Kevin Solway wrote:TheAbsolute TV:
If you have any requests, either email me, send me a personal message, or leave a comment at the site.
kissaki wrote:I think the fact that each Men of The Infinite segment is short and to the point is a very effective format.
Some topics to consider including in future segments:
- Enlightenment is not a particular behavior, person, setting, or word(s). Delusion of ownership or capturing Enlightenment as a thing.
- Misconception of Buddhist future and past lives/births as separate soul entities
- Enlightenment is not academical in nature. Enlightenment is not scientific knowledge, all powerful control, or endless knowledge. Subtle attachments to knowledge.
- Different methods of pointing to Void. Negation vs Affirmation. The Nature of words.
- Enlightenment is not a life-plan. Individual must still choose and create values and resolve his non-inherent existence with activity of things in the world.
- Subtle misconceptions of words. Infinite means not finite, not astronomically huge. Immortal means not mortal / never born, not very very long time spans.
Dan Rowden wrote:Interesting ideas. Other than the last, I've actually got vids in mind for the rest. I suspect that with regard to that last idea, that will happen in specific cases in specific video topics, so there may be no reason to do one dedicated to that particular subject. Perhaps a vid on language and definitions and how vital they are might be useful. e.g. when talking about reincarnation and some aspect of consciousness surviving death, it's absolutely vital to know what one specifically means by all of those terms - otherwise madness ensues.
To be honest, my problem right now is that of too many ideas. It's kind of overloading my brain. I'll have to jot a rough synopsis down when I have them so that I can retain them but not have them all swirling around in my headspace.
mansman wrote:This one title was Sanity, very hard to hear, with all volume controls on max, other MOTI movies also need at least small bump of sound, please thank you.
I will add here this speech well said but beginner not able to understand, can be better, improved, how? well umm....immediate complaint no one will agree that to perceive hallucination things not there can be sane, head doctors have strict definition I believe and will not change if suddenly some community all see imaginary things flying in the sky, they all concluded nuts for sure. Just Im saying if important to you then try to make it better, seem to be space for improvement.
Most important not to make listner hypnotize to sleep with sound of voice, less possible if add a little volume 30-50% imo.
Kevin Solway wrote:New video: "Reincarnation"
Matt Gregory wrote:I think that new age karma meme is very harmful.
Carl wrote:One school of thought (cause and effect) does not necessarily preclude the other (personal reincarnation). The statement that there is no evidence is false.
Kevin Solway wrote:It's true that there could be reincarnation, in the sense that the contents of our brains are somehow channelled into the brain of another body at death . . . minus all the memories (!!!!!!). But I've never seen any evidence that strikes me as even slightly suggestive that such reincarnation might take place. If there was a five-year-old child, who, all of a sudden, started speaking in a dialect of the high-German of a century ago, perfectly fluently, even though the child had had no contact whatsoever with any German speaker, then I would regard that as possible evidence in favour of the hypothesis.
brokenhead wrote:You say there could be, although you have never seen any evidence even slightly suggestive that there in fact is. Then what would make you think that there could be?
I am genuinely curious why you would even entertain such a possibility if you yourself have seen no evidence.
And what would be the "contents" you speak of if you are saying "minus all the memories"?
Do you mean physical contents, like if all the actual atoms of one brain
could somehow be made to appear as the corresponding atoms of a new brain?
I think most channeling stories are a hoax
Would that be the kind of evidence you are talking about?
Would that be ruled out as "evidence" of any sort of "content" transfer?
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests