Hi Joe,

I have had a good read of many of the posts on this site now, and noticed that you feature in a high percentage of them.

There seems to be a bad feeling towards you from many quarters; some see you as a challenge, some an annoyance, for others you are despised.

So I find myself wondering; what do you get out of this forum, what drives you to return day after day?

Thanks

[quote]Hi Joe,

I have had a good read of many of the posts on this site now, and noticed that you feature in a high percentage of them.

There seems to be a bad feeling towards you from many quarters; some see you as a challenge, some an annoyance, for others you are despised.

So I find myself wondering; what do you get out of this forum, what drives you to return day after day?

Thanks

[/quote]

Well, regardless of any interpretation of my presence and purpose.
Without any prejudice and preconceptions on my part.
I was invited here as point of interest.
What brings me back day to day?
 Curiosity and inspiration.
 Ever do any painting? You lay out the canvass and start. Then through the many inspirational ideas and frustrations at some point you come to the conclusion that you are finished.
I guess I'm not done yet, the canvass still provides incentive and inspiration, so I continue to paint.[img]http://www.feebleminds-gifs.com/daffy.gif[/img]
What brings you here?

Joe said:
"Without any prejudice and preconceptions on my part. "

Me:  Too obvious to reply to.
Joe, post with some respect for others.  If you will not regard the people here with respect, then I shall do the distasteful and do it for you.

John

[quote]
Joe said:
"Without any prejudice and preconceptions on my part. "

Me:  Too obvious to reply to.
Joe, post with some respect for others.  If you will not regard the people here with respect, then I shall do the distasteful and do it for you.

John
[/quote]

Shawn,
Curb your dog!

Well at first i thought that if Shawn was going to do me a favour and put a link on mind-brain to my website, then the least i could do, apart from reciprocating, was to join up and see what was going on.

Then I read some posts, and thought of some of my own to post, answers were mostly predictable and threads soon turned into arguments.

But by far the most interesting thing that i noticed was that betwixt the maelstrom there was this guy named Joe.

He had built for himself an online persona that wasn't wasn't particularly nice to deal with, but he had some insite and experience and was potentially better qualified to be here than many of his "competitors".

I want to know what drives this guy?
I want to know if he is genuine?
I want to know if he truely is on a path to enlightenment or if he's just playing the "yes, but ..." game to amuse himself?
Most of all i want to know if this guy has anything to offer me on my honourable quest of no name?

Hey LAZ,
Welcome.  I don't know who you are yet.  Pick and choose.  this is a small midway so far.  Your choice.
Migraines are a bitch.  I used to have something called Horton's histiminic cephalalgia.  Cluster headaches.
Only way to get rid of them was to go down for the count.  The bright lights wer entertaining, but, not enjoyable since I knew what was coming.
Joe's chatter is BS so far, as he does not deliver and his behavior is childlike.  It is disappointing,  his patter makes him sound wise, but his follow through is lame.
My opinion,  I thought him to be a potential genuine article when he started out.  He was cresting and I thought, Boy, if I could calm this guy down out of the trees, maybe he could tell us something.  But is all rehearsed and repetitive.  Maybe you can extract something from him that resembles reason.  I think he may be trolling the site looking for recruits.  Don't know? he plays his card close to the vest.  Maybe you will find the gold.

Synchroox = Synchronox?

Or are you someone else trying to imitate him?
Why do you speak that way?

Laz, on what grounds is Joe 'better qualified to be here than many of his "competitors." ' I don't like the tone of that statement.

Sean, be careful with the quotes, i'm not looking for a fight here. I said:

[quote]He had built for himself an online persona that wasn't wasn't particularly nice to deal with, but he had some insite and experience and was potentially better qualified to be here than many of his "competitors".
[/quote]

Thing is, i don't know who has what qualifications. All i know is that Joe has caught my attention more than anyone else here. I've not noticed you before now Sean.

As for Joe, i'm surprised he hasn't answered my questions...

I want to know what drives you?
I want to know if you are genuine?
I want to know if you are truely is on a path to enlightenment or if he's just playing the "yes, but ..." game to amuse yourself?
Most of all i want to know if you have anything to offer me on my honourable quest of no name?

joe says he's flying, so be careful about him.  i came here before he did, so i could investigate his behavior from the beginning.  it's pretty much enlightening, you'll end up flying around like he does, kissing the feet of 800 years old gurus in the himalaya.

