Tantra-Induced Delusional Syndrome ("TIDS")

[Sounder]

One thing about a discussion board is that we are willingly exposing our shadow (or our relationship to superego perhaps?) for self examination and critique from others.

AD does not seem to care about engaging in this messy process.

Perhaps his is the more sensible approach.

[undead]

One thing about a discussion board is that we are willingly exposing our shadow (or our relationship to superego perhaps?) for self examination and critique from others.

AD does not seem to care about engaging in this messy process.

Perhaps his is the more sensible approach.

I increasingly try to take this approach, because I would rather not insert myself into the conversation when it isn't absolutely necessary. An intellectual discussion does not necessarily need to be a social garden party and is inevitably better without protracted bickering. I think that AD's practice of ignoring people instead of arguing is a wise practice in general, not only on message boards. And like Joe said, this is a trans-personal thread and we are discussing the material with non-local communication via mutual reference in the logos. This is a conversation without ego, or as little ego as possible. And Sim, if you would bother to go back through and read the whole thread you would understand that your complaining about it is totally unfounded.

And yes, there are certainly cases of people having delusions implanted in their minds using tantric practices, both sexual and Buddhist. I don't think it should be a DSM entry, but there is nothing wrong with having a thread about it. So stop whining, please. You can just ignore the thread if you really want to.

[Simulist]

One thing about a discussion board is that we are willingly exposing our shadow (or our relationship to superego perhaps?) for self examination and critique from others.

AD does not seem to care about engaging in this messy process.

Perhaps his is the more sensible approach.

I see where you're coming from on this, and I even resonate with it to some degree.

At the same time, these "critiques from others" so many of us at times become so sensitive about are really just words on a computer screen, usually written in response to other words on a computer screen — and there's never any guarantee at all that the original, intended meaning (or even the content itself) being respnded to was ever even understood.

Maybe another sensible approach is just not to worry too much about what other people think, and just hope that they (and we) sometimes do.

[undead]

A man can keep silence in such a ways that no one will even notice it. The whole point is that we say a good deal too much. If we limited ourselves to what is actually necessary, this alone would be keeping the silence. And it is the same with everything else, with food, with pleasures, with sleep; with everything there is a limit to what is necessary. After this "sin" begins. This is something that must be grasped, a "sin" is something which is not necessary.

[Simulist]

A man can keep silence in such a ways that no one will even notice it. The whole point is that we say a good deal too much. If we limited ourselves to what is actually necessary, this alone would be keeping the silence. And it is the same with everything else, with food, with pleasures, with sleep; with everything there is a limit to what is necessary. After this "sin" begins. This is something that must be grasped, a "sin" is something which is not necessary.

"Sins" are invented means of social control.

Individuals are best-advised to inform themselves in given situations concerning what to do.

[undead]

I very soon saw that the struggle with the habit of talking, of speaking, in general, more than is necessary, could become the center of gravity of work on oneself because this habit touched everything, penetrated everything, and was for many people the least noticed. It was very curious to observe how this habit (I say "habit" simply for lack of another word, it would be more correct to say "this sin" or "this misfortune") at once took possession of everything no matter what a man might begin to do.

If you already know what is wrong and do it, you commit a sin that is difficult to redress. The chief means of happiness in this life is the ability to consider outwardly always, inwardly never.

“Sins exist only for people who are on the Way or approaching the Way. And then sin is what stops a man, helps him to deceive himself and to think he is working when he is simply asleep. Sin is what puts a man to sleep when he has already decided to awaken …”

[Sounder]

Undead wrote…

I think that AD's practice of ignoring people instead of arguing is a wise practice in general

Does the binary need to be ignoring or arguing? Where is a place for engagement or discussion in this recipe? Long ago when AD was doing a series of copy-pasta scare articles about the threat of White power Nazis, I introduced the idea that the threat from these cartoon Nazis was infinitesimal compared to the power and very real threat to humanity of real Nazis who did not dress or sound at all like Nazis of that picture book. This gets to issues of form and substance. AD’s response was to simply continue.
Whatever, but that's not the kind of thing that will build respect with me.

Ignoring people is not a wise practice, it is rude.

Sounder wrote:One thing about a discussion board is that we are willingly exposing our shadow (or our relationship to superego perhaps?) for self examination and critique from others.

AD does not seem to care about engaging in this messy process.

Perhaps his is the more sensible approach.

Simulist wrote…
I see where you're coming from on this, and I even resonate with it to some degree.

I am a proponent of looking at the shadow. AD’s approach may be sensible but it does not seem growth oriented to me.

At the same time, these "critiques from others" so many of us at times become so sensitive about are really just words on a computer screen, usually written in response to other words on a computer screen — and there's never any guarantee at all that the original, intended meaning (or even the content itself) being responded to was ever even understood.

Big up on this. I get all kind of hostility projected my way on this board. By ‘checking’ my reaction things can be learned about my own thinking.

Maybe another sensible approach is just not to worry too much about what other people think, and just hope that they (and we) sometimes do.

Variety is good.

G.I. Gurdjieff wrote:A man can keep silence in such a ways that no one will even notice it. The whole point is that we say a good deal too much. If we limited ourselves to what is actually necessary, this alone would be keeping the silence. And it is the same with everything else, with food, with pleasures, with sleep; with everything there is a limit to what is necessary. After this "sin" begins. This is something that must be grasped, a "sin" is something which is not necessary.

But this is a discussion board.

[Simulist]

G.I. Gurdjieff wrote:A man can keep silence in such a ways that no one will even notice it. The whole point is that we say a good deal too much. If we limited ourselves to what is actually necessary, this alone would be keeping the silence. And it is the same with everything else, with food, with pleasures, with sleep; with everything there is a limit to what is necessary. After this "sin" begins. This is something that must be grasped, a "sin" is something which is not necessary.

But this is a discussion board.

You are exactly right.

[Sounder]

undead wrote...

This is a conversation without ego, or as little ego as possible.

Good luck on that one.

So lets see, no conversation= no ego. It seems to me, more like passive aggressiveness for folk on a discussion board to answer another with quotes from wise men rather that taking the trouble to form (and take responsibility for) words of ones own composition that address the issues at hand.

Yeah, the wisest of wise men got your back. Wow, can't touch that.

[Hammer of Los]

...

I always liked you Sounder.

Keep up the Gorilla Ontology!

...

[Sounder]

Thanks for your support Hammer, and all the best to you and your loved ones also.

[undead]

[Hammer of Los]

...

The Undead is and has been for some years now, the Wisest of the Wise.

Hail to thee oh Lich.

...

[Hammer of Los]

...

INTEGRATE

...

[Hammer of Los]

...

Nothing to see here!

...