Someone Blow My Mind Vol. Illuminati, 2012, Aliens, Life

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here is a true enough myth of our world. It begins with the notion of a soliton of improbability. Let us imagine that these are events which only happen once, and since they only happen once they are not legitimate objects for scientific inquiry because objects of scientific inquiry must happen at least twice. But this is a phenomenon which happens only once and we can visualize it as a kind of particle. These solitons of the utterly improbable crisscross the universe occasionally colliding with an existing event system. When they collide with an existing event system, that event system bifurcates into two event systems in order to preserve a kind of parity of probability - a term I invented that need not be taken seriously. But in the pursuit of the preservation of the parity of probability, the soliton creates a temporal bifurcation.

OK, we have reached the top of the steep learning curve in this concept system. Now here's the good news: the soliton of improbability which interacted with our world occurred two thousand years ago in the phenomenon of the Immaculate Conception. An event that I think you and I can agree is highly improbable! But let us take it at face value and see if we can work with it. When the Immaculate Conception occurred through the collision of the soliton of improbablility with this Galilean village girl called Marian or Mary, in one world she became impregnated with a figure destined for a great religious and political future: our world. The world in which Christ was born, became a young man, taught his message, and went to his execution around 27 AD. Another world sprang into existence at the moment of the Immaculate Conception and in that world nothing whatsoever happened to this young Galilean girl. She continued to live with Joseph. He continued to make fine furniture. Eventually they were able to move to the better side of Nazareth. And that was their story.

So you see I'm suggesting that at the time of Christ, a parallel world came into existence that knew nothing of Christ. And consequently the forces which shattered Roman civilization never came into existence in that parallel world. Instead, Greek science and mathematics continued to enrich Roman engineering, government, and theories of civil polity. Roman civilization continued to develop. The wonderful female mathematical genius Hypathia was able to complete her career. She was stoned to death by Christians in our world, yet in the parallel world she lived to old age and was able to elaborate the calculus some thousand years before Newton. This meant that by the sixth century or so this Greco-Roman world had ship building and navigational techniques that were possessed in our world only by Elizabethan times. Roman navigators inspired by the perfection of their science set sail to explore the world, and in that parallel continuum they discovered the Maya just as they were reaching their classic climax in the jungles of Central America. Approximately nine hundred years after the bifurcation into the two time streams, a Greco-Roman-Mayan civilization came into being in the parallel continuum. The great influence on the Greco-Roman psychology from this cultural adventure was the sophisticated use of psychedelic drugs for the purposes of religion and self-exploration. In the vision in which this idea was shown to me by the powers of the other side, I actually saw a Roman imperial administrator and his retinue arriving at Tikal for the coronation of Three-Flint-Knife in the ninth century; a great confluence of imperial majesty as the greatest king of the Mayan cultural climax received his European counterpart, and documents, codices, mathematicians, instruments of navigation, and pharmacy were traded.

Well to make a long story short, the parallel world continued to develop, and with its sophisticated psychology based on psychedelic drugs they soon became aware by studying the dreams of psychotics in their world, they slowly became aware I should say, of our existence. They figured out what we do not know, which is there was a world bifurcation and that there is a parallel time stream with a different situation evolving in it. They further, by extension of their more advanced understanding of atomic and particle physics, came by around the year 1900 in our continuum to the hypothesis that major releases of hard radiation would penetrate across the energy barrier of the two time streams. They conducted an experiment to test this hypothesis. They decided to set off a small atomic device in their continuum, and to monitor the dreams of sensitive people in our continuum to see if there was evidence of an awareness of this explosion. The experiment was actually carried out in 1906 by our time reckoning. This is what we call the Tunguska blast that occurred in Siberia. After the blast in the parallel continuum those who had conducted the test were able to monitor the dreams of Siberian Shamans and they saw hundreds of square miles of trees smashed flat by a mighty explosion. Hence they realized that their theoretical assumption that explosions in one continuum would affect life in the other were in fact true. Then they became quite alarmed because as they continued to monitor the dreams of human beings in the parallel continuum, they came to slowly understand that primitive though we may be in our world we were coming to a grasp of atomic chemistry and thermonuclear fission and fusion.

Fearing for the destruction of their own world they began, and have in fact carried out through this century, a massive scientific research project to attempt to reach us to communicate to us the true situation, and to depotentiate our nuclear arsenals in order to save their own world, which is now in fact the administrative center of some sixteen integrated star systems in this part of the galaxy. In other words, they are some twelve hundred years in advance of us technologically and in the use of psychedelic substances because they never experienced the history-freezing eschatology that the rise of Christianity created in our world. The last part of the myth relates to the Mayan calendrical date...


...And UFOs are aspects of this technological effort to reach us. In other words they are experimental vehicles attempting to penetrate the time barrier..to reach us with this news. I believe that in 2012 this technology will be perfected and they will no longer need to send unmanned probes or experimental devices, rather they will actually be able to open a domain perhaps as much as several thousand kilometers in diameter, which will be coexistent both in our time stream and in their time stream.


...People from this beknighted time stream will be able to reach the more advanced and perfected culture of the alternative time stream. It's not unlike the situation with East Germany and East Berlin. All that we're saying is that this advanced civilization is about to pull down the wall and invite us to leave the beknighted world bequeathed to us by rampant monotheism and participate in the higher life of the great stellar civilization created by the Greco-Roman-Mayanists, who avoided the rather tawdry ideological path of development that we were victim of. Terence


...Psychedelic compounds amplify the very slight leakage of information from this other dimension. In the same way that they found us, we can find them by taking psychedelic mushrooms and opening ourselves to the information pouring through from the alternative time stream.
Click to expand...
 
I figure if I drop this in here, it will be of some use to someone 's life. In a nutshell, if you have ever wondered about who you are or where you are going with your life ( who hasn't) then reading up on ( Carl ) Jungian theory is for you . It pretty much forms the basis of all modern personality test like the Myer - Briggs. A lot of it works hand in hand with a lot these masonic / heremtic principle you guys have been posting. Me myself, as a left - handed male, I have that sensitive / creative side of myself that I can't escape and have learned to integrate into the male state - of - mind  just by gaining awareness through knowledge. 

link: for your convenience 

http://www.sofia.edu/content/transpersonal-pioneers-carl-jung

Carl Jung is one of the most important, most complex, and most controversial psychological theorists. Jungian psychology focuses on establishing and fostering the relationship between conscious and unconscious processes. Dialogue between the conscious and the unconscious aspects of the psyche enriches the person, and Jung believed that without this dialogue, unconscious processes can weaken and even jeopardize the personality.

One of Jung's central concepts is individuation, his term for a process of personal development that involves establishing a connection between the ego and the self. The ego is the center of consciousness; the self is the center of the total psyche, including both the conscious and the unconscious. For Jung, there is constant interplay between the two. They are not separate but are two aspects of a single system. Individuation is the process of developing wholeness by integrating all the various parts of the psyche.

