Gents,
Welcome to the final instalment. Hope you’ve got a tonne out of this so far and are now set up and ready to go. if not already actively practicing the method.
Up until now you would have noticed one of the main differences is the lack of religious language, and a strong reassessment of many traditional terms into a general framework and language that we can better understand as Westerners. Hopefully, you can now see true utility beyond pie in the sky references to mystical terms or whatever else.
Many will rightly accuse me of erring from tradition. This is correct, this is what I’ve done. The practice itself is perfect; and doesn’t necessarily require tradition. It requires rational and even headed elucidation and contextualisation.
I’ve done this because I’m not superstitious person, and I can’t accept that the messages of the great men are not corrupted by lesser minds over time. This is a hunch - and if I’m wrong so be it. The practice is what it is - I’m sure of that much.
Superstitious and textual litigious theoretical elements also simply don’t comport with my experience in any way shape or form. If anything, they really all just got in the way.
I’m excited to present this part because in many ways this is the general framework for all bio-individual practices, and in regard to mindfulness being a vertex. I provide an in depth presentation of how this type of sitting is different in a practical and pragmatic sense. And how it fits into the goals of the bio-individual practitioner.
This separates this work from other types; there is a different view of what man is, as well as what these technologies achieve and lead to. And what it could all mean for the future.
We know things today about mankind the ancients did did not. We know things about the body and the brain they did not. We have the advantage of instrumentation - extensions to our sense organs and nervous systems - which allows us to refine and shave years of stuffing about off our practices. We can see now what works and what doesn’t work.
It’s also probably right that some dogmatic assumptions are questioned, and de-mystified. Including the drive in some of these traditions to turn their backs on life. I think this is a cultural difference perhaps, and to be blunt, I think Westerners, if they’re honest, are absolutely not capable of this. Except in the case of an exceedingly small minority.
I am not capable of this as a Westerner, and I am not apologetic for this. I don’t simp for things just cause they’re old.