Top Neurosurgeon ‘Spent Six Days In Heaven’ During A Coma

[Antlerman]

I'm rather cynical myself. That is pretty cool that you have been through so much and still come out pretty decent. But when it comes to spiritual matters, I try to remain open. *runs to facebook to get a recent post of a friend* Being a cynic of anything spiritual or non-scientific essentially amounts to claiming one knows something they don't. The following quote was from a friend who used to post on here, but went back to evangelicalism, and even Islam for a while. He is taking some religion courses at the University and is loving it, and he has finally freed himself from all woo. Don't take the term "god" in the quote too seriously... think of god as the unknown.

 

"Faith is a constant, existential awareness of objective reality as only one of many possibilities; both God and man have the power of breaking reality. In exercising his imagination, man meets God."

-Avivah Gottlieb Zornberg

 

What struck me about that was the "existential awareness as objective reality as only one of many possibilities." Our imaginations makes us better people.

 

People like Antlerman are no threat to me, and I can greatly empathisize with his views. I think it is important to realize it is possible we are more than the sum of our biological parts, and what that may imply for our sense of humanity and life. I don't believe in woo, because whatever exists, exists. Just because we don't know how to scientifically describe some phenomenon doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Consciousness is still a mystery and I think that is the part of existence that could be more than the apparent sum of our physical brain. The explanation could be in some complex math we have not yet been able to describe, or in some physical phenomenon or force (if you will) that we haven't explained well enough. Obviously, it requres a brain to exist, so once you die, your personal awareness of anything dies with it. That is where I let my imagination run wild, and I have great fun doing it. I'm still cynical enough to not subscribe to anything or practice anything other than basic meditation, or even have a belief, but I do think that a sense of openness and imagination makes one's life much richer. That is probably the religion and philosophy major in me.

That was an awesome post! Wonderful.

[Ouroboros]

Ok, i think that helps. Seriously.

 

So, if you had to align yourself, would you consider your "understanding" more atheistic, deistic or pantheistic?

The closest in regard to "God" I would relate to would be none of the above, but something you didn't mention which is panentheism. Ultimately, I am a nondualist, which means I don't believe God exists, so to speak (but not in the sense your modern atheist says this). This is very complicated to explain, but suffice to say, no categories that others are trying to put me into here are going to work. I like how the Christian mystic Meister Eckhart put this, "I pray God to make me free of God, for [His] unconditional Being is above God and all distinctions". "God beyond God" is another way to put that. I say that God is the Face we put upon the Infinite. At a point, even God dissolves away.

I agree with this.

[Antlerman]

Ok, i think that helps. Seriously.

 

So, if you had to align yourself, would you consider your "understanding" more atheistic, deistic or pantheistic?

The closest in regard to "God" I would relate to would be none of the above, but something you didn't mention which is panentheism. Ultimately, I am a nondualist, which means I don't believe God exists, so to speak (but not in the sense your modern atheist says this). This is very complicated to explain, but suffice to say, no categories that others are trying to put me into here are going to work. I like how the Christian mystic Meister Eckhart put this, "I pray God to make me free of God, for [His] unconditional Being is above God and all distinctions". "God beyond God" is another way to put that. I say that God is the Face we put upon the Infinite. At a point, even God dissolves away.

I agree with this.

Yes, I've liked that view of a theist-style God. It combines the best of pantheism and tradition theism. God in transcendence, and God in immanence. You know, this is a bit of a side topic, but I've heard some theologians suggest that the original view of the Christian Trinity doctrine, before it became what it was now, was actually panenthiestic. That's cool, if you think about it, plus it makes sense from a theological perspective. I'll need to investigate that further at some point.

[pandora]

 

That was an awesome post! Wonderful.

 

*blush* Thanks, Antlerman! I spent a few years in existential pain and suffering to be able to get to that point. There was also a time period of strict atheism in there, as kind of a reaction to the inflated belief system I once held. I've learned to compromise with myself. For the spiritually inclined, such a journey is a must for serenity. For others who clung/cling to the more concrete aspects of faith, the journey takes a very different route and comes to a very different conclusion. Some of us are just hard-wired to want to think about these things and feel connected to humanity on an existential level, but some people had a belief system for entirely different reasons. The development of compassion for humanity at large or the quest for connectedness is not really in their genes or nature/upbringing.