[quote]As for Joe, i'm surprised he hasn't answered my questions...

I want to know what drives you?
I want to know if you are genuine?
I want to know if you are truely is on a path to enlightenment or if he's just playing the "yes, but ..." game to amuse yourself?
Most of all i want to know if you have anything to offer me on my honourable quest of no name? [/quote]

What drove me to enlightenment was an overwhelming desire and passion to answer the questions of who and what I was.

Am I genuine? As genuine as you are.

I have had to give up the path to enlightenment to actually stand in the experience of it.
The path Still serves me and I serve it. What drives me now is pure inspiration, Total surrender to God and the voice of God.

As for your last question. You are always getting exactly what you need. Don't be so sure that you aren't getting the answers to your questions.
Those that have the ears to hear will hear. What you are capable of hearing and understanding will always come, you will have to allow for the process of growth and understanding to know more than what you can understand in this moment.

And if you want to know something ask me, rather than making statements about what you would like to know to another person or expecting to get an answer without asking the question.

Joe

Am I right in understanding that you believe only the self is truly real?  And if so, how do you define the self?

In answering these questions, you must avoid certain fallacies.  Firstly, the self cannot be defined as unity or harmony or totality of reality.  This is no different than saying that that the self, which is all that is real, is the only thing that is in fact truly real.  Such would be a circular argument.  Secondly, you must take into account the existence of change.  This is very important.  Either change exists and it is real, or it only appears to be real, in which case you must explain why change is only apparent.  Thirdly, you must describe how knowledge of what is real can be obtained without appealling solely to a mystical experience.  If a mystic experience is the only way gain knowledge of the real, we have no basis by which to discriminate between your particular mystical experience from someone else's, and therefore we have no means by which to obtain knowledge of the real unless we happen to have our own mystical experience which may or may not conform to yours or anyone else's--which is really no knowledge at all.

Plato himself (the father of all realism) was not immune to the above criticisms.  If you believe that your theory offers an improvement upon the traditional realisms and monism that denied the reality of the sense world, you must address these issues.

I will be interested in reading your response, especially if it happens to be direct, to the point, and in block format, although I will not hold you to those pet preferences.

I found some useful info in your post Joe, thanks.

I did find your comment at the end strange though:
[quote]And if you want to know something ask me, rather than making statements about what you would like to know to another person or expecting to get an answer without asking the question. [/quote]

Under the assumption that the Subject of this posting I started was Question for Joe! i didn't think to ask directly.  

As for the i want, i want, i want... These things are no easier to write than emails, and sometimes i don't think enough about how they can be read, so if i bruised your ego with the patter of the question, i'm sorry.

I would like to ask you one thing that has just sprung to mind:

Is your real personality outside of this board, the same as the persona you present here?

I can't say that i have every been taken with the notion of playing a different role on the internet to that of your real life; i.e. man plays woman, weakling plays hard, geek plays suave, stupid plays clever.

Warning. This post is long and subject to condemnation and deletion.

[quote]Joe

Am I right in understanding that you believe only the self is truly real?  And if so, how do you define the self? [/quote]
The Self is consciousness itself. It is the one single mind and creator of all personalities and ideas.

