Practice what you Preach...

ren wrote: You know, all you had to do was accept I believe as I do, and you believe as you do.

The next time you become ill, you should simply accept that you are ill and not seek to do anything to remedy it. That's a great philosophy of inaction there. Just because we must accept current circumstances before we may make progress, should not keep us from then seeking to make progress.

ren wrote: You may see a flower and believe it to be conscious as I believe it to be not conscious. Does it make the flower any different?

It can very much make the flower become different, depending on how you direct your consciousness in relation to it, if its actual nature is also consciousness!

ren wrote: Is it this difficult for you to accept differences of opinion?

Is it this difficult for you to open your mind to greater possibilities, or to try out new techniques?

ren wrote: Why do you feel there had to be a victor?

If that's what you think this was all about, then you missed the point entirely. This was not about "winning". It was about addressing the inherent fallacy in your opinion, so as to empower you through the removal of a form of blindness. I guess technically it could have been winning, as a "win-win". You become more powerful, and so do I, because we are not separate. But apparently such a win-win is not to be the case for now, so we both lose, in a way.

ren wrote: That someone had to change their opinion?

I would have been satisfied with you simply giving any indication of even seriously considering our assertions, instead of dismissing them with words like "opinion", "belief", and an attitude of indifference. Your opinion is incorrect in this instance, ren. Not all opinions are created equal, and this is not one of those Coke vs. Pepsi opinions.

The truth of universal consciousness can be confirmed by those who are willing to try. Those opinions which are based on fact and knowledge and experiential confirmation (of the necessary type of experiences) will always trump those that are based on misinterpretation of experience which basically stems from mental laziness. Dislike me for calling you on it all you want.

ren wrote: And change that opinion over something as insignificant as a forum thread?

Truth is truth. It does not matter through what channel or in what vehicle it is delivered. Anything can seem as insignificant as you want to see it, but that does not make it so. Anything can change your life if you are open to trying out new methods.

ren wrote: Ah. At least you got a taste of your own medicine.

In what way did I get a taste of my own medicine? I have admitted that I have faults and shortcomings. I have given you examples of what I am talking about, and the universal laws involved. You have mentioned sitting on your couch and looking around without truly seeing. If I were trying to "win", I would not have said I am done trying to convince you. I would have just kept going indefinitely.

Speaking of which, this is all I'm going to say about this (our disagreement) to you, and I'm saying it more in the way of explanation to those others reading this than I am to you.

Adder wrote: Consciousness then for me is not the height of being, but just the product of the mind to achieve sufficient level of engagement with sensory organs to survive.

Well, keep in mind when I say consciousness, I don't mean solely self-consciousness or personal consciousness within a human being. I mean the radiant essence of awareness, which ultimately is unknowable, that forms the basis of the fabric of all experience. So in essence, I agree with what you've said here. Interconnectedness is inherent to consciousness, because there is only ever really One Thing, with limitless awareness and thus limitless inclusivity. Resonance is a fundamental property of interconnectedness based in the harmonic summations between different rates of vibration of universal mental substance.

I like how you related this topic to the core values. I would not have thought to do that, but it's probably a good idea to get in the habit of that from now on. Thanks!

Fraternally in the Force,
-David

Two men were arguing about a flag flapping in the wind. "It's the wind that
is really moving," stated the first one. "No, it is the flag that is moving,"
contended the second. A Zen master, who happened to be walking by,
overheard the debate and interrupted them. "Neither the flag nor the wind is
moving," he said, "It is MIND that moves."

Br. John wrote: Two men were arguing about a flag flapping in the wind. "It's the wind that
is really moving," stated the first one. "No, it is the flag that is moving,"
contended the second. A Zen master, who happened to be walking by,
overheard the debate and interrupted them. "Neither the flag nor the wind is
moving," he said, "It is MIND that moves."

Very, very true, in all the connotations of that. And yet neither of those soldiers was arguing that the wind doesn't exist or that the flag wasn't designed to blow in it.

Metsu Desal, I have already addressed the original post, but I will quote myself here so you can have another opportunity to see it.

Alluvius wrote: As for this topic in a more general sense, I agree (more or less) with the original post that passion indicates, at least a degree of, lack of control and as self-control is central to the Jedi code, it is at the very least a paradoxical state that we find ourselves in when we do not seek to master our passions, and at worst it is laziness in training and practice to find excuses to not strive toward that control.