[blackpudd1n]

At the core of cynicism is an understanding that the world owes you nothing. You appreciate what good comes your way, understanding that your very existence does not entitle you to more good than bad in life. If you want something, you work to achieve it. If you can't be bothered doing so, don't complain about it. If something is not able to be changed, you just accept it. People can and will frequently disappoint you. You don't sit around getting upset over it, you pick yourself up and you keep on trucking. It's not like anyone owes you anything.

 

This is a really great statement. I think what you call "cynicism" is it also detachment or is it resignation, or both? I don't have nearly the high expectations of life that I used to have, say, 20 years ago. The notion that things will get better. Change and impermanence rule.

 

You can only do so much, work so hard, then let go of the outcome.

 

Detachment? No. I'm too focused on reality for that. And I don't dissociate, either- my psych nurse would have raised it long ago if I did.

 

Resignation only in the sense that the past cannot be changed. For me it's more about just plain old acceptance. Shit happens sometimes. I don't know why, but I'm not going to get hung up on it. I might have a vent, have a cry, have a laugh, do all three, then I get on with things. Deal with the situation. Attempt to improve things on my own. I find peace in dealing with shit. Meditation or any other philosophy would never give me peace, simply because that is time I could use to work on a solution actively. Getting to the root of a problem, weighing up my options, and then choosing the best way to deal with it and commencing that plan is where I find my peace. I am a very, very practical person.

[Ouroboros]

From the Collins Concise Australian Dictionary, 7th Edition, 2008: cynic (n) a person who believes the worst about people or the outcome of events.

 

That's me. I was a cynic long before I was a sceptic. I always hope for a good outcome, or the best in people. But I am aware and I accept that there is a bad outcome and everyone has bad within them. Without being cynical, I would not prepare also for the bad, and have a back-up plan should things go bad. It's got nothing to do with being close-minded or sceptical. It's just realistic.

Then a discussion is almost to the point of impossible. Think about it, if you believe the words about the other person you're discussing with and except the worse outcome from the discussion, it's bound to fail. You must have some trust in people in this thread, or you wouldn't be here even making your points. If you were fully cynical about everyone, you would already know that this discussion was a waste for you. So honestly, I think you're somewhat cynical, but not "hardcore", i.e. all the way and fully out. And it's a good thing that you're not... for us.

 

If you accept the worst may occur, then the worst occuring does not surprise you nor upset you as much.

 

And I am a cynic. My dear psychiatric nurse-practitioner has told me many a time. Not that he sees any issue with it, however. Because of it, I have dealt with the various traumas I have suffered very well, and failed to develop Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result. With my childhood, I was also a prime candidate for Borderline Personality Disorder. But I was just too cynical lol. It sure makes life easier for him- he's only got to keep tabs on one disorder, being bipolar, than a potential three disorders. You see where the cynic laughs, now?

All the disasters and illnesses we've had in my family have pushed us to the brink of cynicism too. I except to have to take my son to the hospital at least twice a month. This year, he has had more infections than we can remember. And when other things in the house breaks, or family dies in our homecountry and we get to know it over Facebook instead of a phone call... and so on.

 

You've got the wrong idea about us cynics. My personal worldview is uninterested in the validity of your claims regarding meditation or anything else. That belongs to the realm of scepticism. A cynic is not necessarily a sceptic. But a cynic can be both.

Well, I think the discussion was more around cynic as used in the area of science, knowledge, etc, where a cynic is someone who is extremely skeptical about claims, to the point that he/she won't even look into them. I can see your point that cynic when it comes to people, that's kind of a different area than the category of skepticism.

 

The main point is, though, that I am an individual. Regardless of the labels I carry, female, feminist, atheist, bipolarity, cynic, childless, animal lover, cheese lover... I am an individual. Just like every other female, feminist, atheist, bipolar, cynic, childless, animal lover, cheese lover. Someone else could hold all of those exact same labels, and still be a very different person to I. To lump any group of people together and proclaim a disliking of that group on the basis of one label they may carry is the essence of prejudice. Trying to redefine a label for one person so that you don't lump them in with all the rest and can have something to do with them is the essence of cognitive dissonance. We all have our biases and prejudices, and some are harder to overcome than others. But recognising that we hold them is the first step to overcoming them and leads to what I refer to as "enlightenment": taking each person as they come, on the basis of who they are and their actions, rather than any label they may hold.