Jung's analysis of human nature includes investigations of Eastern and Western religions, alchemy, parapsychology, and mythology. His initial impact was greater on philosophers, folklorists, and writers than on psychologists or psychiatrists. Today, however, growing concern with human consciousness and human potential has caused a resurgence of interest in Jung's ideas.
[h2]The Attitudes: Introversion and Extraversion[/h2]
Among all of Jung's concepts, introversion and extraversion have probably gained the widest general use. Jung found that individuals can be characterized as either primarily inward-oriented or primarily outward-oriented. The introvert is more comfortable with the inner world of thoughts and feelings. The extravert feels more at home with the world of objects and other people.

No one is a pure introvert or a pure extravert. Jung compared the two processes to the heartbeat-there is a rhythmic alternation between the cycle of contraction (introversion) and the cycle of expansion (extraversion). However, each individual tends to favor one or the other attitude and operates more often in terms of the favored attitude. Introverts see the world in terms of how it affects them, and extroverts are more concerned with their impact upon the world.

There is also a balance between conscious and unconscious emphases on these qualities:

If you take an extravert you will find his unconscious has an introverted quality, because all the extraverted qualities are played out in his consciousness and the introverted are left in the unconscious. (Jung in McGuire & Hull, 1977, p. 342)

At times, introversion is more appropriate; at other times extraversion is more suitable. The two are mutually exclusive; you cannot hold both an introverted and an extraverted attitude concurrently. Neither one is better than the other. The ideal is to be flexible and to adopt whichever attitude is more appropriate in a given situation-to operate in terms of a dynamic balance between the two and not develop a fixed, rigid way of responding to the world.

Introverts are interested primarily in their own thoughts and feelings, in their inner world; they tend to be introspective. One danger for such people is that as they become immersed in their inner world, they may lose touch with the world around them. The absent-minded professor is a clear, if stereotypical, example.

Extroverts are actively involved in the world of people and things; they tend to be more social and more aware of what is going on around them. They need to guard against becoming dominated by external events and alienated from their inner selves. The hard-driving business executive who has no understanding of feelings or relationships is a classic stereotype of unbalanced extraversion.
[h2]The Functions: Thinking, Feeling, Sensation, Intuition[/h2]
One of Jung's greatest contributions to psychology is his theory of type. Jung found that different people think, feel, and experience the world in fundamentally different ways. His type theory is a powerful tool to help us understand how people function.

Jung identified four fundamental psychological functions: thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuition. Each function may be experienced in an introverted or an extraverted fashion. Generally, one of the functions is more conscious, developed, and dominant. Jung called this the superior function. It operates out of the dominant attitude (either extraversion or introversion). One of the other three remaining functions is generally deep in the unconscious and less developed. Jung called this the inferior function.

Thinking and feeling are alternative ways of forming judgments and making decisions. Thinking  is concerned with objective truth, judgment, and impersonal analysis. Thinking asks the question "What does this mean?" Consistency and abstract principles are highly valued. Thinking types (those individuals in whom the thinking function predominates) are the greatest planners; however, they tend to hold on to their plans and abstract theories even when confronted by new and contradictory evidence.

Feeling  is focused on value. It may include judgments of good vs. bad and right vs. wrong (as opposed to decision making according to the criteria of logic or efficiency, as in thinking). Feeling asks the question "What value does this have?"

Jung classified sensation and intuition together as ways of gathering information, as distinct from ways of making decisions. Sensation refers to a focus on direct sense experience, perception of details, and concrete facts: what one can see, touch, and smell. Tangible, immediate experience is given priority over discussion or analysis of experience. Sensation asks the question "What exactly am I perceiving?" Sensing types tend to respond to the immediate situation and deal effectively and efficiently with all sorts of crises and emergencies. They generally work better with tools and materials than do any of the other types.

Intuition  is a way of comprehending perceptions in terms of possibilities, past experience, future goals, and unconscious processes Intuition asks the question "What might happen, what is possible?" The implications of experience are more important to intuitives than the actual experience itself. Strongly intuitive people add meaning to their perceptions so rapidly that they often cannot separate their interpretations from the raw sensory data. Intuitives integrate new information quickly, automatically relating past experience and relevant information to immediate experience. Because it often includeds unconscious material, intuitive thinking appears to proceed by leaps and bounds.

Jung has called the least-developed function in each individual the inferior function. It is the least conscious and the most primitive, or undifferentiated. For some people it can represent a seemingly demonic influence because they have so little understanding of or control over it. For example, strongly intuitive types, who are not in touch with their sensation function, may experience sexual impulses as mysterious or even dangerous. Since it is less consciously developed, the inferior function may also serve as a way into the unconscious. Jung has said that it is through our inferior function that which is least developed in us, that we see God. By struggling with and confronting inner obstacles, we can come closer to the Divine.

For the individual, a combination of all four functions results in a well-rounded approach to the world:

In order to orient ourselves, we must have a function which ascertains that something is there (sensation); a second function which establishes what is (thinking); a third function which states whether it suits us or not, whether we wish to accept it or not (feeling); and a fourth function which indicates where it came from and where it is going (intuition). (Jung, 1942, p. 167)

Unfortunately, no one develops all four functions equally well. Each individual has one dominant function and one partially developed auxiliary function. The other two functions are generally unconscious and operate with considerably less effectiveness. The more developed and conscious the dominant auxiliary functions, the more deeply unconscious are their opposites.

One's function type indicates the relative strengths and weaknesses and the style of activity one tends to prefer. Jung's typology is especially useful in helping us understand social relationships; it describes how people perceive in alternate ways and use different criteria in acting and making judgments. For example, intuitive-feeling speakers will not have the same logical, tightly organized, and detailed lecture style as thinking-sensation lecturers. The talks of the former are more likely to ramble, to include stories, and to give the sense of a subject by approaching it from many different angles, rather than by developing it systematically.
[h2]The Unconscious[/h2]
Jung emphasizes that, because of its very nature, the unconscious cannot be known and thus must be described in relationship to consciousness. Consciousness, he believes, theoretically has no limit. Further, Jung divides the unconscious into the personal unconscious and the collective unconscious.
[h3]Personal Unconscious[/h3]
The material in the personal unconscious  comes from the individual's past. This formulation corresponds to Freud's concept of the unconscious. The personal unconscious is composed of memories that are painful and have been repressed, as well as memories that are unimportant and have simply been dropped from conscious awareness. The personal unconscious also holds parts of the personality that have never come to consciousness.
[h3]Collective Unconscious[/h3]
The collective unconscious  is Jung's boldest and most controversial concept. Jung identifies the collective, or transpersonal, unconscious as the center of all psychic material that does not come from personal experience. Its contents and images appear to be shared with people of all time periods and all cultures. Some psychologists, such as Skinner, implicitly assume that each individual is born as a blank slate, a tabula rasa; consequently, psychological development can come only from personal experience. Jung postulates that the mind of the infant already possesses a structure that molds and channels all further development and interaction with the environment. This basic structure is essentially the same in all infants. Although we develop differently and become unique individuals, the collective unconscious is common to all people and is therefore one (Jung, 1951a).

