Jerry Vaughn said:Our guys are trying to play defense against this counterattack—they’ve split wide open, kind of like the Red Sea. 🙏 And now the Spaniards are hitting back hard with some heavy artillery... a 7-meter penalty and a red card. 🙂
Alex Barrett3 said:It wasn't even that the Spaniards struggled in Germany. I mean, they actually had us on the ropes during the first half—they were playing way better than we were—but then our guys stepped back out and just played a completely different, honestly insane game in the second half.
Heh... even our own players admitted it—that the Spaniards just weren't feeling it anymore, and there was no way they could let things get that messy...
Thomas Harris97 said:Knowing how we operate—we’re basically aiming for a win and locking down that 5th place spot in the tournament. Why am I worried about facing France? It’s actually pretty simple. They just seem to have the edge over us in every single position. Tomorrow feels like the perfect window to let Stepancic, Mandalinic, and Sprem get about 40 minutes of floor time. As for the Spaniards, I’m not entirely sure if they’ll play it safe like they did back in Germany, mostly because of the crowd energy here. I don't know, we'll see, I guess. :S
It isn't just that the French guys are better; it's that our styles just don't mesh. They almost always show up playing at their absolute peak when they go up against us.
Yeah, we definitely need to throw the younger kids into the mix—mostly just to give the veterans a breather.
The worst part about all this is how history just loves to loop back on itself. 😱 We've been down this road before—it's us against the Spaniards, and whoever comes out on top gets a date with the French in the quarterfinals. 😱
Back then, we pulled it off, moved on to face the French, and absolutely crushed them.
The Spaniards were playing it safe back then—kind of calculating their moves, I guess—and they’ll probably do the exact same thing again. If both sides start overthinking and playing too cautiously, the whole game is going to turn into a total farce, and honestly, it could end up being pretty pathetic.
Man, the French really put them in a tight spot... though, I suppose they couldn't care less.
Jacob Sanchez7 said:The reality is that the physical mind occasionally struggles to grasp concepts from higher spheres, but there’s no need to exhaust it. It wasn't built for comprehension; it was built to perceive what's happening. The higher mind, on the other hand, understands how things unfold. It's responsible for manifesting whatever we say, think, and live. Think of meditation as shifting focus from the physical mind to the higher mind—you're essentially rerouting potential energy to give it more RAM.😁
Of course, those are all just facets of the personality. It's all you, simply wanting what's best for you. The only difference lies in the varying perspectives each facet holds.
That said, meditation is merely one technique. All techniques are just excuses we give ourselves to become more of who we already are—who we never stopped being. We just forgot, because this whole life is an adventure in forgetting. The point is to constantly find that state triggered by doing something you truly love, where time flies and you're genuinely engaged.😁
I guess I’m a bit worried that the physical mind never actually knew anything to begin with—it's just too young, maybe? 🤷 It feels more like the higher mind is the one that knows, and always has... which is why this whole idea of 'forgetting' doesn't quite click for me. Isn't the real issue just a lack of connection to that higher mind?
Then again, maybe there’s an exact reason—not just a reason, but an actual purpose—behind that 'disconnection' when it happens, right?
Jacob Sanchez7 said:If we’re talking about meditation in its purest sense, then yes. Everything else—contemplation, various mental exercises, whatever—that's just noise.
That was a perfectly synchronous answer you gave earlier. 🤣
But I think there’s a reason behind that impulse, too—one that the ego isn't really aware of, at least not right out of the gate. It’s hard not to walk away feeling like meditation doesn't just exist for its own sake; it's doing something more.
Jacob Sanchez7 said:HAHAHAHAHAHAH yes! What’s the real distinction between a genius and a madman? It’s simple. A genius knows how to translate their wild ideas so the people around them actually get it. A madman doesn't. 😛
50,000. People approach meditation with this desperate, forced intensity. It’s because the Western mindset is just too blunt—too aggressive. We’re obsessed with instant gratification and immediate results. Because of that, we end up overlooking all that "quiet wisdom," and that's exactly where the problems start. My advice? Slow down. Listen to everything. If a specific thought or feeling starts to bother you, don't fight it. Understand that your subconscious has simply flagged a glitch. It presents that thought or emotion as "negative" only so you’ll actually notice it. It’s giving you a signal to pay attention and work through it on your own terms. Honestly, sometimes the best form of meditation is just journaling—getting the stream of consciousness down on paper and having a real conversation with yourself.
Look, I’m self-taught, and honestly? I haven't run into any real issues. Sure, there were moments that might look negative at first glance, but once you start to meditirati, you realize that "positive" and "negative" are illusions. They don't actually exist. There is only our perception. Every single thing—an event, an object, even a person—is inherently neutral. Once you wrap your head around that, you gain a certain power. You can choose to find the positive in everything we experience. You get to hand-pick the experiences that actually shape who you are.
I'll ask again: Who sets the standard for madness, and who gets to decide? Is being "crazy" actually a bad thing? (Sure, there are people whose neurological systems are completely compromised, but they are already at the extreme end of the spectrum and shouldn't be used as a benchmark.)
The GOAL OF MEDITATION isn't raising consciousness or training the spirit or any of that fluff. The goal of meditation is to meditate. That's it. That's all there is to it. Just do it.
But is that actually all there is to it?
I mean, where does the actual urge to meditate even come from?
wearyfox14 said:Nothing can fix that kind of damage, not even the passage of time. Even after years go by—after you finally accept that the chapter is closed and try to move on—the scars remain. You can't just scrub them away. That’s just the way life works.
A bit fatalistic...
There's a difference between living with consequences and just burying yourself in self-pity and sadness—the kind where the ego refuses to let go, or maybe just doesn't want to. There's a massive gap between those two things. Some people will take one path and actually move forward, while others... well, they just stay stuck right where they are. It comes down to choice, I think.
The real question is—how do you actually help people who aren't interested in helping themselves? I don't think the main issue is just being attached to life itself... it’s more about that refusal to let go after someone passes. Some people just won't release that grip, and they won't move forward. See, if someone is willing to accept that their world has fundamentally shifted, then time eventually does its job and dulls the edges of the pain. But the ones who refuse to face that reality? They just stay stuck, living in a past that doesn't exist anymore, letting all that heartache feed them. It basically gives the pain its own kind of fuel, I guess.
Well, Paul Jones7 hit the nail on the head there—that’s pretty much all there is to be done.
Benjamin Taylor6 said:If your theory actually holds water, then I suppose I should basically be some kind of enlightened guru like Osho, 😢😲😁 But after 35 years of being involved in Transcendental Meditation programs, I haven't seen any real progress. If anything, I've seen things go backward. I’ve noticed it most clearly with people who rely heavily on a religious placebo effect. In the end, it turns out to be a total NOCEBO 😢😲😁 My cousin is the prime example here. (And no, I don't mean the one from >)
p.s.
I originally opened this thread to hear from people who have actually lived through this, but so far, it's been a bust. One person popped in, said a few words, and then drifted right back to their astrology hobby.
There’s this neat little forum out there where this interesting guy explains the fundamental issue with (pretty much) all these techniques—how they're passed down. He argues that most of these methods are essentially dead because the people who truly understood them have passed away, leaving a void where the living interpretation—the kind that actually has the power to make a technique click for someone—should be.
To really learn a technique, he suggests you need someone to guide you. You have to align your terminology first, because we often assume we're talking about the same thing when we're actually using the same words to describe completely different concepts. That’s why you just can’t get true understanding solely from books. Not to mention how, over time, collective shifts occur in the mental frameworks behind the language itself.
And besides, how is someone who hasn't achieved it themselves going to lead you there? It seems impossible. I guess the only way is if an enlightened person guides you toward enlightenment. When you have these people acting like they've reached something, pretending they have, but they're really just leading circles of people who are all spinning in the same spot... well, that leads nowhere.
What strikes me is that maybe a technique isn't the path for everyone. Maybe something that doesn't cause harm is simply activating that internal observer—that part of you that notices everything without passing judgment.
Sandra Morgan2 said:That’s a clever way to put it! But while it offers intellectual satisfaction, you still don't actually know if it's true or not.
See, in your attempt to grasp the unknown, you're essentially moving from one unknown toward another. You don't know what free will is, and you don't even know who this "I" is (the lower self), nor what the soul (the higher self) actually is.
So, before we try to answer whose will it is, or whether it's free—and if so, to what extent—we have to tackle the most basic question first: WHO AM I?
It's the same with all those big, unanswered questions—does free will exist? What is the meaning of life? Where did I come from? Where am I going? What is love? Is there a Creator? Do we have souls? What is consciousness? None of these have answers until you achieve self-knowledge.
doesn't everything just loop back to that eventually?
I mean, honestly, how many times does that one question just... pop up in your head?
I’ve got this theory—and look, I know, it’s just a theory, though it's more of an intuitive, lived-in feeling, if you catch my drift; basically, it's my gut telling me it's not total garbage 😛...
...that will exists on multiple levels, which kind of means it gets fragmented. Like, the "earthly" me, the lower self, it has its own set of wants. But that lower version doesn't see the full picture like the higher me does, and at the end of the day, those two versions of myself can actually want completely different things.
That’s how I see it. I think we’re just bumping heads over the terminology here—I was talking about the soul, but the core issue is really about individual existence across different spiritual planes. Even if we call it the "soul" nowadays, when people talk about "soulful desires," they're implying that what the soul wants isn't necessarily aligned with what our everyday, earthly selves want.
Anyway, skipping ahead to the bottom line 😉 I reckon the will of the lower self just isn't enough unless the whole, integrated self agrees across all levels of existence. In other words, you can only truly manifest something if you're choosing it with your entire being.
And that involves every single layer of who I am, not just the parts we're consciously aware of while walking around on the street.
But hey, maybe I'm off base. Maybe the physical level has everything it needs to make things happen by tapping directly into the absolute principles of creation and manifestation.
If that's the case, then maybe a placebo effect combined with celibacy could actually lead to Enlightenment; if not, there's still a chance that someone within certain monastic traditions might find themselves ready on every single level. 😉
Sandra Morgan2 said:It’s basically a hybrid of ancient spiritual tech and the hippie movement.
The real motivation behind celibacy? Lust. Pure and simple. The average Hare Krishna hopes that by denying themselves physical pleasure, they'll bypass the line and jump straight to an elevated, transcendental bhava—which is really just ultimate spiritual ecstasy, making physical intimacy look like a dim shadow. So you see, they aren't just renouncing things; it's actually worse. They're trying to strike a bargain. "You give me sex, and I'll give You Vaikuntha bliss..." 😁
So, I guess the real question here is: just how much weight does our faith actually carry?
For us, it’s hard to wrap our heads around the idea of receiving everything without giving anything up first. That’s just how we were raised, right?—conditioned to believe that you have to earn every single win. If you start agreeing to these kinds of "trades," you might end up breaking your own internal moral compass just to get what you want. Like, okay, fine, I gave something up... now give me my reward.
But what if someone truly, deeply believes—100%, no doubts—that they’ll be rewarded? Does having that kind of absolute certainty actually make it happen?
(Or, more simply put, how much power does human willpower really have?)