I think Antlerman was talking about cynics on a general basis, not you per se.

 

When it comes to lumping any group together, that's why "woo" has been such a bad term to use in this particular sub-forum. This section here is for serious discussions about individual beliefs, which reflects on their personality and if they're incorrigible cynics (or anything else) or not, and therefore, "woo" labeling them is not allowed.

[pandora]

Detachment? No. I'm too focused on reality for that. And I don't dissociate, either- my psych nurse would have raised it long ago if I did.

 

Resignation only in the sense that the past cannot be changed. For me it's more about just plain old acceptance. Shit happens sometimes. I don't know why, but I'm not going to get hung up on it. I might have a vent, have a cry, have a laugh, do all three, then I get on with things. Deal with the situation. Attempt to improve things on my own. I find peace in dealing with shit. Meditation or any other philosophy would never give me peace, simply because that is time I could use to work on a solution actively. Getting to the root of a problem, weighing up my options, and then choosing the best way to deal with it and commencing that plan is where I find my peace. I am a very, very practical person.

 

I completely agree with you on all this. I want to clarify that meditation for me is purposeful time-out. I don't think during meditation, unless I have a specific problem I need to contemplate or an area of my life where I need to develop more compassion. I don't really consider those times meditation a necessarily spiritual exercise. It is just life. I see my spirituality as separate from but not unrelated to my acceptance that shit happens. My spirituality helps me accept that shit happens. "Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference." Wisdom and serenity do not come without contemplation on some level, it doesn't have to be through a formal practice of meditation. You weighing your options and changing what you can IS spirituality... being more than a person who just reacts to situations instinctively.

 

Also, detachment in the spiritual sense (not the dissociative psychological sense) is required to accept that shit happens. Even though you may not realize it.

[Ouroboros]

Yes, I've liked that view of a theist-style God. It combines the best of pantheism and tradition theism. God in transcendence, and God in immanence. You know, this is a bit of a side topic, but I've heard some theologians suggest that the original view of the Christian Trinity doctrine, before it became what it was now, was actually panenthiestic. That's cool, if you think about it, plus it makes sense from a theological perspective. I'll need to investigate that further at some point.

And I actually wrote more in my post above, but I just don't know how to explain some of these things.

 

I've mentioned it before, but can do it again, that one turning point was when I read or heard a scientist making the claim that if life and consciousness is natural and emerges from the natural world, then it means that nature itself must contain the potential for life and consciousness. Not that it is alive or sentient, as such, but just that the energy, structure, power, for it to emerge is there. He didn't say all this, but something much shorter, which led me to understand these things on a different level. Ground of all being, isn't that a term that's used?

[blackpudd1n]

Pudd..This is a five star post for me. *****

 

Nobody could have explained cynicism better than you have done here. I relate 100% to your 'story'.

In many ways..my story is so close to yours - you would not believe it.

There are things that I have never posted on EX-c. I admire your honesty and 'balls'.

 

I have changed soooo much in the last 2 years on EX-c. Some people may prefer the old whiny Margee, but she's not comin' back. I'm a bit of a 'hard ass' now. I am who I am now and it's not that bad being a friendly cynic!! Deconverting on this site has taught me tons... from the many fantastic posts that people put forth on EX .

 

I also, have been through too much and have heard faaaarrrr too many 'nasty' stories to Not be a cynic. That's why nobody's spitituallity works for me anymore. I have done my share of 'hunting' down some kind of spirituality that might make sence to me...but it ALWAYS comes up short. I ALWAYS STILL end up having far too many questions that people can't answer. I think I'm a 'realist'...a real realist, beyond what most people will accept, so I keep it to myself.

 

I think I've worked my way through the bitterness... and I just want to be a happy cynic. I'm a fighter too. It's the only way I've made it through my life also. I'm glad you got it at your age honey and not mine. Now you know that it's you who must create what you want to happen in your life and also accept at the same time, when the plan is 'frustrated' by the outside world. Outside infuences and people can 'frustrate' one's life. It's learning to deal with this fact. Maybe you can continue to teach ole' Margee a few things hon!!