Jung's approach to the Collective unconscious can be seen in the following passage from a letter to one of his patients:

You trust your unconscious as if it were a loving father. But it is nature and cannot be made use of as if it were a reliable human being. it is inhuman and it needs the human mind to function usefully for man's purposes.... It always seeks its collective purposes and never your individual destiny. Your destiny is the result of the collaboration between the conscious and the unconscious. (Jung, 1973, p. 283)

We are born with a psychological heritage as well as a biological heritage, according to Jung. Both are important determinants of behavior and experience: "just as the human body represents a whole museum of organs, each with a long evolutionary period behind it, so we should expect to find that the mind is organized in a similar way. It can no more be a product without history than is the body in which it exists" (1964, p. 67).

The collective unconscious, which results from experiences that are common to all people, also includes material from our prehuman and animal ancestry. It is the source of our most powerful ideas and experiences.
[h2]Archetype[/h2]
The archetype  is probably Jung's most difficult concept. Archetypes are inherited predispositions to respond to the world in certain ways. They are primordial images, representations of the instinctual energies of the collective unconscious.

Jung postulated the idea of archetypes from the experiences his patients reported. A number of Jung's patients described dreams and fantasies that included remarkable ideas and images whose content could not be traced to the individual's past experience. Jung suggested that there is a level of imagery in the unconscious common to everyone. Jung also discovered a close correspondence between patients' dream contents and the mythical and religious themes found in many widely scattered cultures.

According to Jung, the archetypes are structure-forming elements within the unconscious. These elements give rise to the archetypal images that dominate both individual fantasy life and the mythologies of an entire culture. The archetypes exhibit "a kind of readiness to produce over and over again the same or similar mythical ideas" (1917, p. 69). They tend to appear as certain patterns-as recurring situations and figures. Archetypal situations include the hero's quest, the night-sea journey, and the battle for deliverance from the mother. Archetypal figures include the divine child, the double, the old sage, and the primordial mother.

Each of the major structures of the personality is also an archetype. These structures include the ego, the persona, the shadow, the anima (in men),  the animus  (in women), and the self.

The archetypes themselves are forms, without content of their own, that serve to organize or channel psychological material. They are somewhat like dry stream beds whose shape determines the characteristics of a river once water begins flowing through them. The archetypes are carriers of energy. When an archetype is activated, it generally unlocks a tremendous amount of energy. All creativity has an archetypal element.

In his Hero with a Thousand Faces ( 1949), Joseph Campbell, a Jungian scholar, outlines the basic archetypal themes and patterns in the stories and legends of heroes found in cultures throughout history. Several excellent studies have articulated aspects of the heroic archetype into orphan, warrior, sage, fool (Pearson, 1989, 1991) and also into king, warrior, magician, and lover (Moore & Gillette, 1990). The story of Oedipus is a good illustration of an archetypal situation that deals with a son's deep love for his mother and conflict with his father. The same basic structure can be found as a theme in many myths and legends and also as a psychological pattern in many individuals. There are numerous other related situations, such as a daughter's relationship to her parents, parents' relationship to children, relationships between men and women, brothers and sisters, and so forth.

It is important to remember that only the contents of an archetype can enter consciousness. The archetype itself is a pattern that channels our psychic energies. We can never become fully conscious of this underlying pattern, just as we can study thousands of snowflake crystals but can never actually see the underlying pattern that generates their common crystalline structure.
[h2]The Ego[/h2]
The ego is the center of consciousness and one of the major archetypes of the personality. The ego provides a sense of consistency and direction in our conscious lives. It tends to oppose whatever might threaten this fragile consistency of consciousness and tries to convince us that we must always consciously plan and analyze our experiences.

According to Jung, the psyche at first consists only of the unconscious. Similar to Freud's view, Jung's ego arises from the unconscious and brings together various experiences and memories, developing the division between unconscious and conscious. There are no unconscious elements in the ego, only conscious contents derived from personal experience. We are led to believe that the ego is the central element of the psyche, and we come to ignore the other half of the psyche, the unconscious.
[h2]The Persona[/h2]
Our persona  is the appearance we present to the world. It is the character we assume-through it, we relate to others. The persona includes our social roles, the kind of clothes we choose to wear, and our individual styles of expressing ourselves. The term persona comes from the Latin, meaning "mask," or "false face," as in the mask worn by an actor on the Roman stage through which he spoke. In order to function socially at all, we have to play a part in ways that define our roles. Even those who reject such adaptive devices invariably employ other roles, roles that represent rejection.

The persona has both negative and positive aspects. A dominant persona can smother the individual, and those who identify with their persona tend to see themselves only in terms of their superficial social roles and facades. In fact, Jung called the persona the "conformity archetype." As part of its positive function, it protects the ego and the psyche from the varied social forces and attitudes that impinge on them. The persona is, in addition, a valuable tool for communication. In Roman drama the actors' boldly drawn masks informed the entire audience clearly, if somewhat stereotypically, of the personality and attitudes of the role each actor was playing. The persona can often be crucial to our positive development. As we begin to play a certain role, our ego gradually comes to identify with it. This process is central to personality development.

This process is not always positive, however. As the ego identifies with the persona, people start to believe that they are what they pretend to be. According to Jung, we eventually have to withdraw this identification and learn who we are in the process of individuation. Minority group members and other social outsiders in particular are likely to have problems with their identities because of cultural prejudice and social rejection of their personas (Hopcke, 1995).
[h2]The Shadow[/h2]
The shadow  is an archetypal form that serves as the focus for material that has been repressed from consciousness; its contents include those tendencies desires and memories that are rejected by the individual as incompatible with the persona and contrary to social standards and ideals. The shadow contains all the negative tendencies the individual wishes to deny, including our animal instincts, as well as undeveloped positive and negative qualities.

The stronger our persona is and the more we identify with it, the more we deny other parts of ourselves. The shadow represents what we consider to be inferior in our personality and also that which we have neglected and never developed in ourselves. In dreams, a shadow figure may appear as an animal, a dwarf, a vagrant, or any other low-status figure.

The shadow is most dangerous when unrecognized. Then the individual tends to project his or her unwanted qualities onto others or to become dominated by the shadow without realizing it. Images of evil, the devil and the concept of original sin are all aspects of the shadow archetype. The more the shadow material is made conscious, the less it can dominate. But the shadow is an integral part of our nature, and it can never be simply eliminated. A person who claims to be without a shadow is not a complete individual but a two-dimensional caricature, denying the mixture of good and evil that is necessarily present in all of us.

The following passage from one of Jung's letters provides a clear illustration of Jung's concept of the shadow and of the unconscious in general:

It is a very difficult and important question, what you call the technique of dealing with the shadow. There is, as a matter of fact, no technique at all, inasmuch as technique means that there is a known and perhaps even prescribable way to deal with a certain difficulty, or task. It is rather a dealing comparable to diplomacy or statesmanship. There is, for instance, no particular technique that would help us to reconcile two political parties opposing each other.... If one can speak of a technique at all, it consists solely in an attitude. First of all, one has to accept and to take seriously into account the existence of the shadow. Secondly, it is necessary to be informed about its qualities and intentions. Thirdly, long and difficult negotiations will be unavoidable....

