>And then you become pure awareness, and the concept is that is what we really are, and that this entire material universe, including our body, is a field of phenomena being encapsulated within this consciousness, and so the idea that I am alone, or the idea that I am an individual, is actually, interestingly enough, you're already not. It's false. It's a distortion. 'Cause you're the thing and the observer simultaneously meeting together, and that creates the illusion of self.
>There is a hierarchical love with God. But you may get a much nicer seat in heaven because of it, too.
>All truth is a paradox, and I hate that the culture tells you that you will get over it. I think that anytime anybody says the words, "You'll feel better in time," they should be sliced in the ass.
>Meditate like Christ when he was nailed to the cross. He felt love, not pain. He was lost in love with everything.
>Through love, all pain will turn to medicine.
>There's two reasons to do magic. One is for manifesting something, and that can be anything from a parking spot to the career you want
>The other reason for doing magic is what I call spiritual sustenance, where you are deliberately invoking energy and intelligences that you then absorb into your energy system, into your aura, to make you grow
>When you say "control tower" and "reaching out," do you mean that you were doing some form of astral projection, and I don't like that word, actually,
but I don't know another word to use, astral projection... just because it sounds so kind of flaky and New Agey.
>You are building a vehicle to allow your consciousness to not disintegrate at the point of what we call the Second Death. The First Death is when the physical body dies. The Second Death is whenever your astral or etheric body begins to unravel. That's whenever your consciousness goes through this cosmic washing machine...
The Midnight Gospel - sponsored by GOOP and BUDDHISM
Other urls found in this thread:
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
twitter.com
>When we set an intention, somehow, the world seems to magically come to meet us.
>The more sensitive I get and the more I know, instant karma. But it comes hard and fast when I overlook what I know to be true
>all the consciousnesses in the world are connected
>And each individual consciousness is God. And, in its own way, is the totality.
>And the self obviously doesn't exist, but the self is also a burden and is a source of suffering.
>So Buddhist meditation is sitting with "the feeling" until you notice that "the feeling" is changing of its own accord and the fundamental nature of everything is change and is impermanent and is emptiness. And the whole dream of your life that you thought was real was just a dream until you wake up and say, "Oh, yeah, it was just a dream. And now I'm awake."
>So whatever this experience is, we think it's real and we think that we are somehow inherently real and it's a case of mistaken identity.
>The feeling of everything that you do, the addiction, the addiction to Maya, is to not feel your inherent suffering.
>You don't have to kind of grasp and dwell on that as the only solution for continuing to be alive. There's another option, which is to use the sense-percept to arrive back at the present.
>You can move back and forth between these dimensions of ordinary consciousness and something that is out of space and time. And that thing
outside of space and time is... Is more real than the mental constructs. That's your true identity.
>Because I'm living and dying consciously. Simultaneously, I'm holding both.
>And the only word that I can come up with is "reality." Reality actually has this quality of benevolence.
Exit through the gift shop. No refunds on vagina eggs.
go to bed Moynihan
>when a hollywood shitter doesn't have the vocabulary or knowledge to express stuff like Hegelian dialetics and the oneness of all things without exotic eastern memes and magic
So what the fuck is the goop. I want to enjoy this meme and I need the basic gestalt to do that.
Is this out?
>to express stuff like Hegelian dialetics
miss me with that pseud shit
Hegel was right though. Everything exists in a continuum of interrelation so in the act of having decided to study a subject the subject changes. Worse than that, when you attempt to isolate something it becomes even more greatly removed from what you were initially trying to understand. Fragments gained from targetted research will never properly reconcile with each other by the very nature of the experiments or models used to understand the phenomena.
Hell there's been research showing that even while seemingly following the same methodology having someone unaware of the test and someone aware of the theory behind the test will garner different result after having administered it.
Fragments are good and obviously essential for practical use but proper understanding will only ever be derived from a unified theory. Separating phenomena into chemistry and physics is counter-productive to the pursuit of greater understanding as ultimately all things obey the same principles.
Let me ask you two simple questions:
One, how do you know if a material claim is true or false?
Two, and this is optional, does the law of contradiction apply to physical and/or metaphysical claims?
Watch the Jonathan Tronathan video to get the gist of it.
How do you know if a [..] claim is true of false.
If we're talking about an episodic happenstance, you don't and never will unless you're able to stitch and even back together from the residuals - like the big bang and its radiation
If it's a priniple and phenomena then you verify it. However verification is a tricky thing. We can verify some things in theory but are unable to see them in practice but we assume them to be true because they reconcile with what we already know. Another way to do so is with tendency and replicability. With simplistic interactions replicability usually isn't an issue. The more complex the action is the more we start to rely on data models to answer issues of probability.
Statistics and probability obviously have huge issues. The method of creating a model, obviously, being the most major of them all followed closely by the removal of outliers.
>LNC
In terms of metaphysics it was always a joke in my opinion and got fucked into the dirt almost immediately. LNC only works within a singular observation. This is true both physically and metaphysically.
Whether it's lights travel being difficult to model and displaying different qualities under different instruments or whether it's the idea of whether the river you saw yesterday is the same as the one you see today the answer is always the same
The contradictions will only arise when the warrants that underpin your argument or the methodology that informs your observation change
In this context is the river still the same river?
Rivers are a feature of the landscape and can be thought to be the same regardless of their branches too and from if they share the same intake and estuary OR rivers are a body of water moving through a space in the soil. One set of warrants dictates, yes the river hasn't changed sufficiently in its path, it's the same. The other says no the river IS different because it's not comprised of the same matter it was before
They sell products like "Psychic Vampire Repellent".
That is to say the two answers are contradictions semantically and logically but not in actuality.
>With simplistic interactions replicability usually isn't an issue.
Let me fix your lingo a little: empiricism and reproducibility. Great. Good answer.
>LNC only works within a singular observation
>whether the river you saw yesterday is the same as the one you see today
That's not a contradiction.
I think you think the law of contradiction is "a joke" because you don't understand it if you think the Ship of Theseus has anything to do with it.
Anyway to make a long story short, whether you accept the law of non-contradiction or not, empiricism is the only way to gain knowledge of the physical world.
If you accept the law of contradiction, then classical logic applies and all the current empirically tested scientific knowledge uses it is the best you have.
If you reject the law of contradiction, either: you allow for explosion and triviality, in which case anything can be both true and false and there's no way to tell if something is either or both; or, you use a logic of formal consistency which is by definition weaker than classical logic and that means that there is a subset of empirically tested scientific knowledge that is valid (which could be an empty set, and then you know nothing is either true or false, or any other subset, in which case you know some things are true or false and others are undecided)
So instead of mentally masturbating, just accept that empirical knowledge is the best you got, no matter what. Anything else is either a formal metaphysical system (algebra) or non-formal, in which case it's nonsense.
QUICK, HELP SOMEBODY ON Yas Forums LIKES SOMETHING I DON'T. WHY DOES THIS KEEP HAPPENING.
QUICK, HELP SOMEBODY ON Yas Forums DOESN'T LIKES SOMETHING I LIKE. WHY DOES THIS KEEP HAPPENING.
isn't one of the VA's that satanist from the memphis three
I went in to this not knowing what to expect, but I didn't expect it to just be a glorified podcast from the promotional material.
sucks such neat visuals and MC design is wasted on what is just some dudes shooting the shit
california cargo cult
>logic of formal consistency
Logic of Formal Inconsistency. Typo.
Who are the Memphis three?
three satanists that killed some kids back in the 90's, and got off on some dumbass loop hole by admitting guilt
i think echols is the guy on this show, from that
Victims of one of those 90s satanic panic witch hunts.
720p
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
1080p
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dropapk_to
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
dailyuploads_net
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
usersdrive_com
It's an expensive new age snake oil company that was created by that one chick who played the love interest in Iron Man.
This, sadly
gave up pretty much after 2 episodes
I was hoping it would be some kind of cool story or something, but its just excerpts from one of those psychedelic podcasts where everyone talks about how the universe is actually inside a giant edible that like, everyone is eating at the SAME TIME BRO
Such a pretentious shitfest, had to turn it off after one and a half episode.