 

Thanks for that input....I think my 'idendity crises' is almost over because of people like you. I will always, to the best of my ability....try to be a gentle, healthy, kind cynic. I will keep that smile on my face because it feels better than no smile and it helps a lot of other people.

 

Cynics understand other people's pain more than anyone else in the world. Cynics have the ability to help others through this world. We teach people to fight whatever they are going through. We have our own little 'spirituality' about us!!

 

So........ 'it is, what it is' to me....I'll try not to complain. Life is... heartbreak, disapointment, pain, and happiness. I'm going to steal as much happiness in my last days as I can!!

 

You go and make the best life you can for yourself hon. I'll be right behind you...kicking your arse. You kick mine when I need it....deal?? Love you Pudd!

 

Thanks Margee

 

Sorry it has taken me so long to reply- I had a good, long sleep, then since I got up I've been cooking. Had some mince to use up, so I made a pasta bake from scratch (I don't like those jars of sauce).

 

I love your term "happy cynic". That is, essentially, what I am I'm pretty content within myself, and while it may sound unthinkable to be a "happy cynic" to some, I see no issue with that state

[Ouroboros]

That was an awesome post! Wonderful.

 

*blush* Thanks, Antlerman! I spent a few years in existential pain and suffering to be able to get to that point. There was also a time period of strict atheism in there, as kind of a reaction to the inflated belief system I once held. I've learned to compromise with myself. For the spiritually inclined, such a journey is a must for serenity. For others who clung/cling to the more concrete aspects of faith, the journey takes a very different route and comes to a very different conclusion. Some of us are just hard-wired to want to think about these things and feel connected to humanity on an existential level, but some people had a belief system for entirely different reasons. The development of compassion for humanity at large or the quest for connectedness is not really in their genes or nature/upbringing.

I +1'd both of your posts.

 

I still consider me an "atheist" in the sense of that I don't believe in the traditional God. I don't believe in a sentient, personal God in the sense of how monotheisms portray it, but in Nature/World/Universe whatever we call it, that existed before us, will exist after us, is more powerful, is grander than us, have more facts and intricate details about it that we never can learn or know, and from where we came, that is a new, different, and non-sentient, but yet a form of "God". And I know, some people will argue that this is a "redefinition" of the word "God" and it's a "fallacy of equivocation," but I disagree. There has never been a true or proper definition of God. The Christian God is outdated and nonfunctional, while a metaphysical naturalistic God is born in science and human experience.

[blackpudd1n]

I realise there are other posts directed towards me, but I'm going to have to come back and respond to them later. I'm got to spend a few hours studying, so I'm going to step out for a bit and come back later and deal with the responses

[Antlerman]

Yes, I've liked that view of a theist-style God. It combines the best of pantheism and tradition theism. God in transcendence, and God in immanence. You know, this is a bit of a side topic, but I've heard some theologians suggest that the original view of the Christian Trinity doctrine, before it became what it was now, was actually panenthiestic. That's cool, if you think about it, plus it makes sense from a theological perspective. I'll need to investigate that further at some point.

And I actually wrote more in my post above, but I just don't know how to explain some of these things.

 

I've mentioned it before, but can do it again, that one turning point was when I read or heard a scientist making the claim that if life and consciousness is natural and emerges from the natural world, then it means that nature itself must contain the potential for life and consciousness. Not that it is alive or sentient, as such, but just that the energy, structure, power, for it to emerge is there. He didn't say all this, but something much shorter, which led me to understand these things on a different level. Ground of all being, isn't that a term that's used?

Yes, Ground of Being I believe was a term from Paul Tillich. It may have come from others before him though. Yes, what you describe above is how see it. Of course as I said before and I consider a very important point actually, is that these are not 'beliefs' in the sense that we 'believe in them", and there serve as the basis of some faith. Not at all. They're very fluid and serve as a framework to try to talk about our overall sense, or impressions, intuitions, or lets add mystical experience to that list. What you describe works well for me coming from that place.

[pandora]

That was an awesome post! Wonderful.

 

*blush* Thanks, Antlerman! I spent a few years in existential pain and suffering to be able to get to that point. There was also a time period of strict atheism in there, as kind of a reaction to the inflated belief system I once held. I've learned to compromise with myself. For the spiritually inclined, such a journey is a must for serenity. For others who clung/cling to the more concrete aspects of faith, the journey takes a very different route and comes to a very different conclusion. Some of us are just hard-wired to want to think about these things and feel connected to humanity on an existential level, but some people had a belief system for entirely different reasons. The development of compassion for humanity at large or the quest for connectedness is not really in their genes or nature/upbringing.

I +1'd both of your posts.

 

I still consider me an "atheist" in the sense of that I don't believe in the traditional God. I don't believe in a sentient, personal God in the sense of how monotheisms portray it, but in Nature/World/Universe whatever we call it, that existed before us, will exist after us, is more powerful, is grander than us, have more facts and intricate details about it that we never can learn or know, and from where we came, that is a new, different, and non-sentient, but yet a form of "God". And I know, some people will argue that this is a "redefinition" of the word "God" and it's a "fallacy of equivocation," but I disagree. There has never been a true or proper definition of God. The Christian God is outdated and nonfunctional, while a metaphysical naturalistic God is born in science and human experience.

 

I can totally relate. Sometimes words fail us and we are easily misunderstood. Depending on the crowd, I call myself an atheist or a spiritual agnostic. I have to take into account my audience, like a good journalist.

[Ouroboros]

I think it is important to realize it is possible we are more than the sum of our biological parts, and what that may imply for our sense of humanity and life.

We are, because "summing" is a process, not a part. We know what a "sum" is, but yet, no machine can do it without processing. Causality, process, energy, and more, are "things" beyond matter, parts, atoms, quarks. Even space itself is something different than a proton or electron. A particle is only one view of reality. Reality is more, just as understanding is more than just words.

[Ouroboros]

I realise there are other posts directed towards me, but I'm going to have to come back and respond to them later. I'm got to spend a few hours studying, so I'm going to step out for a bit and come back later and deal with the responses

Do understand that I'm not threatening you or trying to pick you apart. It's just that I think you might not be as cynical as you think. And you can be more, like we all can.

[Ouroboros]

I can totally relate. Sometimes words fail us and we are easily misunderstood. Depending on the crowd, I call myself an atheist or a spiritual agnostic. I have to take into account my audience, like a good journalist.

Very true. That's why it's very hard to bring some of these topics up here, on this site, because the audience is very scattered. They're everywhere on the journey. And misunderstandings are happening quite frequently.

[pandora]

Tillich got me started on my quest for spirituality that was not entirely Christian, despite the fact he claims the label Christian.

 

Sok, pudd... we understand! Good to see you aren't like me... I am most active on this board when I have shit to do. When I was in school, I was on here ALL THE TIME. I am a queen procastinator, one of my character flaws. My excuse now is that I lost my job. I am procastinating applying for new ones. It was such a struggle to get the last job, and I dread the coming battle. And yes, for those not in the US, getting a job here is a battle. Things have changed so much in just the 15 years I've lived in how one looks for a job. Not to mention the economy and not being willing to settle for 32 hours a week at the local BigMart for $7.50 an hour. Although, I might have to do that if I don't get moving soon enough and find a better opportunity. I digress.

 

 

Back to Tillich. His concept of I and Thou really resonated with me. I recommend it to anyone who isn't totally put off by Christian symbolism.

[Antlerman]

That was an awesome post! Wonderful.

 

*blush* Thanks, Antlerman! I spent a few years in existential pain and suffering to be able to get to that point. There was also a time period of strict atheism in there, as kind of a reaction to the inflated belief system I once held. I've learned to compromise with myself. For the spiritually inclined, such a journey is a must for serenity. For others who clung/cling to the more concrete aspects of faith, the journey takes a very different route and comes to a very different conclusion. Some of us are just hard-wired to want to think about these things and feel connected to humanity on an existential level, but some people had a belief system for entirely different reasons. The development of compassion for humanity at large or the quest for connectedness is not really in their genes or nature/upbringing.

I +1'd both of your posts.