Nobody can know what the final outcome of such negotiations will be. One only knows that through careful collaboration the problem itself becomes changed. Very often certain apparently impossible intentions of the shadow are mere threats due to unwillingness on the part of the ego to enter upon a serious consideration of the shadow. Such threats diminish usually when one meets them seriously. (1973,p.234)

Just when we think we understand it, the shadow will appear in another form. Dealing with the shadow is a lifelong process of looking within and honestly reflecting on what we see there (von Franz, 1995).
[h2]Anima and Animus[/h2]
Jung postulated an unconscious structure that is the complement of the  persona-the anima in man and the animus  in woman. This basic psychic structure serves as a focus for all the psychological material that does not fit with an individual's conscious self-image as a man or as a woman. Thus to the extent that a woman consciously defines herself in feminine terms, her animus will include those unrecognized tendencies and experiences that she has defined as masculine.

For a woman the process of psychological development entails entering into a dialogue between her ego and her animus. The animus may be pathologically dominated by identification with archetypal images (for example, the bewitched prince, the romantic poet, the ghostly lover, or the marauding pirate) and/or by an extreme father fixation.

The animus or anima initially seems to be a wholly separate personality. As the animus/anima and its influence on the individual is recognized, it assumes the role of liaison between conscious and unconscious until it gradually becomes integrated into the self. Jung views the quality of this union of opposites (in this case, masculine and feminine) as the major step in individuation.

As long as our anima or animus is unconscious, not accepted as part of our self, we will tend to project it outward onto people of the opposite sex:

Every man carries within him the eternal image of woman, not the image of this or that particular woman, but a definitive feminine image. This image is ... all imprint or "archetype" of all the ancestral experiences of the female, a deposit, as it were, of all the impressions ever made by woman.... Since this image is unconscious, it is always unconsciously projected upon the person of the beloved, and is one of the chief reasons for passionate attraction or aversion. (Jung, 1931b, P.198)

According to Jung, the child's opposite-sex parent is a major influence on the development of the anima or animus. All relations with the opposite sex, including parents, are strongly affected by the projection of anima or animus fantasies. This archetype is one of the most influential regulators of behavior. It appears in dreams and fantasies as figures of the opposite sex, and it functions as the primary mediator between unconscious and conscious processes. It is oriented primarily toward inner processes, just as the persona is oriented to the outer. (For example, the creative influence of the anima can be seen in male artists who have traditionally attributed their inspiration to the muses--female demigoddesses.) Jung also called this archetype the "soul image." Because it has the capacity to bring us in touch with our unconscious forces, it is often the key to unlocking our creativity.
[h2]The Self[/h2]
The self is the most important personality archetype and also the most difficult to understand. Jung has called the self the central archetype, the archetype of psychological order and the totality of the personality. The self is the archetype of centeredness. It is the union of the conscious and the unconscious that embodies the harmony and balance of the various opposing elements of the psyche. The self directs the functioning of the whole psyche in an integrated way. According to Jung, "[C]onscious and unconscious are not necessarily in opposition to one another, but complement one another to form a totality, which is the self" (1928b, p. 175). Jung discovered the self archetype only after his investigations of the other structures of the personality.

The self is depicted in dreams or images impersonally (as a circle, mandala, crystal, or stone) or personally (as a royal couple, a divine child, or some other symbol of divinity). Great spiritual teachers, such as Christ, Muhammed, and Buddha, are also symbols for the self. These are all symbols of wholeness, unification, reconciliation of polarities, and dynamic equilibrium--the goals of the individuation process (Edinger, 1996). Jung explains the function of the self:

The ego receives the light from the Self. Though we know of this Self, yet it is not known.... Although we receive the light of consciousness from the Self and although we know it to be the source of our illumination, we do not know whether it possesses anything we would call consciousness.... If the Self could be wholly experienced, it would be a limited experience, whereas in reality its experience is unlimited and endless.... If I were one with the Self I would have knowledge of everything, I would speak Sanskrit, read cuneiform script, know the events that took place in pre-history be acquainted with the life of other planets, etc. ( 1975, pp.194-195)

The self is a deep, inner, guiding factor, which can seem to be quite different, even alien, from the ego and consciousness. "The self is not only the centre, but also the whole circumference which embraces both conscious and unconscious; it is the centre of this totality, just as the ego is the centre of consciousness" (1936b, p. 41). It may first appear in dreams as a tiny, insignificant image, because the self is so unfamiliar mid undeveloped in most people. The development of the self does not mean that the ego is dissolved. The ego remains the center of consciousness, an important structure within the psyche. It becomes linked to the self as the result of the long, hard work of understanding and accepting unconscious processes.
[h2]Symbols[/h2]
According to Jung, the unconscious expresses itself primarily through symbols. Although no specific symbol or image can ever fully represent an archetype (which is a form without specific content), the more closely a symbol conforms to the unconscious material organized around an archetype, the more it evokes a strong, emotionally charged response.

The symbol has a very complex meaning because it defies reason; it always presupposes a lot of meanings that can't be comprehended ill a single logical concept. The symbol has a future. The past does not suffice to interpret it, because germs of the future are included in every actual situation That's why, in elucidating a case, the symbolism is spontaneously applicable for it contains the future (Jung in McGuire & Hull 1977, p. 143)

Jung is concerned with two kinds of symbols: individual and collective. By individual symbols Jung means "natural" symbols that are spontaneous productions of the individual psyche, rather than images or designs created deliberately by an artist. In addition to the personal symbols found in an individual's dreams or fantasies, there are important collective symbols, which are often religious images such as the cross, the six-pointed Star of David, and the Buddhist wheel of life.

Symbolic terms and images represent concepts that we cannot completely define or fully comprehend. Symbols always have connotations that are unclear or hidden from LIS. For Jung, a sign stands for something else, but a symbol, such as a tree, is something in itself-a dynamic, living thing. A symbol may represent the individual's psychic situation, and it is that situation at a given moment.
[h3]Active Imagination[/h3]
Jung valued the use of active imagination as a means of facilitating self-understanding through work with symbols. He encouraged his patients to paint, sculpt, or employ some other art form as a way to explore their inner depths. Active imagination is not passive fantasy but an attempt to engage the unconscious in a dialogue with the ego, through symbols.

Active imagination  refers to any conscious effort to produce material directly related to unconscious processes, to relax our usual ego controls without allowing the Unconscious to take over completely. The process of active imagination differs for each individual. Sonic People use drawing or painting most profitably, whereas others prefer to use conscious imagery, or fantasy, or some other form of expression.

Jung himself used a variety of outlets to explore his unconscious. He designed his retreat house in Bollingen according to his inner needs, and, as he himself developed, he added wings to the house. Jung also painted murals on the walls at Bollingen; he inscribed manuscripts in Latin and high German script, illustrated his own manuscripts, and carved in stone.