[quote]In answering these questions, you must avoid certain fallacies.  Firstly, the self cannot be defined as unity or harmony or totality of reality.  This is no different than saying that that the self, which is all that is real, is the only thing that is in fact truly real.  Such would be a circular argument.[/quote]
You negate the reality of what you don't believe in only because it is not your experience. If it is not your belief because it is not the popular belief then you are blinded by your own inability to stand outside of your own limitations and must expand beyond in order to move beyond, see beyond and hear beyond relative boundaries.
When I was a child, I spake as a child, thought as a child, but when I became a man I put away childish things. "I CORINTHIANS 13:11"
This passage in scripture represents the change in consciousness when the mind leaves its small interpretations of individuality behind for the awareness and fullness of the greater Self that is in all things. I know I used it before but it is always appropriate when taking into consideration the reality of evolution of conscious awareness.
[quote]Secondly, you must take into account the existence of change.  This is very important.  Either change exists and it is real, or it only appears to be real, in which case you must explain why change is only apparent.[/quote]
I must I must I must... You and the others want to pen me up in the same cage as you so you won't be lonely.
Change is a constant only in duality. Without the awareness of the One never changing ever present reality of the Unmanifest, all that is experienced is change. The mind has been since birth trained to follow the senses outward, away from the inner Self and the Subtle connections to the Self, into the gross manifest world of human mortality and duality.
Is it real? Yes in one sense if you can experience it, it is real, same as the subtler experiences of the unmanifest and the multidimensional aspects of the mind and its realities. Experiences are subject to levels of awareness. No two people experience the exact same thing at the same time. We share similar experiences and can co create and relate to what we experience together from our ability to resonate with the vibrations of thought and manifest reality.
What goes beyond thought and experience is also real and similarly resonates at subtler levels of the senses.
Just as a dog hears frquencies the human ear cannot hear and light and sound frequencies can go beyond physical abilities to see and hear even with scientific instruments we find that they are there when we look for them. Do we negate them because we don't experience them, or stay open to recieve them as our abilities evolve?
Change is part of the process of returning to awareness of the source as well as the change in awareness moving outward from the source. Change is the clash of thought streams colliding with the universe in manifestation and will continue as long as Mind is active.
Underlying all change is the One silent nature of the Transcendant isness and it never changes or goes anywhere. It is in all things active or not. It is even more real than anything that changes because it never changes. Experiences of it change but it never changes.'
Once the totality of the oneness is experienced in Union the secondary nature of its manifestations become known as a constant. In this the only thing that changes is awareness as it moves from one thought to another, giving the impression of time and change.
Change then becomes irrelevant and an illusion of perception.
[quote] Thirdly, you must describe how knowledge of what is real can be obtained without appealling solely to a mystical experience.  If a mystic experience is the only way gain knowledge of the real, we have no basis by which to discriminate between your particular mystical experience from someone else's, and therefore we have no means by which to obtain knowledge of the real unless we happen to have our own mystical experience which may or may not conform to yours or anyone else's--which is really no knowledge at all.[/quote]
Knowledge is relative, experiences are relative.
What you call mystical has no meaning to me other than your reference to something that you might imply is relative only to psychics, mystics, fakirs, magicians, soothsayers etc. etc.
The transcendental experiences are open to anyone that is open to them. With patience and guidance they can be experienced when the senses are turned inward.
The question is would you want to? Seanf I think recently made a statement,"From where I stand I enjoy the ups and downs and the contrasts of being human and in a body that is constantly changing." Or something to that effect.
10 years ago the only thing important to me was my Harley, staying stoned, and the x-files on friday night after the weeks work and doing as I pleased on the weekend. God was not part of any desire and all religions were full of whackos and boneheads.
My interpretations and personal desires and prejudices kept me from any interest other than my own.
What I have experienced since then I read about but of course they were subject to my beliefs and disbeliefs and no one can change anyones thoughts and ideas by presenting an idea that can't be experienced, but someone has to want to experience something and most of all desire to seek a change before they will give up what they hold onto as a truth because that is all they know.
I know from personal experience anytime I say no this can't be, something comes along to show me something different or more. But I have the desire to know and see the expansiveness of creation and all its possibilities.
I could be skeptical and say that wasn't real but why? because someone else didn't experience it?
I am constantly being given accounts of other peoples experiences and they are as real to them as mine are to me. I niether take away anothers experience or expect another to doubt or negate mine that has gone beyond the prejudice in thoughts and ideas that are strictly mainstream.
Consciousness at subtler levels is and has been studied scientifically with documents to attest to the physical changes in altered states, brainwave coherancy in meditation, reduced stress and aging, lowered metabolism and even stilled breath. The outer measurements are secondary to the inner experiences which cannot be measured or proven other than by experience. These states of consciousness can be experienced in another as easily as a married couple experiences each others emotions when they jump.
[quote]Plato himself (the father of all realism) was not immune to the above criticisms.  If you believe that your theory offers an improvement upon the traditional realisms and monism that denied the reality of the sense world, you must address these issues. [/quote]
These issues have been addressed throughout history and for the most part are not shared much beyond the gossip tables because there is no sense in trying to convince anyone that doesn't want to know about it or by their own limited senses can't comprehend it and so demands proof of anothers experience so they can know and understand.
You can't play the piano or even know what it is like unless you practice. You may hear it being played but you may or may not be interested in it or like it.
Such is the reality of free will and the world. Proof of God is in the tasting. Most have their own preconceptions in belief and disbelief and if they hold tight to them they aren't looking for much that exists outside of whatever box they have it wrapped up in.
Christ walked into towns after performing miracles and the people in them still didn't want or believe anything he had to say.
I still marvel in the ideas that mainstream Christianity maintains in the dream of the second coming. If Christ was to return and give all these people a crutch to take away all their need to do anything for themselves, the idea that they would even recognise him makes me laugh. Mainstream religions have its beliefs and its heros so sterotyped and boxed up they know just what God is supposed to act and look like, its just hilarious.