 

I still consider me an "atheist" in the sense of that I don't believe in the traditional God. I don't believe in a sentient, personal God in the sense of how monotheisms portray it, but in Nature/World/Universe whatever we call it, that existed before us, will exist after us, is more powerful, is grander than us, have more facts and intricate details about it that we never can learn or know, and from where we came, that is a new, different, and non-sentient, but yet a form of "God". And I know, some people will argue that this is a "redefinition" of the word "God" and it's a "fallacy of equivocation," but I disagree. There has never been a true or proper definition of God. The Christian God is outdated and nonfunctional, while a metaphysical naturalistic God is born in science and human experience.

Yes. I sigh. It's so nice to hear someone saying exactly what I'm am to these things. I'm not alone! It gets hard personally sometimes when there comes an onslaught of mischaracterizing me, such as calling me a guru who tries to hide from scrutiny in this forum. Can you believe that shit? My god, it gets exhausting. Anyway, thank you for all your years here, and I am always amazed at how yours and my paths have always circled and intersected each other on on roads upward, like a DNA strand. It seems now those strands are becoming more closely bound together, like it says in my signature line: "Many paths lead from the foot of the mountain, but at the peak we all gaze at the single bright moon."

 

[Ouroboros]

Yes. I sigh. It's so nice to hear someone saying exactly what I'm am to these things. I'm not alone!

Yes. We see many things the same, and some different, but that's how it's supposed to be. My current views started probably a year ago or so, maybe a bit more, not sure. And it's evolving and developing.

 

Here's one thing though that might be a difference from your path, and perhaps this is what Pudd is reacting to, I reached this point of thinking without any meditation, at least not intentional mediation of any kind. There are times when I can sit down and listen to music, or just think for myself--alone--in the car, and things are falling into place. Or I listen to a podcast, or read a book. So I'm thinking that people here need to understand that how you travel is not important, even though I'm sure meditation is a great vehicle to use, it's not demanded that you use it. You can walk the road if you want to. Or take a bike. But traveling and enjoying the journey, that's what is important.

[pandora]

I think it is important to realize it is possible we are more than the sum of our biological parts, and what that may imply for our sense of humanity and life.

We are, because "summing" is a process, not a part. We know what a "sum" is, but yet, no machine can do it without processing. Causality, process, energy, and more, are "things" beyond matter, parts, atoms, quarks. Even space itself is something different than a proton or electron. A particle is only one view of reality. Reality is more, just as understanding is more than just words.

 

Well put. I often think of the analogy of a computer, and how it requires many more things than just its physical parts to operate. Now, if we found that consciousness can arise from a sufficiently powerful and programmed computer, well... it wouldn't surprise me. On the other hand, it would blow my mind.

[Rev R]

If what you are looking for is answers from some authority outside yourself, you will never find your own inner peace. It is that simple. It has to come from within you. I'm happy you don't think I have the answers! I don't for you. You do. And the pursuit of that - is - a spiritual path. Yours.

 

But don't ever let yourself think that you are all alone. There is nothing wrong with occasionally seeking the support of someone whose wisdom and experience you trust and can defer to, someone to help guide you through dark patches, steady you in the difficult terrain, or even antagonize you when your head gets too big to get through the door.

[Ouroboros]

Well put. I often think of the analogy of a computer, and how it requires many more things than just its physical parts to operate.

Exactly. I used that analogy too in the past, but I was criticized for it because computers are machines, and the machine analogy is crappy... yada yada. It wasn't you. It was someone else.

 

Anyway, the analogy works for the part of understanding that not even a computer is just parts. It's also electricity. It's also software. It's also user interaction. It's also network connectivity. It's also background processing. It's also a color screen with a certain number of pixels, a keyboard, a ... And it exists in time and do things in one sequence that is not going to be the same next time you start it up. Not even computers are the same experience from day to day. You also have upgrade. New software. Delete old. Cache and history builds up. A computer is something that exists within time, space, history, experience of users, society, culture, etc.

 

Now, if we found that consciousness can arise from a sufficiently powerful and programmed computer, well... it wouldn't surprise me. On the other hand, it would blow my mind.

I don't think it can be programmed.

 

But it can be made to self-learn and grow it.