Dreams. For Jung, dreams play an important complementary (or compensatory) role in the psyche. The widely varied influences we are exposed to in our conscious life tend to distract us and to mold our thinking in ways that are often unsuitable to Our personality and individuality. "The general function of dreams," Jung wrote, "is to try to restore our psychological balance by producing dream material that re-establishes, in a subtle way, the total psychic equilibrium." (1964, p. 50).

Jung approached dreams as living realities that must be experienced and observed carefully to be understood. He tried to uncover the significance of dream symbols by paying close attention to the form and content of the dream, and he gradually moved away from the psychoanalytic reliance on free association in dream analysis. "Free association will bring out all my complexes, but hardly ever the meaning of a dream. To understand the dream's meaning I must stick as close as possible to the dream images" ( 1934, 1). 149). In analysis, Jung would continually bring his patients back to the dream images and ask them, "What does the dream say?" (1964, p. 29).

Because the dream deals with symbols that have more than one meaning, there can be no simple, mechanical system for dream interpretation. Any attempt at dream analysis must take into account the attitudes, experiences, and background of the dreamer. It is a joint venture between analyst and analyzed. The dreamer interprets the dream with the help and guidance of the analyst. The analyst may be vitally helpful, but in the end only the dreamer can know what the dream means.

Jeremy Taylor, a well-known authority on Jungian dreamwork Postulates certain basic assumptions about dreams (1992, p. I I ):
  1. All dreams come in the service of health and wholeness.
  2. No dream comes simply to tell the dreamer what he or she already knows.
  3. Only the dreamer can say with certainty what meanings a dream may hold.
  4. There is no such thing as a dream with only one meaning
  5. All dreams speak a universal language, a language of metaphor and symbol.
More important than the cognitive understanding of dreams is the act of experiencing the dream material and taking this material seriously. Jung encourages us to befriend our dreams and to treat them not as isolated events but as communications from the unconscious. This process creates a dialogue between conscious and unconscious and is, an important step in the integration of the two (Singer, 1972, p. 283).
[h2]Psychological Growth: Individuation[/h2]
According to Jung, every individual naturally seeks individuation or self-development. Jung believed that the psyche has an innate urge toward wholeness. This idea is similar to Maslow's concept of self-actualization but it is based on a more complex theory of the psyche than Maslow's. "Individuation means becoming a single, homogeneous being, and, insofar as 'individuality' embraces our innermost, last, and incomparable uniqueness, it also implies becoming one's own self we could therefore translate individuation as 'coming to selfhood' or 'self-realization' " (Jung, 1928b, p. 171).

Individuation is a natural, organic process. It is the unfolding of our basic nature, and is a fundamental drive in each of us. As Jung has written, "it is what makes a tree turn into a tree" (in McGuire & Hull, 1977, p. 210).
[h2]Evaluation[/h2]
Jung has often been criticized for his lack of a coherent, clearly structured system of thought. His writing sometimes seems to go off on tangents, rather than present ideas in a formal, logical, or even systematic fashion. Also, at different times Jung may use varying definitions for the same term. He was aware of this difficulty in his writing but did not see it as a drawback. Jung believed that life rarely follows the logical, coherent pattern that has become the standard for scientific and academic writing, and felt that his own style may be closer to the rich complexity of psychological reality.

Jung deliberately developed a loose, open system, one that could admit new information without distorting it to fit a closed theoretical framework. He never believed that he knew all the answers or that new information would merely confirm his theories. Consequently his theorizing lacks a tight, logical structure that categorizes all life in terms of a small number of theoretical constructs.

It has been argued that Jung's work is still extremely relevant today and that his writings are in line with the postmodern critiques of contemporary culture (Hauke, 2000). Also, Jung's no obj
 
Last edited:


this covers remote viewing. probably a day left of it being online.

remote viewing is pretty crazy..
 
God Damn

I'm gonna be spending alot of time reading and watching the vids in these last few pages.

I actually wrote my senior thesis breaking down the Godfather books and film series through the Jungian perspective.

It was pretty dope. One day I'd like to go deeper with it, and turn it into a full-fledged book.
 
GotHolesInMySocks said:
If the moon landing indeed did happen.
Click to expand...
Indeed it did. But what really happened?

I mean I've heard most of the stories from Hoagland, how we warned not to come back, how it rings like a bell when struck insinuating it's hollow.

Both formation theories don't really add up either.

I'm hoping the Chinese rover brings some new discoveries
 
Yeezy83 said:
Indeed it did. But what really happened?

I mean I've heard most of the stories from Hoagland, how we warned not to come back, how it rings like a bell when struck insinuating it's hollow.

Both formation theories don't really add up either.

I'm hoping the Chinese rover brings some new discoveries
Click to expand...



There are reports that we were told by beings not of this world never to return to the moon.

Also, there are supposed structures on the other side.
 
Wow that insider q and a really spoke to me. I know it from almost ten years ago and I found it odd that I've never seen that until yesterday, but I wouldn't have understood much and completely dismissed it if I read it sooner. It made too much sense.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/index.htm

This site has a huge catalog of ebooks about every occult subject/topic.

I highly recommend reading manly p halls, the secret teachings of all ages. It's a lot of info to take in.

Also, some of you are experimenting/have experienced the use of psychedelics and dmt and wondered if there was a sober way of getting there, I think for that to happen you must live a completely natural life, away from society, away from worldly desires and just to be one. There's a book called Awakening Spirits by Tom brown jr that touches on the subject I couldn't tell you word for word but it has to do with prair/meditation and how that isn't the endgame, it's just the beginning.
 
Props to all for keeping this thread going. Been through all the pages like 3 times gathering information lol
 
AllStarDope said:
Ego - The False Center
   

The first thing to be understood is what ego is. A child is born. A child is born without any knowledge, any consciousness of his own self. And when a child is born the first thing he becomes aware of is not himself; the first thing he becomes aware of is the other. It is natural, because the eyes open outwards, the hands touch others, the ears listen to others, the tongue tastes food and the nose smells the outside.


All these senses open outwards.
That is what birth means. Birth means coming into this world, the world of the outside. So when a child is born, he is born into this world. He opens his eyes, sees others. 'Other' means the thou. He becomes aware of the mother first. Then, by and by, he becomes aware of his own body. That too is the other, that too belongs to the world. He is hungry and he feels the body; his need is satisfied, he forgets the body.


This is how a child grows. First he becomes aware of you, thou, other, and then by and by, in contrast to you, thou, he becomes aware of himself.
     

This awareness is a reflected awareness. He is not aware of who he is. He is simply aware of the mother and what she thinks about him. If she smiles, if she appreciates the child, if she says, "You are beautiful," if she hugs and kisses him, the child feels good about himself. Now an ego is born.
     

Through appreciation, love, care, he feels he is good, he feels he is valuable, he feels he has some significance.
A center is born.
But this center is a reflected center. It is not his real being. He does not know who he is; he simply knows what others think about him. And this is the ego: the reflection, what others think. If nobody thinks that he is of any use, nobody appreciates him, nobody smiles, then too an ego is born: an ill ego; sad, rejected, like a wound; feeling inferior, worthless. This too is the ego. This too is a reflection.

