CoC Mini Series Ep. 1 - Introduction & No-Thing
Played: 1225 | Download | Duration: 00:32:29
Episode one tells us why this series is happening and then takes us on a quest for transcendence all the way back to the time before time.
Culture Of Contact
http://blog.valiens.com
Culture of Contact: CoC Mini Series Ep. 1 - Introduction & No-Thing
Episode one tells us why this series is happening and then takes us on a quest for transcendence all the way back to the time before time.
Ok, all this is well and good and I'm sure that anyone who has "researched" this stuff has already "heard it all before", but it has been my experience that the "self", "ego", what-have-you simply tends to use this "knowledge" as simply another way to bolster it's own existence and sense of self-importance, saying "look how transcended I am, I know all this, I must be special". This is, I'm sure, where I am at. My "ego" is very proud of itself for recognising the fact that it is not transcended and in turn uses that recognition as a way to prove to itself how transcended it is "see how special I am for recognising the fact that I am not transcended". Caught in an endless cycle it seems.
My question then is how does one go beyond that point. How does one get the "self" to let go of itself? How does one convince one's self to become a willing participant in it's own annihilation? I don't need any more "knowledge". I have at least enough "knowledge" to know that more knowledge is not the answer, it's just a trick used by the self to convince itself that it is progressing.
I feel I have been stuck at this point for sometime now, lifetimes perhaps... acquiring knowledge yet never actually applying that knowledge (or letting go of it) in a way that breaks down the self and therefore never achieving "true enlightenment" only the false enlightenment of "knowledge". Prophets have been preaching and teaching for millenia but how many people have actually GOT it?
Perhaps this is indeed where you are heading with this series and if so please continue, but any comment in this area would be greatly appreciated.
Reply to this
Just a quick note to say I'm really looking forward to the mini series. I'm reading Krishnamurti right now, so it's excellent timing for me.
Thank you for doing this, Jeremy..
Oh..as an FYI, it's pronounced Toll-ee.
Reply to this
Jeremy,
Nice surprise!
This is perfect!
I have been LOOKING/SEEKING for the "truth" all my life.
Have read Tolle (as far as I have heard it's as Stacie says "Toll-ee"), I have listened to and read some Jiddu K., have tried to meditate, tried brain wave tech, and psychedelics. I have actually been hunting for mushrooms lately...and considering a trip to the Amazon next summer to “work” with iowaska.
Questions...hmmm???
Will you be MY Guru? Ha ha.
How do you silence the monkey mind??
Are you still doing your kundalini dance?
Are we all part of one?
Are WE God?
Are we in an illusion?
I’m not sure exactly where you want to go with this mini-series so I will stop there.
Jeremy,
I have been a fan of yours for a while now & want you to know that I do appreciate what you are doing!
Thanks Bro…or is it Dude?
Paul H.
Reply to this
Welcome back to CoC Jer. We missed spamming you! lol
Reply to this
First of all thanks for the podcast, Jeremy. I followed most of what you said here except that there is one thing that I couldn't initially agree with and everything after that was built on it so I struggled with the rest of it. I agree that the word "Nothing" is a concept and concepts require intelligence. But it seems that you assume in your statements that the state of "nothingness" cannot exists without the concept of nothingness. This doesn't follow for me. The actual state of nothing and the concept of nothing are two different things and in my mind the existence of the actual state of nothing does not require the concept to exists. Your statements in a logic format seemed to be this:
-Nothing exists prior to bigbang
-Nothing is a concept
-Concepts require intelligence
- Nothing is intelligence/god
So it treats the actual state and the concept as either synonymous or as mutual dependents.
Human languages are flawed and imprecise ways to categorize and understand the world around us. They are loaded with Paradoxes so I try hard not to get caught up in conclusions about what actually exists in reality when they in actuality are based on semantic conplications.
So what did I miss? Perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying and you can clarify. Or maybe my brain is chatting too much
Reply to this
Beautiful man,
finally someone who makes perfect, logical, POSITIVE, sense!
Keep it up brother,
you're genius...
Reply to this
Thanks. Much appreciated.
Reply to this
Much appreciated... and encouraged.
Which seems a very slight response, but isn't, there are echoes of all the other comments... and of the questions, which, rather than be repeated, are perhaps answered by being. Encouraged.
Very best wishes
J
Reply to this