what we have to do even in the face of great opposition. The heart leading the way.

I know that personally the need to be liked and fit in has been and is a huge limitation. It is primarily experienced at the heart level as living one way and having a secret life on the inside. A lack of integritiy. I recently returned from India and felt so liberated to be in a culture in which I could not speak the language and I could live my love of my spiritual master out loud. It was a shock to realise how much I suppress this in my western world. I would go so far as to say that this is my biggest limitation and so biggest place of sadhana.

Of course it is all nutty on a logical kinda level. Everyone wants to reveal their deepest heart. Of course it is nutty on another logical kinda level. No one wants to be so lost in love that there is no one there to know about it.