 
First the mother - and mother means the world in the beginning. Then others will join the mother, and the world goes on growing. And the more the world grows, the more complex the ego becomes, because many others' opinions are reflected.
The ego is an accumulated phenomenon, a by-product of living with others. If a child lives totally alone, he will never come to grow an ego. But that is not going to help. He will remain like an animal. That doesn't mean that he will come to know the real self, no.

 
The real can be known only through the false, so the ego is a must. One has to pass through it. It is a discipline. The real can be known only through the illusion. You cannot know the truth directly. First you have to know that which is not true. First you have to encounter the untrue. Through that encounter you become capable of knowing the truth. If you know the false as the false, truth will dawn upon you.
     

Ego is a need; it is a social need, it is a social by-product. The society means all that is around you - not you, but all that is around you. All, minus you, is the society. And everybody reflects. You will go to school and the teacher will reflect who you are. You will be in friendship with other children and they will reflect who you are. By and by, everybody is adding to your ego, and everybody is trying to modify it in such a way that you don't become a problem to the society.
     

They are not concerned with you.
They are concerned with the society.
Society is concerned with itself, and that's how it should be.
They are not concerned that you should become a self-knower. They are concerned that you should become an efficient part in the mechanism of the society. You should fit into the pattern. So they are trying to give you an ego that fits with the society. They teach you morality. Morality means giving you an ego which will fit with the society. If you are immoral, you will always be a misfit somewhere or other. That's why we put criminals in the prisons - not that they have done something wrong, not that by putting them in the prisons we are going to improve them, no. They simply don't fit. They are troublemakers. They have certain types of egos of which the society doesn't approve. If the society approves, everything is good.


One man kills somebody - he is a murderer.
And the same man in wartime kills thousands - he becomes a great hero. The society is not bothered by a murder, but the murder should be commited for the society - then it is okay. The society doesn't bother about morality.
     

Morality means only that you should fit with the society.
If the society is at war, then the morality changes.
If the society is at peace, then there is a different morality.
Morality is a social politics. It is diplomacy. And each child has to be brought up in such a way that he fits into the society, that's all. Because society is interested in efficient members. Society is not interested that you should attain to self-knowledge.

 
The society creates an ego because the ego can be controlled and manipulated. The self can never be controlled or manipulated. Nobody has ever heard of the society controlling a self - not possible.
And the child needs a center; the child is completely unaware of his own center. The society gives him a center and the child is by and by convinced that this is his center, the ego that society gives.


A child comes back to his home - if he has come first in his class, the whole family is happy. You hug and kiss him, and you take the child on your shoulders and dance and you say, "What a beautiful child! You are a pride to us." You are giving him an ego, a subtle ego. And if the child comes home dejected, unsuccessful, a failure - he couldn't pass, or he has just been on the back bench - then nobody appreciates him and the child feels rejected. He will try harder next time, because the center feels shaken.


Ego is always shaken, always in search of food, that somebody should appreciate it. That's why you continuously ask for attention.

You get the idea of who you are from others.
It is not a direct experience.
It is from others that you get the idea of who you are. They shape your center. This center is false, because you carry your real center. That is nobody's business. Nobody shapes it.
You come with it.
You are born with it.


So you have two centers. One center you come with, which is given by existence itself. That is the self. And the other center, which is created by the society, is the ego. It is a false thing - and it is a very great trick. Through the ego the society is controlling you. You have to behave in a certain way, because only then does the society appreciate you. You have to walk in a certain way; you have to laugh in a certain way; you have to follow certain manners, a morality, a code. Only then will the society appreciate you, and if it doesn't, you ego will be shaken. And when the ego is shaken, you don't know where you are, who you are.
     

The others have given you the idea.
That idea is the ego.
Try to understand it as deeply as possible, because this has to be thrown. And unless you throw it you will never be able to attain to the self. Because you are addicted to the center, you cannot move, and you cannot look at the self.
And remember, there is going to be an interim period, an interval, when the ego will be shattered, when you will not know who you are, when you will not know where you are going, when all boundaries will melt.


You will simply be confused, a chaos.
Because of this chaos, you are afraid to lose the ego. But it has to be so. One has to pass through the chaos before one attains to the real center.

 
And if you are daring, the period will be small.
If you are afraid, and you again fall back to the ego, and you again start arranging it, then it can be very, very long; many lives can be wasted.
     

I have heard: One small child was visiting his grandparents. He was just four years old. In the night when the grandmother was putting him to sleep, he suddenly started crying and weeping and said, "I want to go home. I am afraid of darkness." But the grandmother said, "I know well that at home also you sleep in the dark; I have never seen a light on. So why are you afraid here?" The boy said, "Yes, that's right - but that is MY darkness." This darkness is completely unknown.
     

Even with darkness you feel, "This is MINE."

Outside - an unknown darkness.
With the ego you feel, "This is MY darkness."
 

It may be troublesome, maybe it creates many miseries, but still mine. Something to hold to, something to cling to, something underneath the feet; you are not in a vacuum, not in an emptiness. You may be miserable, but at least you ARE. Even being miserable gives you a feeling of 'I am'. Moving from it, fear takes over; you start feeling afraid of the unknown darkness and chaos - because society has managed to clear a small part of your being.
     

It is just like going to a forest. You make a little clearing, you clear a little ground; you make fencing, you make a small hut; you make a small garden, a lawn, and you are okay. Beyond your fence - the forest, the wild. Here everything is okay; you have planned everything. This is how it has happened.
     

Society has made a little clearing in your consciousness. It has cleaned just a little part completely, fenced it. Everything is okay there. That's what all your universities are doing. The whole culture and conditioning is just to clear a part so that you can feel at home there.
And then you become afraid.
Beyond the fence there is danger.
Beyond the fence you are, as within the fence you are - and your conscious mind is just one part, one-tenth of your whole being. Nine-tenths is waiting in the darkness. And in that nine-tenths, somewhere your real center is hidden.
     

One has to be daring, courageous.
One has to take a step into the unknown.
For a while all boundaries will be lost.
For a while you will feel dizzy.
For a while, you will feel very afraid and shaken, as if an earthquake has happened. But if you are courageous and you don't go backwards, if you don't fall back to the ego and you go on and on, there is a hidden center within you that you have been carrying for many lives.


That is your soul, the self.
Once you come near it, everything changes, everything settles again. But now this settling is not done by the society. Now everything becomes a cosmos, not a chaos; a new order arises.
     

But this is no longer the order of the society - it is the very order of existence itself.
It is what Buddha calls Dhamma, Lao Tzu calls Tao, Hera****us calls Logos. It is not man-made. It is the VERY order of existence itself. Then everything is suddenly beautiful again, and for the first time really beautiful, because man-made things cannot be beautiful. At the most you can hide the ugliness of them, that's all. You can decorate them, but they can never be beautiful.


The difference is just like the difference between a real flower and a plastic or paper flower. The ego is a plastic flower - dead. It just looks like a flower, it is not a flower. You cannot really call it a flower. Even linguistically to call it a flower is wrong, because a flower is something which flowers. And this plastic thing is just a thing, not a flowering. It is dead. There is no life in it.