As for Ren, I believe that I made myself fairly clear on the point that I'm done with him. I was drawn into an argument, and that was my fault, but now that I recognize what has happened, I would be doubly at fault to continue the idiocy of argument.

To whomever feels I "owe" it to you, or that I was guilty of "picking a fight" here, and to all those who were simply in the wrong thread at the wrong time and were made to feel uncomfortable by the unfriendly tenor this thread took for a time: It was my truest intention only to add information and offer an alternate point of view. The fact that I fell to argument in the process does not speak "poorly" of the others involved in the conversation, it speaks "poorly" of my diplomacy and my wisdom. I am embarrassed at my conduct on this thread, and I sincerely apologize to all who had to witness the breakdown in my ability to communicate. Again, I thank all involved for the opportunity afforded me to learn greater lessons in humility and diplomacy.

People who don't practice what they preach eventually get found out and it's all the funnier to point out their hypocrisy.

FraterDavid wrote: Just because we must accept current circumstances before we may make progress, should not keep us from then seeking to make progress.

FraterDavid wrote: It was about addressing the inherent fallacy in your opinion, so as to empower you through the removal of a form of blindness.

FraterDavid wrote: Your opinion is incorrect in this instance, ren. Not all opinions are created equal, and this is not one of those Coke vs. Pepsi opinions.

FraterDavid wrote: Truth is truth.

FraterDavid wrote: Anything can change your life if you are open to trying out new methods.

I have been trying to stay out of this as I feel this topic has shifted from a discussion into a downright heated argument. With that being said, I wanted to point something out here...

An opinion is defined as: "A view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge."

To say that an opinion is wrong implies that it is based in facts that make it wrong. This is simply not true. An opinion does not require fact to exist at all and therefore can be whatever someone wants it to be. This means an opinion can not be fallacious unless presented as fact...which it actually seems is what you are trying to do here FraterDavid. Opinions are based on our own experiences. You say simply trying something new will change your view of that thing. This is just not true.

For example: Suppose I had never picked up a tarot card in my life...I could believe that they are a ridiculous superstition and have no bearing on reality. You say they show the "truth" about everything and attempt to force me to give them a try because you firmly believe in them. For arguments sake, I throw out my old beliefs and give them a try for a bit. They do absolutely nothing for me and I go back to my original belief that they are just a ridiculous superstition. How is this any different than what I believed originally? Should I just keep trying to use them until I see a result that agrees with your belief, ignoring all the other attempts that don't? That is illogical.

Another example: You say the sky is blue. We've both seen the sky but I say the sky has no color at all. You begin to show me how the sky is blue and I say well I've been in a spaceship and you haven't and looking down from above the sky I don't see any color to it at all. Would going up in a spaceship change your opinion that the sky is blue? Would everyone who had been in a spaceship before have to come to that conclusion?

Final example: We both look at a painting that someone is trying to sell. We have both seen the exact same painting...do we both have to think that it is beautiful? (Personally I think Picasso's art is worse than stuff I've seen in a kindergarten class, but that's my opinion. Maybe when you look at it, you see something different.)

The simple fact that because I haven't tried to understand something does not mean that trying it will change my mind. An opinion is not solely based on experiences in someone's life or things that they have been told. It can also be based on how someone views something. Not based on the premise that if someone attempts something new then they will ultimately reach the same conclusion that you have reached about it. You have shared your opinion David, repeating the same thing over and over again and calling it fact or "truth" does not make it so.

FraterDavid while I fully agree with most of what you've said, variances in terminology and all that aside, I see what is being said here by Resticon and while the examples employed to me - outside the art one which was fabulous - are nonfunctional I must say the point is clear and precise and dare I say even true?

You and I FD, we may have found a depth in meditations like Zazen, or in deep Ohms, we may have found oneness with everyone around us, we may have found a true connection in the beauty of a flower as the Force Flows through and all around within and connecting us to that beauty...

However to contrast that, I've never felt anything but oppression in the walls of a Church. I was abused by a family member and strong member of a Church just outside my home when I was 3. That abuse has left me scarred? No the truth is as a strong functional man that abuse may have hurt at one time but it didn't destroy who I became. However I recognize that the beauty of prayer inside those walls may never touch me with its light in the way it does others.

