Topic: Why debunking Carlos doesn't work

[Nick]

You are missing the point here.

Nope, I simply have no interest in restating what you preach over and over.

You can debunk your own experience, then continue to practice and gain more experience. We "have to believe" in whatever is of value to us, because there is no way of knowing anything for certain.

Yes, Carlos's practices work, for me, but someone else could easily practice them, and be convinced they gained nothing. I reiterate, nothing is undebunkable.

Just as you "believe" I don't get it, because I emphasize a different aspect than you. Are you that immersed in your own beliefs that you can not see past them?

[erik]

Nope, I simply have no interest in restating what you preach over and over.

You can debunk your own experience, then continue to practice and gain more experience. We "have to believe" in whatever is of value to us, because there is no way of knowing anything for certain.

Yes, Carlos's practices work, for me, but someone else could easily practice them, and be convinced they gained nothing. I reiterate, nothing is undebunkable.

Just as you "believe" I don't get it, because I emphasize a different aspect than you. Are you that immersed in your own beliefs that you can not see past them?

If Castaneda's practices don't work for somebody, but work for me, I have no reason to change my mind about the practices. Your or anybody else's experience does not have that power.

If I manage to deepen my experience using some of the outlined practices, then I am not debunking the practice, but my experience. It is a different thing.

At the beginning you said that nothing can debunk Castaneda for you:

I enjoy reading the stories about what it was like for the people who met CC, esp. the ones who want to debunk him. It is one thing to feel the power in the stories he wrote...true or not, the stories are a genuine gateway to power, and other worlds... What gets me though, is how when I read things the debunkers say I am only more fascinated, more entranced. Is it just that I am so entranced, so indoctrinated? Perhaps...but what is really at the h eart is  that I took something from his works that spoke to me on a deep level, and nothing, NOTHING can shake that. What gets me excited is how the debunking stories actually make the flame of devotion to my path brighter. I leave those stories feeling energized almost as much as when I read CC's books, and sometimes more...

Now you are desperate to tell me that everything can be debunked, and if nothing else, then I'll do it myself. No problem there. As you say - everything can be debunked, even your attachment to Castaneda's writings.

[Nick]

At the beginning you said that nothing can debunk Castaneda for you:
Now you are desperate to tell me that everything can be debunked, and if nothing else, then I'll do it myself. No problem there. As you say - everything can be debunked, even your attachment to Castaneda's writings.

Anything can be debunked, nothing can debunk Castaneda's works "for me", if I refuse to allow it. I believe in Castaneda's works because they work for me, and I choose to believe in their validity. At the same time I do not believe in Castaneda's works, yet this is not a contradiction. Even reality itself is debunk able, none of this is real, so I believe because I have to, yet I also do not believe.
You may think I am being evasive, but then you would be missing the point.

As for everyone else's interest in his works, that is were I speak of the systemic effect. I am talking about how dynamic systems function. Trying to invalidate, will only keep the story's momentum going. Just as talking about your personal history, even to invalidate it, will only keep it alive.

[erik]

[Nick]

Ha, I love House!

You must be talking about me with that quote, as your self-importance is to inflated for you to describe yourself that way.

Another really good story, Les Miserables; I love the dynamic between Javert and Jean Val Jean....

[erik]

Anything can be debunked, nothing can debunk Castaneda's works "for me", if I refuse to allow it.

You answered exhaustively to the question in the title of the thread. Case closed.

[Nick]

You answered exhaustively to the question in the title of the thread. Case closed.

Is it more important to you that you disagree, challenge, and conflict, so as to reinforce your self-righteousness, than to externally consider the views of another, and there by free yourself? Funny thing, what I am saying is not so different from what you are saying, and yet you still discuss (verbally concuss), instead of dialoging.

Liberation leads to liberation

[Nick]

"Having to believe means that you accept the facts of something, consider all possibilities and possible outcomes, and then choose to believe in accordance with your innermost predilection. Believing is a cinch. Having to believe is something else. If you have to believe, you must use all of an event, account for all possibilities, and consider everything. Before deciding that you believe one way you must consider that it may well be another way."

"Death is the indispensable ingredient in having to believe. Without the awareness of death everything is ordinary, trivial. It is only because death is stalking us that the world is an unfathomable mystery. Without an awareness of the presence of our death there is no power, no mystery.
      Having to believe that the world is mysterious and unfathomable is the expression of a warrior's innermost predilection. Without it he has nothing."

It is because everything, including ones self, and ones personal experience is an unfathomable mystery, that a warrior skilled at controlled folly can laugh at him/herself. If we were sure of ourselves it would be no laughing matter.

[Jahn]

"Having to believe means that you accept the facts of something, consider all possibilities and possible outcomes, and then choose to believe in accordance with your innermost predilection. Believing is a cinch. Having to believe is something else. If you have to believe, you must use all of an event, account for all possibilities, and consider everything. Before deciding that you believe one way you must consider that it may well be another way."

"Death is the indispensable ingredient in having to believe. Without the awareness of death everything is ordinary, trivial. It is only because death is stalking us that the world is an unfathomable mystery. Without an awareness of the presence of our death there is no power, no mystery.
      Having to believe that the world is mysterious and unfathomable is the expression of a warrior's innermost predilection. Without it he has nothing."

It is because everything, including ones self, and ones personal experience is an unfathomable mystery, that a warrior skilled at controlled folly can laugh at him/herself. If we were sure of ourselves it would be no laughing matter.

You have the seed Nick - but you're not there yet.
A Warrior do not laugh out of controlled folly, controlled folly is how to get along in a crazy world created by humans, a Warrior laughs along with the construct of the Universe, and that is fun!