You have a flowering center within. That's why Hindus call it a lotus - it is a flowering. They call it the one-thousand-petaled-lotus. One thousand means infinite petals. And it goes on flowering, it never stops, it never dies.
But you are satisfied with a plastic ego.
There are some reasons why you are satisfied. With a dead thing, there are many conveniences. One is that a dead thing never dies. It cannot - it was never alive. So you can have plastic flowers, they are good in a way. They are permanent; they are not eternal, but they are permanent.

 
The real flower outside in the garden is eternal, but not permanent. And the eternal has its own way of being eternal. The way of the eternal is to be born again and again and to die. Through death it refreshes itself, rejuvenates itself.

To us it appears that the flower has died - it never dies.
It simply changes bodies, so it is ever fresh.
It leaves the old body, it enters a new body. It flowers somewhere else; it goes on flowering.
But we cannot see the continuity because the continuity is invisible. We see only one flower, another flower; we never see the continuity.
     

It is the same flower which flowered yesterday.
It is the same sun, but in a different garb.
The ego has a certain quality - it is dead. It is a plastic thing. And it is very easy to get it, because others give it. You need not seek it, there is no search involved. That's why unless you become a seeker after the unknown, you have not yet become an individual. You are just a part of the crowd. You are just a mob.
     

When you don't have a real center, how can you be an individual?
The ego is not individual. Ego is a social phenomenon - it is society, its not you. But it gives you a function in the society, a hierarchy in the society. And if you remain satisfied with it, you will miss the whole opportunity of finding the self.
     

And that's why you are so miserable.
With a plastic life, how can you be happy?
With a false life, how can you be ecstatic and blissful? And then this ego creates many miseries, millions of them.

You cannot see, because it is your own darkness. You are attuned to it.
Have you ever noticed that all types of miseries enter through the ego? It cannot make you blissful; it can only make you miserable.
     

Ego is hell.
Whenever you suffer, just try to watch and analyze, and you will find, somewhere the ego is the cause of it. And the ego goes on finding causes to suffer.
     

You are an egoist, as everyone is. Some are very gross, just on the surface, and they are not so difficult. Some are very subtle, deep down, and they are the real problems.
     

This ego comes continuously in conflict with others because every ego is so unconfident about itself. Is has to be - it is a false thing. When you don't have anything in your hand and you just think that something is there, then there will be a problem.
If somebody says, "There is nothing," immediately the fight will start, because you also feel that there is nothing. The other makes you aware of the fact.


Ego is false, it is nothing.
That you also know.
     

How can you miss knowing it? It is impossible! A conscious being - how can he miss knowing that this ego is just false? And then others say that there is nothing - and whenever the others say that there is nothing they hit a wound, they say a truth - and nothing hits like the truth.
     

You have to defend, because if you don't defend, if you don't become defensive, then where will you be?
You will be lost.
     

The identity will be broken.
So you have to defend and fight - that is the clash.
     

A man who attains to the self is never in any clash. Others may come and clash with him, but he is never in clash with anybody.
It happened that one Zen master was passing through a street. A man came running and hit him hard. The master fell down. Then he got up and started to walk in the same direction in which he was going before, not even looking back.


A disciple was with the master. He was simply shocked. He said, "Who is this man? What is this? If one lives in such a way, then anybody can come and kill you. And you have not even looked at that person, who he is, and why he did it."
The master said, "That is his problem, not mine."
You can clash with an enlightened man, but that is your problem, not his. And if you are hurt in that clash, that too is your own problem. He cannot hurt you. And it is like knocking against a wall - you will be hurt, but the wall has not hurt you.
     

The ego is always looking for some trouble. Why? Because if nobody pays attention to you, the ego feels hungry.
It lives on attention.
So even if somebody is fighting and angry with you, that too is good because at least the attention is paid. If somebody loves, it is okay. If somebody is not loving you, then even anger will be good. At least the attention will come to you. But if nobody is paying any attention to you, nobody thinks that you are somebody important, significant, then how will you feed your ego?
     

Other's attention is needed.
In millions of ways you attract the attention of others; you dress in a certain way, you try to look beautiful, you behave, you become very polite, you change. When you feel what type of situation is there, you immediately change so that people pay attention to you.
     

This is a deep begging.
A real beggar is one who asks for and demands attention. And a real emperor is one who lives in himself; he has a center of his own, he doesn't depend on anybody else.
     

Buddha sitting under his bodhi tree...if the whole world suddenly disappears, will it make any difference to Buddha? -none. It will not make any difference at all. If the whole world disappears, it will not make any difference because he has attained to the center.
But you, if the wife escapes, divorces you, goes to somebody else, you are completely shattered - because she had been paying attention to you, caring, loving, moving around you, helping you to feel that you were somebody. Your whole empire is lost, you are simply shattered. You start thinking about suicide. Why? Why, if a wife leaves you, should you commit suicide? Why, if a husband leaves you, should you commit suicide? Because you don't have any center of your own. The wife was giving you the center; the husband was giving you the center.
     

This is how people exist. This is how people become dependent on others. It is a deep slavery. Ego HAS to be a slave. It depends on others. And only a person who has no ego is for the first time a master; he is no longer a slave. Try to understand this.
     

And start looking for the ego - not in others, that is not your business, but in yourself. Whenever you feel miserable, immediately close you eyes and try to find out from where the misery is coming and you will always find it is the false center which has clashed with someone.
     

You expected something, and it didn't happen.
You expected something, and just the contrary happened - your ego is shaken, you are in misery. Just look, whenever you are miserable, try to find out why.
     

Causes are not outside you. The basic cause is within you - but you always look outside, you always ask:
Who is making me miserable?

Who is the cause of my anger?

Who is the cause of my anguish?

And if you look outside you will miss.

Just close the eyes and always look within.

The source of all misery, anger, anguish, is hidden in you, your ego.


And if you find the source, it will be easy to move beyond it. If you can see that it is your own ego that gives you trouble, you will prefer to drop it - because nobody can carry the source of misery if he understands it.
And remember, there is no need to drop the ego.
You cannot drop it.
     

If you try to drop it, you will attain to a certain subtle ego again which says, "I have become humble."
Don't try to be humble. That's again ego in hiding - but it's not dead.
Don't try to be humble.
     

Nobody can try humility, and nobody can create humility through any effort of his own - no. When the ego is no more, a humbleness comes to you. It is not a creation. It is a shadow of the real center.
And a really humble man is neither humble nor egoistic.
     

He is simply simple.
He's not even aware that he is humble.
If you are aware that you are humble, the ego is there.
Look at humble persons.... There are millions who think that they are very humble. They bow down very low, but watch them - they are the subtlest egoists. Now humility is their source of food. They say, "I am humble," and then they look at you and they wait for you to appreciate them.
     

"You are really humble," they would like you to say. "In fact, you are the most humble man in the world; nobody is as humble as you are." Then see the smile that comes on their faces.
     