Just as my meditations may never touch some, I know a man who's mind works in images, the concept of the clear mind meditation can never touch him, we worked to develop a meditation together that DOES work for him fantastically though!

However, things like this are very personal. I see the message your presenting and I agree that for many, maybe most?, you are right in what you say. If they simply give some effort toward making the connection the truth of The Force flowing through them on an innate bone deep level connecting them to everything, everyone, all and nothing will be self evident and have far more impact than any thousand books, any thousand videos, may have on their life.

Yet, it will not be "as for all" such a thing can never be as life experiences change people. There is a time when I was a Christian man would expound upon the greatness of Christ, before mysticism touched me more deeply than Christ could, before the full awakening of Thor within my soul, before the deep connection to the Force that all added together of me calling myself "A Jedi Mystic, Norse Pagan, Follower of the Force" as an overly large title of description. Yet now such things would not, and do not, touch me in the least. Last I went to Church it was a catholic one. My Church now is the hammer when I need solace complete and true. It is meditation when I need peace and clarity. It is hard word, training, and dedication when I need direction in my life. There in this order you find Thor, The Force, and The Jedi Path as they are in my life. They mix and mingle, and rarely do they give me time to tarry or take too long in my tasks for none of it is easy, and it is all saved best for a calling.

So that said, I see where your coming from, your words touch my soul and remind me of the depth I can find within others, that understanding of the reflectiveness. I tell you though friend, brother, fellow follower of The Force that some people your words can never reach. That for some they could experience just as you have, just as I have, and to them it would be nothing.

For each is different in their own measure, their own complexities build the world they live in, and yet I applaud you for your effort. I do not tell you to stand down in the least but instead to continue fighting the good fight, stand firmly, but stand with a gentle hand in this. For in reflecting The Force in the most gentle of manners perhaps you will bring more light in your efforts.

Resticon wrote: I have been trying to stay out of this as I feel this topic has shifted from a discussion into a downright heated argument.

And who can blame you? Seriously. Who would want to get involved in what that became? I am shamed by it.

Resticon wrote: To say that an opinion is wrong implies that it is based in facts that make it wrong. This is simply not true. An opinion does not require fact to exist at all and therefore can be whatever someone wants it to be.

An opinion is always an interpretation of fact of some kind, even if the fact involved is purely one of personal perception. Such as, "I like Coke instead of Pepsi." That is a fact, for me. Albeit that may change in the future. And especially when we live our lives according to our opinions, that can very much lead to erroneous (i.e. disempowering) behavior, if our opinion is based on falsehood or incorrect interpretation. Thus the danger of "false" opinions and my willingness to classify them as false.

Resticon wrote: An opinion is defined as: "A view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge."

To me, there are three kinds of opinions. True opinions are those based on logical extrapolation from facts about the world and which can be experimentally verified in some way. False opinions are those which involve misinterpretation of facts or experiences, or are centered in lack of relevant experience. And then there are "taste" opinions, which relate only the fact of some personal preference, such as whether we like a certain painting or not.

In my argument with ren, I was focusing on the concept that what we were discussing involved a true opinion vs a false opinion, and had nothing to do with taste opinions. But ultimately that was not what mattered most, which is why I feel ashamed.

My responses to Brother ren were both pretentious and arrogant, even though that was not my intention, and thus were unbecoming of the requisite humility of a Jedi. I have already apologized to him in a PM, but I wanted to do so here as well, because I account this a serious failure on my part.

Resticon wrote: You say simply trying something new will change your view of that thing. This is just not true.

If that was what I said, then I would agree with you completely. I said "can", not "will". There are no guarantees in life, but if we don't try in the right kinds of ways then we will never know, either way.

About Tarot, I never advocated that. But to go with your example, assuming I have experience with Tarot, if someone was trying to expand their beliefs or awareness using that system, and failing to produce such a result, I would simply ask them how they were going about doing it. The procedure and technique is everything with spiritual tools.

Resticon wrote: Another example: You say the sky is blue. We've both seen the sky but I say the sky has no color at all. You begin to show me how the sky is blue and I say well I've been in a spaceship and you haven't and looking down from above the sky I don't see any color to it at all. Would going up in a spaceship change your opinion that the sky is blue? Would everyone who had been in a spaceship before have to come to that conclusion?

