X-Ftn-To: Damir Orlic

Damir Orlic wrote:
>>>Huh ... da mi je jos znati zbog cega je ovaj thread dosao na tako
>>>veliki prioritet. :)
>>
>>Zanima me koji ce se sve kreteni javiti, a buduci da ih imam na skipu,
>>trebao bi ih otamo maknuti, a ovo mi je prakticnije.
>
>Dobro je to .... ali mi nije jasno zasto te zanimaju kreteni? :)

A cuj, da bi se protiv necega borio moras s tim biti upoznat. Osim
toga, uvijek postoji mogucnost da me netko iznenadi s necim pametnim.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Marcus E Engdahl

mengdahl@cc.hut.fi (Marcus E Engdahl) wrote:
>>>Life has value even if we are 'just' lumps of biomatter.
>
>>Life has value only because it serves as means of Divine
>>manifestation.
>
>What does that mean?

Oh, probably something that doesn't exist in your world, either.

>>If the Divine isn't recognized, there's not much
>>difference between a live cow and a dead one.
>
>A human being without religion is like a fish without a bicycle.

Who said anything about religion? Religion is mostly obsolete. God,
however, is not.

>Life
>can be valued greatly without the 'Divine', whatever that means.

Actually, without the Divine, there would be no life, and nobody to
value anything.

>>>Is seeing prana similar to seeing auras, which seems mostly to be
>>>looking at after-images?
>
>>You seem to already know everything so who am I to tell you. ;)
>
>It seems you know everything also. You are not very old, how long have
>you known practically everything about reality with absolute
>certainty?

How do you know how old I am?

>>:))) No, but you are.
>
>I was asking because religion seems to be the central thing in your
>life.

Actually, I'm not religious at all. But, God is central in my life.
Since that is so, I don't need a religion to interpret God to me.

>>You happen to fit my definition of a cult: a
>>narrowminded, restricted perspective of the reality, that is
>>maintained by denying yourself a different perspective of things;
>
>And your personal worldview that includes a lot of religious
>handwaving and talk about God is somehow more real, less narrowminded
>etc.?

Actually, you described yourself; it's just that your religion is
atheistic.

>>since some people seem to be happy with such a worldview,
>
>Yes, I'm quite happy with my worldview.

So, why are you talking to me, go with your business.

>>I do not
>>object if you keep it, but don't try to impose it on others, because
>>not all share your enthusiasm regarding your views.
>
>Are you saying that I should not become a teacher and write books
>about spiritual matters, like you have done?

If it makes you feel good, do it, by all means. Just don't expect me
to give those things high value in my life.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Damir Orlic

Damir Orlic wrote:
>>>Tako dakle ... nisam u kilfajlu ipak. :-)
>>
>>Jesi, ali ovaj thread mi je na watchu s vecim prioritetom.
>
>Huh ... da mi je jos znati zbog cega je ovaj thread dosao na tako
>veliki prioritet. :)

Zanima me koji ce se sve kreteni javiti, a buduci da ih imam na skipu,
trebao bi ih otamo maknuti, a ovo mi je prakticnije.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Gwailoh-9

Gwailoh-9 wrote:
>its not the one i was thinking of, looks good though.

Very tasty, too. :)

>Say, Is it common for people in your area to collect wild mushrooms
>for food?

Yes, reasonably so. Unfortunately, there are people who know very
little about mushrooms and still collect them, and so lots of people
get poisoned. Fortunately, only one or two species are actually lethal
(amanita phalloides and cortinarius orellanus), and fortunately the
majority recovers with no serious consequences. If they come to the
doctor in time, that is. There are antidotes.

>Did you learn from you family, or was it a hobby you've
>developed on your own?

Well, my family used to walk through forests and parks when I was
still a kid, and since we used to find lots of mushrooms, we bought
several books about them and learned together. I knew about 200
species when I was younger; now it's about 50.
We collected only the species that taste excellent, about 10 of them,
and if there were mushrooms at all, we could always find enough to
make a huge lunch. However, cleaning a huge mountain of mushrooms from
the dirt and ants and small snails and stuff, after an 8 hour walk,
well, I'd say it was the least favourable part of the experience. :))
Finding them was always more fun than eating them, because they are
often hidden under the leaves and branches any you need to train you
eyes in order to find anything at all. Great fun for kids.

>In Canada & Australia, such a thing would be _very_ uncommon.

I find this surprising; actually, this is good news, coz if I go to
Canada, I'll be sure that a million of folks didn't turn every leaf in
a forest looking for them; I'd probably pick enough for lunch in five
minutes. :)) No such luck here. But, recently I'm a bit cautious about
mushrooms, they don't fit in my diet and I tend to leave them out...
too much tellural prana.

>foraging. It would be great if our culture here supported it!

:) Make your own culture, then. But be sure to read lots of
illustrated books about them, the ones written by the guys with lots
of experience. Once you get the hang of it, it can be extreme fun, and
you get to walk through the nature a lot.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Marcus E Engdahl

mengdahl@cc.hut.fi (Marcus E Engdahl) wrote:
>I agree. My interpretation of the spiritual experience is that it is a
>purely psychological phenomenon.

Experiencing taste when you drink coffee is also a purely
pyschological phenomenon. However, that doesn't mean that there is no
coffee.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Marcus E Engdahl

mengdahl@cc.hut.fi (Marcus E Engdahl) wrote:
>>Well, the concept of yourself as a lump of biomatter is kinda
>>depressing. Whether you live or die makes no big difference, just some
>>chemicals shifting positions.
>
>Life has value even if we are 'just' lums of biomatter.

