SOUL

Member
  • Content count

    1,256
  • Joined

  • Last visited

5 Followers

About SOUL

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Location
    Being Here Now
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

855 profile views
  1. @Faceless You're stuck in a contradiction and don't have the clarity of awareness to recognize it even though I reveal it to you. I just wonder why you insist on teaching others this contradiction percrption and believe it to be "truth".
  2. Well, "buddy" it appears you don't understand the clarity of awareness I have in revealing the contradictory nature of your complicated belief system.
  3. You say it has nothing to do with philosophy but either you don't understand what philosophy is or you are ignorant of yourself philosophizing about all these ideas you purport to be the knower of. This is what you are doing, philosophizing about these ideas from an position of you knowing about them from 'going into them'. "Just takes honesty." Yet you carry all these ideas as an implied knower that you write here with you into the present moment. All the language, all the concepts and ideas, all the understanding gleaned from the past imposing itself on the present otherwise you wouldn't be on this forum writing all this. You wouldn't be able to because none of it would be possible without the remembrance of the past. "Just takes honesty." Yet you are conforming to your own ideas that you express profusely about on this forum and profess are the "truth".... yes, "just takes honesty". I thought you said it's freedom from the "knower" yet now it's "knowing"? So which is it? If there is knowing there is a knower. You are the one with all these complicated contradictions and conflicting words, ideas, concepts and philosophizing. If you were as free of accumulated content and conditioned mind so are being in silence you wouldn't be filling up this forum with all these words about your ideas and concepts. "Just takes honesty". If it's not complicated why do you have all these complicated contradicting and conflicting ideas and concepts you are using to explain someone that is so simple? "Just takes honesty" You say I don't know truth and it's not about knowing or experiencing truth yet here you are saying what is or isn't truth. So which is it? We don't know truth or you know what truth is or isn't? Yup, "just takes honesty". If there is no knower there is nobody to know so nothing to teach and nobody to learn but I suspect you will still be on this forum filling it up with your words on ideas and concepts telling others what is the "truth". "Just takes honesty". It is very simple, with simple awareness of the present moment and the clarity in that it is easy to see the convoluted and contradictory messages you reply with. If you truly had this space and silence you preach then so many complicated ideas and contradictory concepts wouldn't come out of you. Honest enough?
  4. It depends on what one defines as "ego" but what one defines as "good" also plays a huge role in answering the question "can the ego be good?" That's quite a list of the most imponderable topics of philosophy and you are suggesting "one has to go into" all of those and more? Actually, one doesn't have to go into any of that to just be present in the moment, you are just foisting your personal opinion of what matters to you as being important for others, too. I have a sense of well being, peace and fulfillment in just being without the use of this complicated ideology of yours. Awakening and self awareness can be a very simple exercise that even the most simple minded individual can self examine from a simple perspective. So though your own more complicated perspective works for you it isn't any more of a "truth" than any other experience of it and there is no "has to go into" about it.
  5. The insightful use of experience to bring a sense of well being in one's life.
  6. You still don't get the nuance of my point or you are purposefully being obtuse so refuse to acknowledge it. Either way, that's ok, it's no bother to me.
  7. @Outer I appreciate you proving my point for me, usually it isn't that easy. It takes just a few mins of that video to get to the point, the person SoA is citing suggests that 'cult thinking' is a 'psychological force' that brings on 'characteristics of behavior' he uses to call something a cult. Where does all of this 'authoritarian' control and belief take place? Within the individual because without the individual empowering it to be 'cultish' for them it has no force in their psychology to bring about behavior associated with it. Ironically, the video you provided explains how the four listed behaviors that are mentioned of compliance with a group, dependence on a leader, devaluing outsiders and avoiding dissent are all exhibited on this forum with much fervor. It seems that you are using a physical threshold of organization to be able to call something a cult without recognizing the power of the 'cultish thinking' present in the individual that brings about the control and belief. So yes, just in the first few mins that video you posted agrees that the subjectivity of group member's view of the group is the thing that makes for cultish thinking otherwise it has no psychological power of belief to control them to exhibit characteristics of behavior.
  8. So what do you think it's "based on"? Hm?
  9. It appears you didn't understand what I said....haha.
  10. His "teachings" aren't the only way to awaken in peace and fulfillment, in fact, they aren't even the most clear ones. In his own words....
  11. It's not a problem for me, the universe is a controlled accident that I exist with.
  12. The "cult", if there is it, resides within the person who empowers it to be a cult for them so yes, this can become it since anything can be a cult if one makes it so.