Tantras.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Ground

Well from my perspective you already have a philosophical outlook when you approach an object for the first time. How that? you are conditioned to perceive things in a way that depends on what philosophies you have been conditioned by in your life so far. Of course this outloook may change as you get to know new phenomena but every moment you are perceiving an object being interested in it a specific philosophical outlook is involved.


Now that is your philosophical outlook.

What I'm trying to say is the philosophical outlook is wrong in essence, but it is bit of intellectual entertainment or a way of conveying things conceptually. On the other hand, one's insight isn't a philosophy or some kind of answer, but a lived realisation which deepens ones wisdom. In this sense, the meaning one assigns to the philosophy changes, becoming deeper, more subtle and nuanced, as it pertains to the life learned wisdom. It also means that aspects of the doctrines turn out to be rather fanciful, and bear little to no relevance to the living experience. I my case I find it to be rather comical, but sometimes if taken too seriously, people lose trust in their own discoveries when such realisations don't conform to, or contradict, what is too highly valued as 'teachings'. In short, what we call 'spirituality' isn't recorded in any book, and is solely a matter for discovery.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Jeremy Bong

I have no intention to convince you anything. But I have healed many people here in the spiritual forum.

More than one person has talking to my Cupid son and one member of the SF has saw my spirit as God in front of her that she knelt down and my spirit travelled in a second from Malaysia to US.

Well, you claim it, and apparently, genuinely believe it.

You know nothing of this world.

Petty.

[Jeremy Bong]

The truth of my claim.

It seems that you're not agreed what the truth is? Yes, don't push yourself too hard for what you're not sure otherwise it may create nightmare which is not healthy. Joke!!!!.

When I was young I healed more than hundreds people. Especially those patients of my workers village, I just put my hand (or holding) on their hands then they're healed. (See my thread-- Mind work how I heal others).

In the SF here, at first whenever I healed a person that person disappeared from the Forum. I have healed more than 10+ of the people here. So it's hard to prove anything but that's the truth. You said, "I claim it," yes for you only but not the same for others.

[Ground]

Originally Posted by Gem

What I'm trying to say is the philosophical outlook is wrong in essence, but it is bit of intellectual entertainment or a way of conveying things conceptually.

I wouldn't say this. Why? Because there is no essence in philosophical outlook but nevertheless a particular philosophical outlook can be efficient regarding particular goals.

Originally Posted by Gem

On the other hand, one's insight isn't a philosophy or some kind of answer, but a lived realisation which deepens ones wisdom. In this sense, the meaning one assigns to the philosophy changes, becoming deeper, more subtle and nuanced, as it pertains to the life learned wisdom.

Well insight is great, however it should be expressed appropriately. "Being expressed appropriately" means it should be compatible with the whole range of one's experience and not be contradictory to it. "compatible with the whole range of one's experience" means that insight expressed should be consistent with one's philosophical system qua view of oneself and the world.
That's my approach.

Originally Posted by Gem

It also means that aspects of the doctrines turn out to be rather fanciful, and bear little to no relevance to the living experience. I my case I find it to be rather comical, but sometimes if taken too seriously, people lose trust in their own discoveries when such realisations don't conform to, or contradict, what is too highly valued as 'teachings'. In short, what we call 'spirituality' isn't recorded in any book, and is solely a matter for discovery.

When using the expressions "philosophical outlook" or "philosophical system" I am not referring to doctrines but to one's own verified (hopefully and in the best case) philosophical system. Of course one can make use of pre-existing systems but those will rarely match one's own linguistic conditioning so that they will have to be modified and amended. "Philosophical system" is a system of linguistic expressions and linguistic expressions are without meaning from the outset but linguistic expressions do cause synthesis of meaning in conscious beings capable of verbal communication. So language is experience and as language is experience a philosophical system is an expression of experience.

[Jeremy Bong]

The following is: copy and paste from my thread: Mind work. There are more to look for.. ...

#24
26-08-2016, 11:16 PM
Jeremy Bong
Master
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 1,667

4) The healing mind.

This is mainly mentioning of mind power, controlling ,destroying of sickness, construction of new cells to our bodies. It may does on myself or on others bodies.

Mind power in healing play a great role on using dharma to healing wounded parts of our bodies. The involved energy that I usually used is the Heavy Energy of the space. I may create new cells for the wounded parts before that I have to healing by "cleaning" the wounded parts first. All dark energy have to pull away using dharma or forces.

They are two parts of a body have to consider of doing the healing. It's the spirit and the physical body have to be done at the same time then the healing will be completed.

The healing mind is the "driver" of the healing and dharma is the tool and Heavy Energy becomes to form the new spare part of the body. Lacking of anyone of it may not be successful. One more essential thing is the will of the healer and without it or not strong enough may fell the healing.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Ground

I wouldn't say this. Why? Because there is no essence in philosophical outlook but nevertheless a particular philosophical outlook can be efficient regarding particular goals.

Basically, I mean it's best not to get all wrapped our our own bulldust, so the philosophical side of things is good, fun and I enjoy it, but it's not important to me.

Well insight is great, however it should be expressed appropriately. "Being expressed appropriately" means it should be compatible with the whole range of one's experience and not be contradictory to it. "compatible with the whole range of one's experience" means that insight expressed should be consistent with one's philosophical system qua view of oneself and the world.
That's my approach.

It really depends on if the person is trying to preserve their belief system, and seeing the world through that preconceived lens, because insight is that 'lightbulb moment' in which something entirely new emerges, or at least, 'the pieces of a puzzle' come together as understanding of the whole, but essentially, it's a realisation, which more probably than not contradicts one's belief system, by which one is transformed, and as an irrevocable truth, requires prior beliefs to be abandoned.

I the sense you describe it as "compatible with the whole range of one's experience", I guess this is true, because when scattered, disjointed fragments suddenly come together and make sense in a qualitative understanding of 'the big picture' it brings a compatibility to what might previously have seemed senseless or confusing. It's a level of learning that entails psychological/personal transformation, rather than the acquisition of more knowledge or the embellishment of belief - More likely resulting in the abandonment of 'what you think you know'.

When using the expressions "philosophical outlook" or "philosophical system" I am not referring to doctrines but to one's own verified (hopefully and in the best case) philosophical system. Of course one can make use of pre-existing systems but those will rarely match one's own linguistic conditioning so that they will have to be modified and amended. "Philosophical system" is a system of linguistic expressions and linguistic expressions are without meaning from the outset but linguistic expressions do cause synthesis of meaning in conscious beings capable of verbal communication. So language is experience and as language is experience a philosophical system is an expression of experience.

Right. I was mostly referring to the Buddhist philosophy, as this is such a thread, and there is no shortage of folk who take those texts to be true, but in my case, I marvel at its insightful depth and intellectual genius, and personally adopt huge swathes of it as it pertains to my own discoveries as a language I assign meaning to in regards to my own lived experience.

[Jeremy Bong]

If a person was on a gambling table in this case so far he has lost all his cash. And if he's in a boat in the rough sea, his boat must has sunk by the roaring waves. And he's waiting for the right time to pierce his own judgment to be on the wrong track/direction.

It's so hard for a person to win back his long lost money from the gambling table and to row hard to save the sinking boat at the rough sea. He must have strove too hard to be himself again.