Esoteric, (Hidden,) Knowledge

So you are agreeing with me then that the Scientific Community has its own pretentiousness. That's great to hear.

I will check that Scientist out.

You should check out the '2012' forum in regards to the other things that you brought up regarding Science studying Consciousness as it is the foundation for my Hypotheses and/or Spell towards the notion that the new Mayan Cycle is going to be bringing with it a lot of studies by Science into these realms because it's the next step of evolution and that the Mayans knew what they were doing with their Calendar. As Writer has already pointed out, there was a Science to their creation of the Calendar, as Science has always existed.

 

All regional stages of coming to the awareness of the same thing. It is as vain for an aboriginal to call an airplane pilot a god as it is for an airplane pilot to call an aboriginal primitive. You don't know anything if you think you know everything in resistance to everyone else. These are elements of self deception. the universe is every bit informed.

 

The potential to know and understand may well be latent in everyone. But that's not the point with traditional shamanism. The general rule seems to be that shamans don't choose their path, rather it chooses them. There's been some speculation that these might just be the same people we today regard as crazy - or moving in that direction at least.
Sometimes a shaman receives the calling as a result of an illness.
But whatever the case, this is an institution that has been around for tens of thousands of years at least. There are many cultural variables, and also some patterns that seem to be universal.

Needless to say, I'm not advocating that we can or should seek to go back to tribal shamanism as it existed in traditional cultures. If I've understood you correctly, then I would agree that in our contemporary context, knowledge, spiritual or magical experience has to be open to all. To have some understanding of shamanism may be helpful in that for some people. To be your own shaman would be the goal for anyone wishing to integrate this stuff into modern life.

 

And I'm also guaranteeing that the more that Science begins to study Consciousness, the more that it will undeniably bump into Spirituality. There's no way around it and no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

And also, regarding the Scientific Method, this is exactly what I meant by the snowflakes thing. If everything must be repeatable, then how do the randomness of each snowflake fit into the framework of the Scientific Method? How does the fact that the weather changes every day fit into the paradigm of the Scientific Method? There's a ton of infinity going on in the Universe that isn't repeatable.

 

It is why I abandoned a preference or an accreditation, I am my own measure, I know what I know and may also be confused about things which requires debate by comparison. Know one outside of you will suffice for your own conclusion. Fuck anyone that can't take the cosmic joke. Discover that you are real and not in doubt.

 

I thought you were going to "let Writer win" China. Was that stated as deception or do you feel that simple endurance with the issue will make up for lack of content?

 

BlackBillBlake you've got some great posts. I would agree that these paths choose you, you don't choose it. I would say my form of illness is the destabilizing effects of Kundalini. I didn't choose that shit. It chose me. And I can see now that it was dormant within from a very young age.

I would say that anyone has the potential to become a shaman or a magician and to have a Kundalini awakening but the idea of it choosing you makes sense simply in the fact of whether it begins to consume your life or not.

 

You can find sheldrake on youtube. He's worth checking out. He did a TED talk that TED later took down - but someone put it up again

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg





The Maya were fascinating.

 

Not quite sure where my lack of content has been that you guys keep claiming that I have. I've put up plenty of content ever since the '2012' forum. I've gotten as specific as possible all the way up to including my own personal experiences because that is my own business and I keep that to myself. And I'm not asking or seeing any more content from Writer than me.

 

You want to argue about the point of divergence? Everything perceived is known through observation. Knowledge is being shared or shared being. A taxonomical certainly is derived by how things appear the same. a particular distinction is made by detecting difference. How each of these fit together is defined in purpose.

Next issue please. Let's not hold our hand in the fire until our skin is charred and our bones are blackened!

 

If we can get over the tit for tat about who is right and who is wrong and realize that reality is all the same and we are all real then we can start to learn of our shared being.

 

Content:

 

To defend yourself is to attack your opportunity to become familiar with what you are looking at.
Esoteric spell. Something to think about.
There are no attacks, we are energy behaving energetically.

 

Dope

They say the shamans dance in the heart of the fire.

And never get burned.

But I'm not here to argue. I hear what you say, in so far as I can decode it. I just say things out of my own individual cache of experiences, knowledge, disinformation etc. I'm not trying to prove anything or prove anyone else wrong.

 

"well, even in an evolutionary Universe, why shouldn't the laws themselves evolve?" -Sheldrake

"Magic is the Science of the Future" -Colin Wilson

"The Merging of Science and Spirituality will happen in the post-2012 Mayan Cycle" -me

 

Not sure how that equals content. That's just Writer talking about Science. And I've been talking about Magick.

How does Science explain how different tear drops have way different molecular structures in accordance to the feelings going on within the person of the tears being shed?

As I already said, the only point with the original post about the snowflakes is that the Scientific Method can't measure a repeatability in every snowflake being different. Nor can it use any claim of repeatability to explain where and when the snowflake will land, and WHY it landed there. Please apply all of that to the Scientific Method. Hell, even try to use Math alone to try to explain that. It can't be done. And if somebody does try to come up with some formula for it, then what's the difference between that and me coming up with a Magickal formula or explanation for it? Writer already admitted that it's all One anyway, so how can one formula be considered more correct than any other? As Writer already said, Science has always existed, so any explanation for it throughout all of time, whether it be Mythological, Religious, Poetic, Magickal, would equal Science.

 

If you never get burned then how do you know what getting burned is? Speak for the shaman if you are a shaman. Your determinations are history. I am not scolding you my honor, without you I know less
You needn't defend yourself. I am just in keeping with the intent of the thread. To discover what we don't know, esoteric knowledge.
Time is our most valuable commodity which is why we heard the saying, "how long must I remain with you".

 

Instead of concentrating on points of divergence, build on points of agreement.

 

So basically in that TED Talk he is saying that he feels that Science is about to undergo a Renaissance, and that the subject of the mind, brain, and consciousness is currently a large area of debate? That kind of reminds of me what I was suggesting is going to happen in the post-2012 Mayan Cycle.

Why was that banned by the way?

 

I think the 'esoteric' (if I dare use the word) meaning of the fire dance might include the fact that only one who has been entirely burned up previously can perform said terpsicorean feat.
All the combustible material has been exhausted. Removed by the spirits when they dismembered the body, burned up and replaced before re-assembling it.

But more to the point is that I used the metaphor in an attempt to lighten the tone.

Can I speak for the shaman? I can speak for myself. But in speaking for myself, I may be also speaking for the shaman.