Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
lastly, though, i do not feel the fact that such assumptions are generally false discounts what i was saying previously, that the PUA tactics don’t seem to address the soul level, and the relationships between biological and soul level. i admit i have a lot to learn about these connections. the PUA material seems to be pretty accurate in terms of the domain of its own self-defined goals, but i don’t seem long-term fulfillment happening on that level… more a like a loop repeating itself over and over again until you get tired and die. nowhere is it addressed where these goals comes from, and what their actual meaning is, aside from just relegating it to the realm of DNA. likewise, suppose you go out and pick up women, rouse their passions so they sleep with you, etc. but what of the deeper effect this is having on the soul level, for both you and them, in the unfolding of destiny? this seems basically ignored. i don’t see a social transformation of the gender rift as possibile until we can address both the bio level and the soul level together at once.
i do value you pointing out those self-deceptions.
they developed in me largely out of confusion about how to puruse what i’ve experienced sprititually while at the same time living out my sexual desires. i do realize they are false, but i’m still in the process of undoing them. 🙂PietroS,
i appreciate your reply. i haven’t just ignored the informations you’ve presented, and i don’t necessarily hold those assumptions as strongly as you might think. but it has been a challenge to find some integration between the spiritual and the biological, without negating either. what you’re saying here is helpful to me as it aids me in digesting complexities that have made me uncomfortable in the past, parts of myself i was not fully able to accept. perhaps you have sensed in me traces of this discomfort as they were expressed in my words.
on the other hand, i may look at the stars, but i also make eye contact with many people. it is a practice i began many years ago, when i would often approach strangers and invite them upon adventures. and i do sometimes meet girls who have a different set of priorities on earth than solely those of the biological interface. but nonetheless it is an important interface to fulfill in order feel complete as a human. and so i thank you for sharing, and challenging me to grow.
-christopher
thanks for your post.
i agree with what you’ve said.
and i’ve glimpsed it myself, this sanctification of the physical.
that’s one reason i had to chime in to say there’s so much more to the male-female story than this biological DNA saga. that’s just one layer that we’re interfacing with. but our origins go far beyond it as well… i myself have learnt a lot about these things by gazing at the stars. so on the level of genetic propagation, humans are acting out a sort of subplot in the cosmic process. but we can also get in touch with the broader story, and take a more conscious part in participating in it.i meant to write my question more rhetorically, as obviously there are people who engage relationships at a soul-based level. i just felt like the framework being proposed in those linked-to writings totally ignored the possibilities on other levels.
🙂
to employ the notion of subtle bodies —
what level is the attraction taking place on?
obviously, the ideal would be a harmonization of connenction on all layers.
but how can this happen in the mode of approach advocated by “the pickup game”??
it is completely fixated upon only a certain shell (at the probable expense of the others).regarding “the game”….
while i can see the accuracy of the analysis, i would say it only applies to people who are living predominately on a certain level (even if that’s a majority of humans).
my question is this:
are there both men and women who tire of this “game” and instead seek connections on deeper levels (levels which become accessible through cultivation)?
i ask this as a 20 year old male, in the thick of such issues. for i am intensely NOT attracted to a woman who i could “trick” into having sex with me within an hour of meeting her! don’t these lustful approaches only intensify the gender-rift inside the human psyche? are there not women who are more emotionally integrated and intelligent than to play into that? and is not there a possibility of spiritual heart-connections whose blissful remembrance infinitely outweighs the meager releases involved in “getting laid”??
wishing to hear from the older folks…
-christopher
NN,
i really dig your essay.
i am curious what you would think of this website:
http://www.metahistory.org/
the primary author there suggests that they way gnosticism is typically described by scholars, etc. is in fact disinformation, largely based in the writings of their opponets (the church). he links gnosticism to pre-christian europrean indigenous traditions and the mystery schools. he suggestions gnosticism is not about a duality of creation, but a epistemological/noetic one. it’s a pretty unusual view.-C
i do feel like the points in themselves, in their essential meaning, are quite wonderful and important in what they emphasize.
i personally find it pretty attractive and accessible, but i could see how it’s language may not be so helpful for someone just getting into these things. perhaps you could simplify each point to its essential meaning which, by using some more general wording, everyone could relate to in their own way. then in other materials where you explain the mission in greater detail, you could include discussion of the topics you’ve referred to here.
as much as i love idiosyncratic cosmological verbiage with capitalized first letters, and find it pretty easy to explore and synthesize, it’s probably not so appealing to people in general.
thanks for your work,
christopher
smiling back, my friend!
this forum is full of great contributions.
thanks for your thoughtful response.
-cit seems both michael and fajin/max are making valid points within the domains of experinece each are addressing. the impediment lies in whether the points about one’s own chosen domain of experience actually address the paradigm offered by the other person. i think the point michael is making in a way comes down to how buddhist language does not address the full range of experiences that constitutues the human process, indeed, it is often quite negative toward many of them. i think he is suggesting its lexical mores are insufficient as a spiritual language for most people, again, the issue is not that the buddhist approach is incorrect about the domain of experience it focuses upon, just that its focus doesn’t EMBODY the whole spectrum of processes that make up a life, because it denies their authenticity.
i find this to be a genuine problem.
“If we are fixed on what is “true” at an early age we are resisting the process of learning/unlearning and thus put a cap on our growth. Humility, respect and flexibility are sometimes difficult to come by when our personality has been structured to protect itself for reasons of insecurity.”
very good words for me to hear as a 20 yr. old myself!
and of course this whole exchange is part of that growth process.
it is exciting to contemplate the magnitude of learning that awaits through the portal of every moment.
thanks.-christopher
p.s. somehow the quote i was responding to got cut out of my post — it was this:
“That is not a pre-natal vs. post-natal distinction as you suggest – it is a distinction that arises within the post-natal.”
<>
it seems that is quite like what was i was trying to say in my posts below, that the rejection of fear as false could only arise out of the post-natal consciousness, whereas the the “true” expression of pre-natal IS those “innocent feelings” of the life into which it flows, which are only made “false” by a post-natal reactionary divisiveness/constriction.
is this close to what you are suggesting?
-christopher