 

It's like plants. We would never strive to "build" a plant, like a tomato plant with tomatoes on the vines.

 

We, however, do strive (we, as in the industry) to change and program the DNA for the seeds that will grow to a tomato plant.

 

Consciousness is the sum and result of the tomato plant, in time and space, and interaction with insects, pests, pesticide, dirt, water, air, ...

[Antlerman]

Yes. I sigh. It's so nice to hear someone saying exactly what I'm am to these things. I'm not alone!

Yes. We see many things the same, and some different, but that's how it's supposed to be. My current views started probably a year ago or so, maybe a bit more, not sure. And it's evolving and developing.

 

Here's one thing though that might be a difference from your path, and perhaps this is what Pudd is reacting to, I reached this point of thinking without any meditation, at least not intentional mediation of any kind. There are times when I can sit down and listen to music, or just think for myself--alone--in the car, and things are falling into place. Or I listen to a podcast, or read a book. So I'm thinking that people here need to understand that how you travel is not important, even though I'm sure meditation is a great vehicle to use, it's not demanded that you use it. You can walk the road if you want to. Or take a bike. But traveling and enjoying the journey, that's what is important.

Yes, I agree with this. I'm not sure why people are thinking I'm saying you can't have any realizations like this without meditation. I came to this place before I meditated too. Why I practice meditation as I do, is because it takes that understanding and exposes it in away nothing else in fact can. I don't think that's inappropriate or untrue to say this. It's the difference between conceptually knowing something, in which you do in fact experience that through those frameworks, and leaving the frameworks altogether into a direct immersion. The latter will always be 'more' than thinking about it, or sensing it, etc. All those things are valuable beyond doubt, and they are part of my experience as well. But there is in fact a difference in experience. It really depends on how deep you really want to go, and that is a personal choice.

 

Think of it between me getting exercise by walking two miles per day, versus getting specifically working muscles groups to tone the whole body. There will be in fact a difference in experience and understanding what that does for you.

[Antlerman]

If what you are looking for is answers from some authority outside yourself, you will never find your own inner peace. It is that simple. It has to come from within you. I'm happy you don't think I have the answers! I don't for you. You do. And the pursuit of that - is - a spiritual path. Yours.

 

But don't ever let yourself think that you are all alone. There is nothing wrong with occasionally seeking the support of someone whose wisdom and experience you trust and can defer to, someone to help guide you through dark patches, steady you in the difficult terrain, or even antagonize you when your head gets too big to get through the door.

Yes, very much so. I have those that know me that are just that for me. I know their voices, and know they know where I'm coming from. I respect their help. We all need people like this in our lives.

[Ouroboros]

Yes, I agree with this. I'm not sure why people are thinking I'm saying you can't have any realizations like this without meditation. I came to this place before I meditated too. Why I practice meditation as I do, is because it takes that understanding and exposes it in away nothing else in fact can. I don't think that's inappropriate or untrue to say this. It's the difference between conceptually knowing something, in which you do in fact experience that through those frameworks, and leaving the frameworks altogether into a direct immersion. The latter will always be 'more' than thinking about it, or sensing it, etc. All those things are valuable beyond doubt, and they are part of my experience as well. But there is in fact a difference in experience. It really depends on how deep you really want to go, and that is a personal choice.

Perhaps the problem (and it includes me) is that we're all way too used to "preachers" who want to tell us what the "right" way of doing things. One of the problems is that we all read and listen to other people based on our own expectations and preconceptions, not truly listening. Good listening comes from clearing your mind and start fresh each time. But it's difficult.

 

Think of it between me getting exercise by walking two miles per day, versus getting specifically working muscles groups to tone the whole body. There will be in fact a difference in experience and understanding what that does for you.

I don't doubt it. But I think the point is that we're not all "runners" or "bikers" or "hackers" or whatever. We're all different. Mediation might work for most people, but I'm sure there are people who just can't deal with it. Perhaps they just have to take a longer walk, but they still can get "there" without mediation. Just like there are different basic body types, based on the proportions of fat, long fibre, short fibre, etc, muscles, and one type is better for bodybuilding another for sprinting, we can all stay healthy, but not everyone runs a marathon.