What is ego? Ego is a hierarchy that says, "No one is like me." It can feed on humbleness - "Nobody is like me, I am the most humble man."


It happened once:
A fakir, a beggar, was praying in a mosque, just early in the morning when it was still dark. It was a certain religious day for Mohammedians, and he was praying, and he was saying, "I am nobody. I am the poorest of the poor, the greatest sinner of sinners."
     

Suddenly there was one more person who was praying. He was the emperor of that country, and he was not aware that there was somebody else there who was praying - it was dark, and the emperor was also saying:
"I am nobody. I am nothing. I am just empty, a beggar at our door." When he heard that somebody else was saying the same thing, he said, "Stop! Who is trying to overtake me? Who are you? How dare you say before the emperor that you are nobody when he is saying that he is nobody?"


This is how the ego goes. It is so subtle. Its ways are so subtle and cunning; you have to be very, very alert, only then will you see it. Don't try to be humble. Just try to see that all misery, all anguish comes through it.
Just watch! No need to drop it.
You cannot drop it. Who will drop it? Then the DROPPER will become the ego. It always comes back.
Whatsoever you do, stand out of it, and look and watch.
Whatsoever you do - humbleness, humility, simplicity - nothing will help. Only one thing is possible, and that is just to watch and see that it is the source of all misery. Don't say it. Don't repeat it - WATCH. Because if I say it is the source of all misery and you repeat it, then it is useless. YOU have to come to that understanding. Whenever you are miserable, just close the eyes and don't try to find some cause outside. Try to see from where this misery is coming.
     

It is your own ego.
If you continuously feel and understand, and the understanding that the ego is the cause becomes so deep-rooted, one day you will suddenly see that it has disappeared. Nobody drops it - nobody can drop it. You simply see; it has simply disappeared, because the very understanding that ego causes all misery becomes the dropping. THE VERY UNDERSTANDING IS THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THE EGO.
     

And you are so clever in seeing the ego in others. Anybody can see someone else's ego. When it comes to your own, then the problem arises - because you don't know the territory, you have never traveled on it.
The whole path towards the divine, the ultimate, has to pass through this territory of the ego. The false has to be understood as false. The source of misery has to be understood as the source of misery - then it simply drops.
     

When you know it is poison, it drops. When you know it is fire, it drops. When you know this is the hell, it drops.
And then you never say, "I have dropped the ego." Then you simply laugh at the whole thing, the joke that you were the creator of all misery.
     

I was just looking at a few cartoons of Charlie Brown. In one cartoon he is playing with blocks, making a house out of children's blocks. He is sitting in the middle of the blocks building the walls. Then a moment comes when he is enclosed; all around he has made a wall. Then he cries, "Help, help!"
     

He has done the whole thing! Now he is enclosed, imprisoned. This is childish, but this is all that you have done also. You have made a house all around yourself, and now you are crying, "Help, help!" And the misery becomes a millionfold - because there are helpers who are also in the same boat.
     

It happened that one very beautiful woman went to see her psychiatrist for the first time. The psychiatrist said, "Come closer please." When she came closer, he simply jumped and hugged and kissed the woman. She was shocked. Then he said, "Now sit down. This takes care of my problem, now what is your problem?"
     

The problem becomes multifold, because there are helpers who are in the same boat. And they would like to help, because when you help somebody the ego feels very good, very, very good - because you are a great helper, a great guru, a master; you are helping so many people. The greater the crowd of your followers, the better you feel.
     

But you are in the same boat - you cannot help.
Rather, you will harm.
People who still have their own problems cannot be of much help. Only someone who has no problems of his own can help you. Only then is there the clarity to see, to see through you. A mind that has no problems of its own can see you, you become transparent.
     

A mind that has no problems of its own can see through itself; that's why it becomes capable of seeing through others.
In the West, there are many schools of psychoanalysis, many schools, and no help is reaching people, but rather, harm. Because the people who are helping others, or trying to help, or posing as helpers, are in the same boat.
...It is difficult to see one's own ego.
     

It is very easy to see other's egos. But that is not the point, you cannot help them.
Try to see your own ego.
Just watch it.
     

Don't be in a hurry to drop it, just watch it. The more you watch, the more capable you will become. Suddenly one day, you simply see that it has dropped. And when it drops by itself, only then does it drop. There is no other way. Prematurely you cannot drop it.
It drops just like a dead leaf.
 

The tree is not doing anything - just a breeze, a situation, and the dead leaf simply drops. The tree is not even aware that the dead leaf has dropped. It makes no noise, it makes no claim - nothing.
The dead leaf simply drops and shatters on the ground, just like that.
When you are mature through understanding, awareness, and you have felt totally that ego is the cause of all your misery, simply one day you see the dead leaf dropping.
     

It settles into the ground, dies of its own accord. You have not done anything so you cannot claim that you have dropped it. You see that it has simply disappeared, and then the real center arises.
And that real center is the soul, the self, the god, the truth, or whatsoever you want to call it.
 It is nameless, so all names are good.
     

You can give it any name of your own liking.
Click to expand...

one more time. :nerd:
 
400

Lookin right at u
 
THE QBZ said:
The connection is it an offshoot of free masonry to keep black members due to the "loss " of charter

3 letter A ncient
F ree
M asonry

4 Letter A ncient
F ree
A ccepted
M asonry
Click to expand...


thanks for the responses guys.

So what does accepted mean in this sense? That they are simply allowed to participate?
 
Masonry in its inception was strictly for stone masons soon after outsiders became "accepted" for a number of reasons.

To get a better understanding of the Masonic perspective you have to study astrotheology amongst other things.

The sun enters each heavenly sign or house of the zodiac in what is called "the 30th degree" and leaves at the "33rd degree" thus gods son is said to begin his ministry at 30 and die at 33 according to the ancients.

A Freemason is not told the truth about the object of his worship until he attains the 30th degree this is why the highest degree in freemasonry is 33. No one can rise higher than the sun.

When viewing the shimmering rays of sunlight on a body of water at dawn or sunset one can still see today how "gods son walks on water"

They believe that the Christianity me and you are taught is a perversion of the mysteries. This explains the apparent conflict between masons and pseudo Christianity
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ARK
Becoming a Supporter Worth It?
Replies
0
Views
908
ARK
ARK
R
Entrepreneurs Thread
Replies
7
Views
774
TSCQ
TSCQ
us3less
Healing/Recovering from Anxiety and Panic Attacks - by Allowing the Feelings and Thoughts to Happen
Replies
1
Views
2K
Belgium
Belgium
Beruseruku Desu
Popular slang/memes that Gen Alpha are using right now
2
Replies
25
Views
4K
Beruseruku Desu
Beruseruku Desu
Methodical Management
  • Sticky
Make a Plan to Vote in the 2024 US Election
2 3 4
Replies
99
Views
5K
yobyellav
yobyellav

Latest News

View All News

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

Site contents may not be incorporated into AI training data or any other derivative works without prior express written consent.

Links to participating merchants may generate referral or affiliate commissions that help support our community. See our policies for details. NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom