017 - House of Cards
05-05-2014, 08:45 AM
Post: #11
RE: 017 - House of Cards
(05-05-2014 07:27 AM)regedit Wrote:  In this podcast you guys mentioned that you both might have been a little aggressive with AYP, and I am pretty sure you mentioned that in a previous podcast. I was wondering what you meant by that. Was it that you took on new practices taught by Yogani at a fast pace? Was it that you didn't dial things back with self-pacing when you probably should have? Was it that you were performing the practices for longer amounts of time than suggested (i.e. 40 minutes of deep meditation and 15 minutes of spinal breathing)? As someone looking for a smooth ride, I'd love to learn from any mistakes that you think you might have made. Thanks!

Hi Regedit,

I'll let Brett speak for himself, but everything you mentioned above with the exception of the "longer amounts of time" is what I was doing. And you could add in there doing more than 2 practices a day as I was doing 2 personal practices a day and then teaching a third on most days as well. So, I added too many practices too fast (and when I say "too many" I mean "all of the"), did not dial back when I should have, and was doing more practice sessions in a day than I should have been. I was able to keep this pace for 5-6 years before hitting the wall and having to (essentially) drop all practices completely and am still there today.

If you are looking for a smooth ride, I recommend not following my example. ;D

snd
Quote
05-07-2014, 10:31 AM
Post: #12
RE: 017 - House of Cards
Thanks man - I appreciate it. It sounds like you were pretty gung ho Biggrin
Quote
05-24-2014, 12:08 PM (This post was last modified: 05-24-2014 12:47 PM by CarsonZi.)
Post: #13
RE: 017 - House of Cards
Here is a video that begins to show from a scientific perspective what I was trying to talk about when I was experiencing the dissolution of the time/space concept in the middle of recording this podcast: http://consciouslifenews.com/time-illusi.../1170290/# It's simplistic and still easy to rip apart from many perspectives, but it could potentially give a taste to some for what I was trying to explain (poorly) in the House of Cards podcast.

snd

The theory of entropy seems to be an issue in this discussion, at least from my perspective. I believe that entropy should not be from "order to chaos" but more like "ordered chaos" or "chaotic order" or maybe "chaos>order>chaos>order>ad infinitum" or maybe "chaos>order>chaos>order" in a circle instead of on a line.
Quote
05-25-2014, 09:10 AM (This post was last modified: 05-25-2014 09:25 AM by brett.)
Post: #14
RE: 017 - House of Cards
Great video.. I was interested to see that they only spoke of a static past/present/future, without the possibility of multiple outcomes, also all happening at once. Would you say your experience falls in line with this static outlook?

I also wonder if science itself is a path and what percentage of scientists, through scientific examination (inquiry), realize this type of thing through direct experience and not just on paper. The more I learn about Einstein, the more it seems like he saw the big picture, and I wonder if other accomplished scientists of the past were in similar shoes. As we continue to move forward toward the junction of science and spirituality, will more scientists experience their findings as a side effect of these ideas and inquiries coming to light?

Balls.
Quote
05-25-2014, 02:52 PM
Post: #15
RE: 017 - House of Cards
(05-25-2014 09:10 AM)brett Wrote:  Great video.. I was interested to see that they only spoke of a static past/present/future, without the possibility of multiple outcomes, also all happening at once. Would you say your experience falls in line with this static outlook?

I would say that the video did not touch on anything beyond the physical nature of 3D reality and is not quite inline with my personal experience as it doesn't go into the nature of consciousness. That said, the video points to it. If you continue to take the inquiry that was started with the video further you will start to get to questions like "How long is a moment and who determines that?" and that can push one even further into the discovery that there really is no such thing as "objective reality" and everything is subjective (aka perception based).

(05-25-2014 09:10 AM)brett Wrote:  I also wonder if science itself is a path and what percentage of scientists, through scientific examination (inquiry), realize this type of thing through direct experience and not just on paper. The more I learn about Einstein, the more it seems like he saw the big picture, and I wonder if other accomplished scientists of the past were in similar shoes. As we continue to move forward toward the junction of science and spirituality, will more scientists experience their findings as a side effect of these ideas and inquiries coming to light?

Balls.

I think that anything can be a path. Science included and not just the "hard" sciences either... I think psychology and other "soft" sciences can also be a path and can lead at least some to "self-realization." Tesla, Einstein, Jung, etc etc are all examples of people using science as a path to self I think.

snd
Quote


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)