[quote]I will be interested in reading your response, especially if it happens to be direct, to the point, and in block format, although I will not hold you to those pet preferences. [/quote]
I would not be suprised if you did hold me to these preferences. You have in the past, and also held me in judgment based on your own experiences and the comparisons you have made in your understandings of my posts. Just as you have with your demands and expectations with your questions.

[quote]I found some useful info in your post Joe, thanks.

I did find your comment at the end strange though:

Under the assumption that the Subject of this posting I started was Question for Joe! i didn't think to ask directly.  

As for the i want, i want, i want... These things are no easier to write than emails, and sometimes i don't think enough about how they can be read, so if i bruised your ego with the patter of the question, i'm sorry.

I would like to ask you one thing that has just sprung to mind:

Is your real personality outside of this board, the same as the persona you present here?

I can't say that i have every been taken with the notion of playing a different role on the internet to that of your real life; i.e. man plays woman, weakling plays hard, geek plays suave, stupid plays clever.
[/quote]

 Don't worry about bruising my ego it wasn't part of the equation. I didn't take your casual remark in wondering about me to the person you mentioned it to seriously or as a question to answer, so I just thought I'd give you a prompt to be more direct to get my attention.

To answer your question. I am different with different people.
My parents are happy if I'm happy and are content to talk about their old age and their gardening. The students and groups I work with demand more from me than the average guy. As for the average guy, I can still talk about the weather but I don't have much interest in it or the desire.
So yes I am the same. As you might be able to tell there is a response for every situation and I am always the same person in every situation.

Ah! so you are a bona fide teacher? Where do you teach, and what level? I guess the subject is obvious, or is it?

I'm sorry about the next bit Joe my ego is getting the better of me here, but i will move on...

[quote]I didn't take your casual remark in wondering about me to the person you mentioned it to seriously as a question to answer[/quote]

I was replying to you, it was your question:

[quote]What brings you here? [/quote]

[quote]Ah! so you are a bona fide teacher? Where do you teach, and what level? I guess the subject is obvious, or is it?[/quote]
The subject may be obvious. The classification may not be so easy to recognise.

The School in which I teach is not a system recognised school, nor do I have any credentials other than the traditional passing down from teacher to student tools, and recognition of mastery.
Where? On the Oregon Coast of the United States.

[quote]I was replying to you, it was your question:[/quote]
Thanks for the clarification

[quote]I would not be suprised if you did hold me to these preferences. You have in the past, and also held me in judgment based on your own experiences and the comparisons you have made in your understandings of my posts. Just as you have with your demands and expectations with your questions. [/quote]

No, I understand that I have no right to demand that you respond to direct questions according to my preferences.  I merely attached those comments in hopes that you would.  I have very poor vision and it is difficult for me to read responses without paragraph breaks and adequately comprehend the material.  It was merely a request and nothing more in this circumstance, and I do not hold it against you.  Some subjects simply cannot be stated in simple terms.

I looked over your response and am having difficulty understanding certain aspects of your position.  Perhaps it would be more effective to limit the discussion to a single topic at a time rather than spread ourselves out discussing all of the major obstacles.

If this is ammenable to you, I will post my thoughts on the first issue you spoke about and we can work our way from there.  My intention here is to understand what you are and are not saying.

[quote]If this is ammenable to you, I will post my thoughts on the first issue you spoke about and we can work our way from there.  My intention here is to understand what you are and are not saying.  


[/quote]

You may fire when ready Gridley

On second thought, I don't have time to address this properly right now.  Maybe another time.

In it's proper time, when you find time, I have all the time in the world.