This is a problem of definitions, not of opinions. The sky is (typically) blue, space is black (or "has no color"). Most definitions of "sky" require you to be looking up at atmosphere to perceive it rightly, not down.

Resticon wrote: Final example: We both look at a painting that someone is trying to sell. We have both seen the exact same painting...do we both have to think that it is beautiful? (Personally I think Picasso's art is worse than stuff I've seen in a kindergarten class, but that's my opinion. Maybe when you look at it, you see something different.)

This is an example of a taste opinion situation. The painting simply exists. We have the fact arise within us that we either like it, don't like it, or it doesn't "speak" to us, so we don't care either way.

Resticon wrote: The simple fact that because I haven't tried to understand something does not mean that trying it will change my mind.

I agree completely. Also, it is not my place nor responsibility to "empower" anyone but myself. In attempting to act in the spirit of oneness, I ended up acting in the spirit of division and separation instead.

Resticon wrote: An opinion is not solely based on experiences in someone's life or things that they have been told. It can also be based on how someone views something.

Agreed. Although in life, many things work a certain way regardless of what we think is the reason why. We can think electricity is the flowing of electrons, or simply the power of Zeus, but either way we're going to get shocked if we make the mistake of sticking our finger in a light bulb socket. I felt I was discussing a simple matter of universal mechanics such as this previous analogy. I just wish I had not ended up being disrespectful to ren, who has been nothing but nice to me up until that.

Resticon wrote: You have shared your opinion David, repeating the same thing over and over again and calling it fact or "truth" does not make it so.

I agree. I was an ass about it. I do genuinely appreciate you taking the time to write to me concerning your thoughts on my behavior. Ultimately, I saw the problem for what it was, this time, but I may not always be so fortunate, and in such cases the feedback from my fellow Jedi could prove to be very important to my self-corrective efforts.

UraharaKiskue: You are very kind to say what you did (in post #77710). You are right, of course. I will endeavor to speak more softly and act with a gentler hand. And also to speak less while saying more. Writing less is difficult for me.

I apologize to everyone who was unlucky enough to be optically lambasted by my previous exchange with ren, and of course to ren, who has been quite patient and gracious throughout.

I want to attempt to say something here (hopefully without kicking up too much dust), that I believe I should have said long ago: "Let he that hath ears to listen, hear."

I have found, and apparently momentarily forgotten, that as humans, no opinion, no fact, no "reality, of any sort will impact us in any way we are not ready for. The fact of the matter is we all believe our opinions are based on logical extrapolation and interpretation of facts. And that's the issue we witnessed here. The sum of our life experiences have led us here, to this place, holding the beliefs we hold. We all have collected "facts" throughout our lives based on our experiences. We have all interpreted those facts in the most logical way we know how. And we have all formed opinions based on the essence of those interpretations, and assimilated those opinions into our daily lives. For ANYONE to tell someone else their experience is "wrong" or "erroneous" is arrogance pure and simple. Not to mention the fact that, if they aren't ready to hear your interpretation of their "facts", you're only going to upset them as they will inevitably feel attacked. It all comes down to: We have not all led the same lives, we have not all had the same experiences, thus we do not all believe the same things, or recognize the same facts. I believe that fluoride, antibiotics, and vaccines are actually bad for us, and only contribute to the weakening of our immune systems and the decay of our skeletal structure. Most would disagree with me and I know that. I have "good, fact-based rational to back my opinion", most others would say the same. Which one of us is "right" tho? The only correct answer is both and neither...depending on who's asking.

I believe that the purpose of an online community of this nature is to come together and gain from eachother's diverse experiences. To do that we must be prepared not only to share our own "wisdom", but to hear things we don't agree with "at first glimpse". That end cannot be served by "attacking" people who hold different views as we do. In the end, that serves only to erode the foundation of the community as we create our own versions of the Inquisition and conduct our very own "witch hunts". In the end, attacking difference serves only to breed fear and contempt, and are not those the very things Jedi are sworn to defend against?

"Let he who hath ears to listen, hear." My translation of that passage is: people will only ever hear what they're ready to.

The more I look back on the argument between myself, Ren, and David, the more embarrassed I am to have contributed to it. Thank you for letting me "unburden my soul" about it...twice.

May the Force be with us all...