Life has value only because it serves as means of Divine
manifestation. If the Divine isn't recognized, there's not much
difference between a live cow and a dead one.

>>I never said I _can_ do astral travel, since I can't. I'm just
>>sensitive to the astral substance; I can see prana if I choose to
>>look;
>
>Is seeing prana similar to seeing auras, which seems mostly to be
>looking at after-images?

You seem to already know everything so who am I to tell you. ;) None
of those things exist in your world, and therefore they can't be
proven to you. If they are, you'll just say that the evidence didn't
convince you. That's why Randi will never lose his millions; he
actually invested millions of dollars in not seeing anything beyond
the physical. That's a mighty reason for not seeing it.

>>>surely you can read a text that a random
>>>stranger writes on paper, and places in a locked room.
>
>>Nobody I know can do that. The physical mind simply doesn't have the
>>resolution necessary.
>
>Are you saying that in reality nobody can see anything that could be
>verified in any way? Can you come up with a situation where one could
>prove that they see something real?

Actually, all things that I describe _can_ be verified in one way or
another, but, not all are able to verify them.

>>And, you see, _they_ find no need to argue with me, because they think
>>that learning from me is a much better way to use my presence while
>>I'm still around.
>
>Are you in some kind of a cult?

:))) No, but you are. You happen to fit my definition of a cult: a
narrowminded, restricted perspective of the reality, that is
maintained by denying yourself a different perspective of things;
since some people seem to be happy with such a worldview, I do not
object if you keep it, but don't try to impose it on others, because
not all share your enthusiasm regarding your views.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Damir Orlic

Damir Orlic wrote:
>>Cuj, ja i inace nisam imao previsoko misljenje o Tvojoj pameti, ali
>>ovo je vec fakat smijesno, naime daj malo razmisli o tome sto pises.
>>Ti u stvari kritiziras ljude koje poznajes i za koje _znas_ da im se
>>nista ne moze prigovoriti, kritiziras ih nekom kretenu kojemu su
>>zaboravili staviti mozak kad su ga pravili, a sve zato sto si
>>frustriran.To je sve skupa tako jadno da bi se ja zrigao sam nad
>> sobom na sam naTvojem mjestu. Odi u neku mracnu rupu i zakopaj se.
>
>Tako dakle ... nisam u kilfajlu ipak. :-)

Jesi, ali ovaj thread mi je na watchu s vecim prioritetom.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Vicko Vitasovic

"Vicko Vitasovic" wrote:
>Da, ali to opet prosudjes na osnovu toga sto ti mislis sto je misticno
>iskustvo. A moze se misliti da je misticno iskustvo kad te netko nokautira
>ili kad "kad napraviš kontrakciju genitalija kod završetka mokrenja" u cemu
>nevidim nista nadnaravno.

A jebote, pa normalno da se radi o tome, ako odes u crkvu i pojedes
onaj keks i napises da si sad pojeo misticno tijelo Kristovo, i da je
to misticno iskustvo pa si sad ispunjen Bogom, jasno je da to oni koji
vjeruju u "laznu mistiku" u kojoj svijest bude ispunjena neposrednom
vizijom Boga, i u kojoj se opaza temelj stvarnosti, nece prepoznati
kao mistiku, pa zato se ljudi i sprdaju s Tebe. Nikad nisi vidio Boga
niti nista pametno dozivio, ali pokusavas se nekako posrati po onima
koji jesu. Ma mrak.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Marcus E Engdahl

mengdahl@cc.hut.fi (Marcus E Engdahl) wrote:
>>mengdahl@cc.hut.fi (Marcus E Engdahl) wrote:
>>>I'd like to hear your opinion about experiences and feelings ans how much we
>>>should trust them.
>
>>It's very simple, actually. If the nature of the experience is such,
>>that it allows doubt, then doubt it, because it deserves nothing
>>better. But, some things are beyond doubt.
>
>But you should realize that experiences as such are never beyond doubt. In
>psychotic states people often believe in very strange things beyond any doubt
>(God is often a part of these beliefs). If you feel something to be true beyond
>doubt, it still might be untrue.

This is a pointless discussion. You don't know what I'm talking about,
and you still express opinions on it. Just think about it, for a
second. Your senses and your mind provide you with a picture of
reality, yes? The senses respond to the reality and provide the mind
with information, and then mind comes up to conclusions regarding
what's outside, yes? It's OK to be skeptical because either the senses
or the mind can trick you, yes?

But, in genuine spiritual experience, you get _direct_ insight of the
reality. You are _there_, and you are _it_. There is no perception,
just reality. There's nothing to be skeptical about, because there's
nothing but the truth. There's not even the process of knowing it.
Of course, when you get out of that state, it pays to be skeptical
about your interpretations of it, and this is where most folks goof
up.

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org

X-Ftn-To: Zoran Znidaric

"Zoran Znidaric" wrote:
>Moze, toliko je odrastao, da ju treba poceti i koristiti.
>Rekao sam mu: ili si moj frend, ili frend patera Rufusa, ne mozes imati oba,
>na tebi je da izaberes.
>Ako izabere pravu stvar, prosvijetlit ce se potpuno, u suprotnom sjebat ce
>se kao nikad prije.

Daj jebote razmisli malo, ako izabere Tebe potpuno ce se
prosvijetliti; pa Ti si izabrao sebe pa se jos nisi prosvijetlio. :)

--
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org