--- In [email protected], "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], new.morning <no_reply@> > wrote: <snip> > > Certainly, you can proceed to test Tom's hyptheses, if you care > to. I > > would be eager and all eyes if you set up an experiment to test the > > hypothesis. We will see if the war in Iraq stops. We will see if Tom > > has uncovered the new physics. But first, perhaps the original > > question posed of you, and still unanswered, could be tested: > whether > > you could stop the war in Iraq if you desired, if all of your > desires > > are easily fulfilled. > > Of course it would, if we truly desired it; I believe I have > mentioned here that I have time and again seen instantaneous > manifestations of our desires on the global -- actually, universal -- > scale.
My friends on Owsley acid used to see similar things. Can you offer up any more validation of your subjective vision than they did (which was not much.) In fact, it's become pretty clear that all of us are operating > from that level all the time, only usually it is in what we might > call the state of "deep sleep" (but which we might also call the > causal realm), so we remain unconscious that all this drama is a > fulfillment of our own writing, direction and production :-) Again, a pretty vision and story. Any substantive validation? > > And/or your wholeness swallowing particles > > effect exercise to heal iraq. > > Everything affects everything else, IME :-) Yes, but it doesn't not follow that in any way that your wholeness swallowing particles effect / exercises have any significant effect on to healing iraq. Your visions probably make you feel good -- perhaps it brings meaning to your life. But do you have any validation that such mental exercises have improved the situaion in Iraq? > > > As far as BK's technique, I have used it for several years, studied > > two of her books, and I like her method and approach. As we have > > discussed, I found it useful to quiet the monkey mind of > > judgements.Though apparently, according to you and Tom, I have been > > misusing the BK technique. A premise I see BK laughing deeply about, > > but I take your word for my errors. Thus I have started to use a > > offshoot method, thats works better for my interests. > > Would that be the Wok? :-) Truly, that was the most brilliant joke I > have seen here in a long time -- pretending to be against tamas and > inertia, while actually espousing it and loving it far better than I! > I bow to the Master! :-) I am glad that you got something useful from it. I got something different from you. But it is interesting to cough up something, and then objectively look at it from different angles -- and compare notes with others. Though your notes, your perception, doesn't "resonate" with me. What I have gotten, and am continuing to get from the Wok "manifestion" (upchuck in your view, I surmise) is a useful view and perspective. It has made, for me, the universe come (more) alive and connected. > > And, as I have said before, IMO, I find that you have taken what she > > says, extended it to fit your world view, proclaiming it to be her > > approach. C'est la vie. But I may be wrong. In any event, either way > > is not an earth shaking consequence. > > Not just the earth, true -- IME the consequences shake the entire > universe :-) Will the universe shakes with every step you take. Surrendering to Rory at every step. Not my trip, but glad it works for you. > > > Perhaps this IS the > > > new > > > > physics. Stop the presses -- The REAL source of cause and > effect has > > > > been found. > > > > > > No, no, you were right, Richard -- your Wok is the way to > go! "Don't > > > love what IS, what is is the rotting corpse of God" -- priceless! > A > > > perfect recipe for continued denial and suffering! Talk about > loving > > > the status quo! :-) You seem to be mocking my view. And implying that I should have a different view. Yours perhaps? If such (possibly)internal judgemental dismissivness and imperatives work for you -- go for it. > > I love your continued recasting of my most positive insights in > terms > > of suffering, denial -- with a wonderful snap of one-upmanship and > > smugness. It is what makes you so endearing. > > Yes, you have reminded me that it actually IS a lot of fun to laugh > at myself! (If indeed you're not laughing with me on this one.) I > have to thank you for that too -- Again, I bow to the Master :-) I laugh a lot too. (thogh some see it as anger. Go figure. (or translated to a more primal language, "WTF?" > >The persistence of your > > story, your seeing denial and suffering everywhere. As you have > said, > > its all projection -- you can (not should) do the math. > > Oh, trust me -- You are providing me endless fun and delight and self- > discovery! :-) I thought you had already discovered the farthest shore. > > And I appreciate your being a sounding board, for my, at first, > > humorous antitode to the extremes of a BK view I read here. But as I > > let the idea of the Wok unfold, it has provided some quite useful > > insights for me. My view is envigorated. So thank you for that. > > You're very welcome; happy to be of service! And you have most > definitely invigorated mine; many thanks for that :-) > > Love Us Always :-) Riding in front of the the crest of the wave of emergent infinite possibilities -- not lamenting the dimished (aka"dead") part of the wave already past. I just wave good-by. If you stay "in the wave" it passses by you. Leaving you with lots of tangled seaweed and sharks. As jerry once said, "You gotta keep moving or it will catch up with you." -- Waving, with all affection..