[erik]

Nick, you like to complain and file accusations about my beliefs, self-importance, blindness, etc.
I have no problems with that. Yet, I wonder why exactly do you resort to such mode of expression so frequently? Do you feel that you are losing ground? Do feel that things you consider important and valuable are not respected? Do you feel you are not respected sufficiently?

You started this thread to say that Castaneda is undebunkable because you choose to keep it that way. You like to believe it, and that's that. At the same time, in your words, everything can be debunked (but not the things you choose to believe).

Hence, it is about beliefs. You justify your beliefs with mystery and say that because everything is so very mysterious, one cannot but has to have beliefs as a last resort. In fact, you cover and hide large parts of unknown and unknowable with beliefs.

That logic runs contrary to what one of the characters of Castaneda's books - Don Juan - said. He said that warrior cannot afford the luxury of beliefs, because they make warrior rigid and petrified. They prevent him from dropping human form. Beliefs prevent warrior from seeing the world as it is. The world cannot be defined as one likes (that's the foolishness of mental body, but not of the other bodies we have). Beliefs blind and freeze one in his tracks. Warrior has no story, no truth to defend. If anything is worth its salt, it will prove itself (if practiced).

Your story and my story are different stories. I cannot have the luxury of beliefs. On the contrary, I work to drop them, and to free my mind from any imprinted mental constructs. The practice I mentioned is the way to do it. Experience changes, I change, and what matters is whether techniques known to me facilitate it continuously.

World has to be faced without the safety of mental shields. To see, one has to let go and navigate the universe naked.

Castaneda could have been sex-crazed lunatic who died of cancer and guided his followers to a monumental disaster. Or maybe it was about something else totally. His life, his choices. His story is nothing I have to defend or cling to. It does not matter.

In fact, I do not have to defend any story.

[Nick]

Nick, you like to complain and file accusations about my beliefs, self-importance, blindness, etc.
I have no problems with that. Yet, I wonder why exactly do you resort to such mode of expression so frequently? Do you feel that you are losing ground? Do feel that things you consider important and valuable are not respected? Do you feel you are not respected sufficiently?

You started this thread to say that Castaneda is undebunkable because you choose to keep it that way. You like to believe it, and that's that. At the same time, in your words, everything can be debunked (but not the things you choose to believe).

Hence, it is about beliefs. You justify your beliefs with mystery and say that because everything is so very mysterious, one cannot but has to have beliefs as a last resort. In fact, you cover and hide large parts of unknown and unknowable with beliefs.

That logic runs contrary to what one of the characters of Castaneda's books - Don Juan - said. He said that warrior cannot afford the luxury of beliefs, because they make warrior rigid and petrified. They prevent him from dropping human form. Beliefs prevent warrior from seeing the world as it is. The world cannot be defined as one likes (that's the foolishness of mental body, but not of the other bodies we have). Beliefs blind and freeze one in his tracks. Warrior has no story, no truth to defend. If anything is worth its salt, it will prove itself (if practiced).

Your story and my story are different stories. I cannot have the luxury of beliefs. On the contrary, I work to drop them, and to free my mind from any imprinted mental constructs. The practice I mentioned is the way to do it. Experience changes, I change, and what matters is whether techniques known to me facilitate it continuously.

World has to be faced without the safety of mental shields. To see, one has to let go and navigate the universe naked.

Castaneda could have been sex-crazed lunatic who died of cancer and guided his followers to a monumental disaster. Or maybe it was about something else totally. His life, his choices. His story is nothing I have to defend or cling to. It does not matter.

In fact, I do not have to defend any story.

Yet defending is exactly what you are doing, what I have observed you do in numerous contexts, which is why I attack you, to watch you defend. If this isn't true, why are you still replying to this thread?

You 'perceive' complaints where there are none. You perceive others less spiritual than you so as to fortify the beliefs you claim you do not have the luxury of.

[Nick]

You have the seed Nick - but you're not there yet.
A Warrior do not laugh out of controlled folly, controlled folly is how to get along in a crazy world created by humans, a Warrior laughs along with the construct of the Universe, and that is fun!

No I am not quite there yet, but I still say the warrior laughs at herself out of controlled folly, and that is achievable because she can't know anything with certainty.

[erik]

Yet defending is exactly what you are doing, what I have observed you do in numerous contexts, which is why I attack you, to watch you defend. If this isn't true, why are you still replying to this thread?

It is my deliberate folly.

You 'perceive' complaints where there are none. You perceive others less spiritual than you so as to fortify the beliefs you claim you do not have the luxury of.

So you have actually tried deliberately to 'attack' me? Pardon me for taking these attempts for complaints. However, it seems that you are going slightly over the edge in how you make your points.

The intent to 'attack' does not do any good to anyone.  At one stage of the path, the intent will start directing energy. Dark applications of power (like that of attacking  other person) that are guided by ill intent mean that 5/6 of the applied energy will never leave and will strike the very person who uses it.

[Jahn]

No I am not quite there yet, but I still say the warrior laughs at herself out of controlled folly, and that is achievable because she can't know anything with certainty.

A Warrior does not laugh at him- or herself out of controlled folly, it is no fun with practicing controlled folly - it is only a must do. A Warrior laughs along with his Source. However, what may amuse a Warrior and his or hers Source is some times, human folly.

This because the funny thing is the revelation of how things "really are set up" in this Universe and how that state of "how it really are set up" is in conflict with the world of the humans. They (the humans, in their folly) got the horse behind the carriage so to speak.

To put it in other terms: We laugh when we get insights - it is as simple as that.

[Nichi]

..... which is why I attack you, to watch you defend.....

Perhaps the title of this thread should be, "Why Debunking Each Other Doesn't Work."