Sexual celibacy and the absolute withholding of the sexual chi as an enlightening practice.

[Le_Regard]

rosygyro wrote:
MOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmoth

So here's my conclusion.  Just because person X is NOT CELIBATE, that doesn't mean person X wants to *** Person Y.  Person Y can die alone and insane, it's not Person X's problem.

So logically, Person X can easily be NOT CELIBATE in general, but also CELIBATE concerning Person Y in particular.  So a person can be simultaneously CELIBATE and NOT CELIBATE.

Or, alternatively, the Universe doesn't support INDIVIDUALS like that and we're all energetically connected and everything is fucking everything all the time and there is no SELF to be a GOOD SELF or an EVIL SELF or a CELIBATE or a NOT CELIBATE SELF.

But I do feel rather strongly that I exist, other people exist, and that sometimes people hit on other people, and being told "no" seems radically more typical than saying "yes" in most cases.

Maybe it's different for the unbelievably beautiful or the unbelievably rich... but I wouldn't know anything about that.

[rosygyro]

I would normally charge money for this, but I'm going to do this pro bono.

NO.  *** you, I'm not going to waste my energy learning your Secret Language.

It's cool you've made a private world with your own secret Alphabet -- very Masonic of you.  But since this is an English language forum, in 2017, I'm going to have to ask you to express your thoughts in contemporary English like everyone else does.

If it helps, try doing it in 140 characters. 


It’s not a private language! It is the terminology of nagualism of which this group is based.

“ the tonal of the warrior is bound in a single corporeal lattice which is itself bound by evolving awareness.”
The nagual.

[rosygyro]

Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
MOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmoth



So logically, Person X can easily be NOT CELIBATE in general, but also CELIBATE concerning Person Y in particular.  So a person can be simultaneously CELIBATE and NOT CELIBATE.

You makes your choices according to desire or values inferior, values superior.
You makes your choices according to THEGREATWORK or according to your socially complex egoic sense of personal rights.

Not celibate in general! Hmmmm

[Le_Regard]

rosygyro wrote:
Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
MOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmothMOTHmoth



So logically, Person X can easily be NOT CELIBATE in general, but also CELIBATE concerning Person Y in particular.  So a person can be simultaneously CELIBATE and NOT CELIBATE.

You makes your choices according to desire or values inferior, values superior.
You makes your choices according to THEGREATWORK or according to your socially complex egoic sense of personal rights.

Not celibate in general! Hmmmm

think it's strange you haven't noticed, but at this time in history which values are the inferior ones and which values are the superior ones is a subject of much debate, and perhaps even a bit of a racially charged question.

[Le_Regard]

Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
Le_Regard wrote:




So logically, Person X can easily be NOT CELIBATE in general, but also CELIBATE concerning Person Y in particular.  So a person can be simultaneously CELIBATE and NOT CELIBATE.

You makes your choices according to desire or values inferior, values superior.
You makes your choices according to THEGREATWORK or according to your socially complex egoic sense of personal rights.

Not celibate in general! Hmmmm

think it's strange you haven't noticed, but at this time in history which values are the inferior ones and which values are the superior ones is a subject of much debate, and perhaps even a bit of a racially charged question.

I mean...  EVERYONE thinks their values are the superior values.  Everyone who has values at ALL thinks the values they hold are the best possible values, or they'd have to hold other ones, right?

[rosygyro]

Le_Regard wrote:
Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:


You makes your choices according to desire or values inferior, values superior.
You makes your choices according to THEGREATWORK or according to your socially complex egoic sense of personal rights.

Not celibate in general! Hmmmm

think it's strange you haven't noticed, but at this time in history which values are the inferior ones and which values are the superior ones is a subject of much debate, and perhaps even a bit of a racially charged question.

I mean...  EVERYONE thinks their values are the superior values.  Everyone who has values at ALL thinks the values they hold are the best possible values, or they'd have to hold other ones, right?

I Am celibate generally.
You could even say deliberately celibate in a general sense. I cannot imagine the horrors of being not celibate generally.

Exclusivity is a wonderful thing that I wouldn’t bifurcate with speculation. Speculation to include the general .general being the collective hole I am celibate from.

[Le_Regard]

rosygyro wrote:
I would normally charge money for this, but I'm going to do this pro bono.

NO.  *** you, I'm not going to waste my energy learning your Secret Language.

It's cool you've made a private world with your own secret Alphabet -- very Masonic of you.  But since this is an English language forum, in 2017, I'm going to have to ask you to express your thoughts in contemporary English like everyone else does.

If it helps, try doing it in 140 characters. 


It’s not a private language! It is the terminology of nagualism of which this group is based.

“ the tonal of the warrior is bound in a single corporeal lattice which is itself bound by evolving awareness.”
The nagual.

Is the "Terminology of Nagualism" like how people say the Bible is "the Word of God"?

[rosygyro]

hubris... theres a great contest...
you realise you are applying.

[Le_Regard]

rosygyro wrote:
hubris... theres a great contest...
you realise you are applying.

I'm not being very clear.

I'm not very concerned with anything called Nagualism.  I'm mostly concerned with the unusual cross-over between Nagualism and postmodern feminist philosophy which I thought you were trying on a few dozen posts ago.

[Le_Regard]

rosygyro wrote:
hubris... theres a great contest...
you realise you are applying.

Because here's the thing, right?  If there's any kind of GREAT CONTEST between Nagualism and Postmodern Feminism, then everyone knows that Feminism is going to win.  Everyone knows that women win everything.

[rosygyro]

Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
hubris... theres a great contest...
you realise you are applying.

Because here's the thing, right?  If there's any kind of GREAT CONTEST between Nagualism and Postmodern Feminism, then everyone knows that Feminism is going to win.  Everyone knows that women win everything.

I don’t think you understand - the terms of nagualism are the safest way to utilise , compartmentalise and actualise a balanced perspective.
If you use a different set of terms but try to intone as a nagual then you run a risk.

Use post modern feminist terms and intone as a woman..
I hope you find it empowering.
Use post modern feminist terms and intone as a man subservient to the feminist scheme! I hope you find that interesting.
Peristalsis

[rosygyro]

there was once a coven of 13, all previously abused they sought to change the male.
They formed a circle and bid the rapist, the pedophile and the bully enter.
No such man dared step up.
So I did- foolishly believing that no curse against such men could touch me and I could cross unscathed.
Took a while.

[Julio Juliopolis]

rosygyro wrote:
Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
hubris... theres a great contest...
you realise you are applying.

Because here's the thing, right?  If there's any kind of GREAT CONTEST between Nagualism and Postmodern Feminism, then everyone knows that Feminism is going to win.  Everyone knows that women win everything.

I don’t think you understand - the terms of nagualism are the safest way to utilise , compartmentalise and actualise a balanced perspective.
If you use a different set of terms but try to intone as a nagual then you run a risk.

The first thing you should do then, is define those terms precisely. That would be a useful thing to do well beyond the scope of this conversation.

[Julio Juliopolis]

rosygyro wrote:
there was once a coven of 13, all previously abused they sought to change the male.
They formed a circle and bid the rapist, the pedophile and the bully enter.
No such man dared step up.
So I did- foolishly believing that no curse against such men could touch me and I could cross unscathed.
Took a while.
There was another group whom had all been previously abused so they decided to fix the problem by changing the negro.
In the end, they learned to see their hidden assumptions.

[Le_Regard]

rosygyro wrote:
there was once a coven of 13, all previously abused they sought to change the male.
They formed a circle and bid the rapist, the pedophile and the bully enter.
No such man dared step up.
So I did- foolishly believing that no curse against such men could touch me and I could cross unscathed.
Took a while.

Do you mean this actually happened?

Did a group of 13 practicing witches, sorcerers, magicians, psychics, or whatever, who were all abused by MEN previously in their lives, actually invite you to a ritual where they made YOU, personally, the direct object for the acute psychic projection of all their anger and fear and hatred and resentment, and all general negativity, for all men?

So that you have like... seen the Truth, and withstood it, and been purified?

Is that what you're saying?

The problem is that if you wanted THAT particular special insight about human nature you should have gone into a circle of 13 rapists, pedophiles, and bullies, and let them project on you all their feelings about women.

[Le_Regard]

rosygyro wrote:
Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
hubris... theres a great contest...
you realise you are applying.

Because here's the thing, right?  If there's any kind of GREAT CONTEST between Nagualism and Postmodern Feminism, then everyone knows that Feminism is going to win.  Everyone knows that women win everything.

I don’t think you understand - the terms of nagualism are the safest way to utilise , compartmentalise and actualise a balanced perspective.
If you use a different set of terms but try to intone as a nagual then you run a risk.

Use post modern feminist terms and intone as a woman..
I hope you find it empowering.
Use post modern feminist terms and intone as a man subservient to the feminist scheme! I hope you find that interesting.
Peristalsis

I can't remember where, but I read somewhere once that a good definition of insanity is "mistaking words for things".

Anyway, in the tantric body paradigm you have two channels on either side of your spine and one in the middle.  The side two are TRADITIONALLY male/female solar/lunar, god/goddess, mind/body, etc., etc., etc., all of them, all of them you can think of probably.  The problem though is in some systems they're BACKWARDS, lol, and a lot of times the pairs don't always match.  Sometimes the SUN is FEMALE and the MOON is MALE... it just ruins the whole chart you've spent so much time making.  Very frustrating.

And I think in a lot of cases Buddhists maybe SWITCHED THEM from the Hindu versions just to be difficult... like just to show they could.

[rosygyro]

Le_Regard wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
there was once a coven of 13, all previously abused they sought to change the male.
They formed a circle and bid the rapist, the pedophile and the bully enter.
No such man dared step up.
So I did- foolishly believing that no curse against such men could touch me and I could cross unscathed.
Took a while.

Do you mean this actually happened?

Did a group of 13 practicing witches, sorcerers, magicians, psychics, or whatever, who were all abused by MEN previously in their lives, actually invite you to a ritual where they made YOU, personally, the direct object for the acute psychic projection of all their anger and fear and hatred and resentment, and all general negativity, for all men?

So that you have like... seen the Truth, and withstood it, and been purified?

Is that what you're saying?

The problem is that if you wanted THAT particular special insight about human nature you should have gone into a circle of 13 rapists, pedophiles, and bullies, and let them project on you all their feelings about women.

I guess the difference is that of healing chaos.
Scars and sexual wounds once had a perfect unison with their own genetics precursor to form.
I.e a torn vagina could clamp shut like a Venus flytrap , of no teeth or even seam to bust.

To submit to the healing of a females own body I only need to get out of the way.

....

We’re i to follow your plan - the healing would require I state MY OWN rights to genetic sequence embodied.
As the experiment is targeting flawed overextension of the pervert and not flawed post traumatic damage of the innocent getting out of the way is not a viable healing option.
Also as I am plainly a man the statement of formal rights could empower the wrong aspect of the male ergonome.
Really I would have to be a lesbian with a dick for it to make any sense at all.
As I was not born a lesbian wrongly positioned in a male body and am actually physically the product of heterosexuality- barf

were there a sensitive enough ANGEL to stand within 13 points of ME.
I am fairly certain it could reflect my intent even at my current level of self sanctity , and make the hell.

[rosygyro]

James half spear

[Julio Juliopolis]

rosygyro wrote:
there was once a coven of 13, all previously abused they sought to change the male.
They formed a circle and bid the rapist, the pedophile and the bully enter.
No such man dared step up.
So I did- foolishly believing that no curse against such men could touch me and I could cross unscathed.
Took a while.

Would you like to hear a true story? There once was a man who bragged to me about being invited to attend a women's only group to speak one time because his energy was so pure and he was so aligned with the feminine, (which he obviously believed to be "better" and just naturally expected me to do so without question as well). He was so proud of being considered almost as good as a, (any!), woman.

Want to hear another one? There once was a ship called the Titanic which sunk, in which men refused to use lifeboats and kept them out of the hands of other men so that they would only go to women, whom they valued more than themselves out of respect for them having accomplished being born with a different body type.

How about a 3rd? I keep telling you you aren't inferior and you keep arguing with me. My guess is to convince someone else that you're good and worthy of love, you've got to believe yours is the inferior kind, but only recap will tell you for sure why you do that.

[rosygyro]

Julio Juliopolis wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
there was once a coven of 13, all previously abused they sought to change the male.
They formed a circle and bid the rapist, the pedophile and the bully enter.
No such man dared step up.
So I did- foolishly believing that no curse against such men could touch me and I could cross unscathed.
Took a while.

Would you like to hear a true story? There once was a man who bragged to me about being invited to attend a women's only group to speak one time because his energy was so pure and he was so aligned with the feminine, (which he obviously believed to be "better" and just naturally expected me to do so without question as well). He was so proud of being considered almost as good as a, (any!), woman.

Want to hear another one? There once was a ship called the Titanic which sunk, in which men refused to use lifeboats and kept them out of the hands of other men so that they would only go to women, whom they valued more than themselves out of respect for them having accomplished being born with a different body type.

How about a 3rd? I keep telling you you aren't inferior and you keep arguing with me. My guess is to convince someone else that you're good and worthy of love, you've got to believe yours is the inferior kind, but only recap will tell you for sure why you do that.

that makes no sense.
there exists through a study of MEST. recap, intent a way to SHIFT the assemblage point.
unlike a movement of the assemblage point which can happen through will or intent
a shift of the assemblage point can only happen through intent and totality.

consider a sorcerer who doesnt like the vibe in a room he is in
he could choose to manipulate his assembage point through will to any position he desires
wheras to shift his assemblage point would be immpossible
if it contained elements of social conditioning or personal history he needed to resolve.

a movement of the assemblage point is a snap decision and a shift is indicitive of the lifelong decision.

a shift of the assemblage point will change perception whilst the personal history and evidence of a persons life will no matter how hidden remain unchanged.

a shift of the assemblage point will move the entire MEST bolus
i.e. the sorcerers world.
and with it will stir the elelements of the cocoon in which recapitulation and personal histiry and social conditioning reside.

a shift of the assemblage point is connected to the north east , south and west.
a movement is usually just a withdrawel from the east and an overempowerment of west.

these wild stabs in the dark at my sexual adequacy are unecissary and also unwarrented
as i have not tried at all to identify your own petty shortcomings
what do you think this is? who are these give a **** audience who care about your attitude and applaud
your attempts to drag others down to a level of your own equality?

[rosygyro]

[watergaze]

it seems to me that JJ you are looking at the male-female thing from a very societal viewpoint, while rosy is going at it, to a bigger extent, through a sorceric (toltec) viewpoint. The universe as feminine, the nagual as feminine - therefore unknown. 

But either way, it made sense to me that a guy would say the male is known and the female is unknown. I mean I surely do not need to analyze that . 

And yes, traditionally there is a stronger link to mystery and the unknown with the feminine (if we were to have to choose) - one reason for that might be because society (in general) was dominated by men (and for them the feminine was mysterious and unknown). And no, I do not feel like going into a talk about how that is not true .

Sorcerically also we need to connect with the other part of us. Men with their female part and women with their male part. We need to balance. In that sense, a guy strengthening his femininity is something very unsurprising. The fact that society might not feel like that man is then 'man enough' or whatever bs ... is a different topic.
There is nothing wrong with men being fascinated and wanting to be closer or be like the feminine. There is nothing wrong with respecting the opposite of the masculine-feminine dichotomy. (Before one balances and after one broadens one's horizons there might be an imbalance towards the other side, but that is OK as part of a larger process).
I have had the same with the masculine and I have seen how female sorceresses get closer to being like men (in what can be for me sometimes an extreme and unnatural way even). But others balancing. But before one balances one is a bit out of balance. 
And then ofc someone might not really be very aware of this happening and it can take strange and unhealthy forms. Or one can be smacked around by idiots on either side of the gender divide . etc.

I can tell you thought that people who have incorporated these to some degree are a bit strange if looked at by the general societal eye. The guys in a shamanic circle that I am familiar with can be gentler than the women. It is quite peculiar at times . The women also have qualities that might be considered masculine by the general population. But these qualities, like gentleness, are not the domain of any single gender.
And that is the thing. In order to go beyond the societal constructs, one needs to venture into the so-called realm of the other. And this is why it becomes attractive and desirable, one might see something 'better' there... in the sense that it will be better for one if one checks it out, tries it out, incorporates it, and balances themselves through doing that.

Disclaimer: Use my ideas to further stuff in a productive way, if you can. But dont waste time arguing cause I wont be here to help you with that .

[Julio Juliopolis]

rosygyro wrote:
Julio Juliopolis wrote:
rosygyro wrote:
there was once a coven of 13, all previously abused they sought to change the male.
They formed a circle and bid the rapist, the pedophile and the bully enter.
No such man dared step up.
So I did- foolishly believing that no curse against such men could touch me and I could cross unscathed.
Took a while.

Would you like to hear a true story? There once was a man who bragged to me about being invited to attend a women's only group to speak one time because his energy was so pure and he was so aligned with the feminine, (which he obviously believed to be "better" and just naturally expected me to do so without question as well). He was so proud of being considered almost as good as a, (any!), woman.

Want to hear another one? There once was a ship called the Titanic which sunk, in which men refused to use lifeboats and kept them out of the hands of other men so that they would only go to women, whom they valued more than themselves out of respect for them having accomplished being born with a different body type.

How about a 3rd? I keep telling you you aren't inferior and you keep arguing with me. My guess is to convince someone else that you're good and worthy of love, you've got to believe yours is the inferior kind, but only recap will tell you for sure why you do that.

that makes no sense.

Really? The whole thing? You can make no sense of any of it? Or is it just the last part you don't get? I'm guessing the last part, because I did incorporate a lot into that last sentence. Perhaps it would be clearer if I broke that down...

1 - I keep telling you that you are NOT inferior and you keep arguing with me.
2- Thus far, you have not shown any evidence that you reached this view as a result of deductive reasoning.
3 - Earlier, you admitted that this view didn't come from seeing either but rather you feel a need to show greater respect for one birth group than another.
4 - In order to see where you've gotten this view for sure you'd have to recap it.
5 - My guess is that the view was needed to please other people.

Does that make it more clear for you?

In my case, I can'd understand the following...

"there exists through a study of MEST. recap, intent a way to SHIFT the assemblage point."

First, I don't know what MEST means. Second, the sentence structure is all wrong. What is the word intent doing in there? My best attempt to translate that into something I can understand is to read it like "There exists, (through a study of MEST recap), a way to shift the assemblage point." Do you follow this up by saying what this study was about? Do you distinguish between this way of shifting the assemblage point and other ways? In each case the answer is no. So how am I supposed to know what you're saying?

unlike a movement of the assemblage point which can happen through will or intent
a shift of the assemblage point can only happen through intent and totality.

This creates more of the same kind of confusion for me as to what you mean. Why isn't unlike capitalized? You used a period after the previous word but didn't capitalize this one. Is this the start of a new sentence or not? I'm guessing it is, but why make your reader guess? Why not follow the universal capitalization rules and be clear to everyone? So to once again punctuate your sentence in the way that makes it closest to making sense to me... "Unlike a movement of the assemblage point, (which can happen through will or intent), a shift of the assemblage point can only happen through intent and totality." This still doesn't make a lot of sense though, because the word totality is ambiguous. Totality of what? And how does something happen "through totality"? 

consider a sorcerer who doesnt like the vibe in a room he is in
he could choose to manipulate his assembage point through will to any position he desires

Okay.

wheras to shift his assemblage point would be immpossible
if it contained elements of social conditioning or personal history he needed to resolve.

I'm not sure I agree there. Why would a shift be impossible? How exactly does a shift contain elements of personal history or social conditioning?

a movement of the assemblage point is a snap decision and a shift is indicitive of the lifelong decision.

THE lifelong decision? You are not explaining yourself. 

a shift of the assemblage point will change perception whilst the personal history and evidence of a persons life will no matter how hidden remain unchanged.

a shift of the assemblage point will move the entire MEST bolus
i.e. the sorcerers world.
and with it will stir the elelements of the cocoon in which recapitulation and personal histiry and social conditioning reside.

Still no idea what your trying to say at all. I'm honestly unsure if you're not just playing a game of word soup.

a shift of the assemblage point is connected to the north east , south and west.
a movement is usually just a withdrawel from the east and an overempowerment of west.

these wild stabs in the dark at my sexual adequacy are unecissary and also unwarrented

Has anyone questioned your sexual adequacy? Have I implied anything in any way about your prowess in that matter at all? Seriously, where in this conversation do you believe we've been discussing that?

You've become defensive here. It's your view I've been "attacking", not you. When a person becomes defensive when their view alone is being assaulted, it's a red flag that their view exists to serve an emotional purpose.

as i have not tried at all to identify your own petty shortcomings

No, but you do include me in the inferior group when you praise women as superior. Even so, I've replied nicely.

what do you think this is?

A variety show called "Life", episode 14,755.

who are these give a **** audience who care about your attitude

Don't know. I don't think about my audience too often. I tend to focus on the characters on stage with me.

and applaud your attempts to drag others down to a level of your own equality?

Ah yes. Since your view is the morally correct one and I'm stubbornly opposing it I must be the villain in this drama, eh? Do you picture me twirling my mustache and saying "I'll drag those womenz down to the level of only being equal to me" while cackling evilly?

Well, sorry to disappoint, but this episode is going another route. See, I believe in the idea that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Take anything in the universe, anything at all, and look at it with a certain perspective and it is exquisite. Everything can be seen as marvelous, beautiful, and worthy of reverence. Likewise, anything can be seen as filthy, disgusting, and fit to be destroyed. Since this is only a matter of your chosen point of view, all things are actually equal. Go ahead and look at the world with reverence. See the divine in a squirrel, a passing cloud, a rock, and a raspberry pie. Then, if you hear a blueberry pie tell another blueberry pie how superior the raspberry pies are don't condemn the latter for "attempting to drag the raspberry pie down to it's level" when it replies to the first with, "No, we're just as divine as the raspberry ones no matter what your mommy, daddy, beloved aunt, and 3rd grade teacher Miss Sweety said to you while you were growing up. You ought to recap all that so you can be free to see your own divinity without guilt."

[rosygyro]

MEST is an acronym for matter energy space and time.

[rosygyro]

When I was a twelve year old boy I didn’t know what it felt like to have my penis in a willingly receptive vagina.

Some years later I discovered the feeling and it became A KNOWN .

Included in that knowledge of one vagina was a minuscule amount of presumption as to what all vaginas feel like.

The KNOWN is debilitating because it is our own sobriety that gets in the way of innocence or seeing the nascent part of life evolving.

In the case of every other vagina in the world... even my presumption was a form of tiny tiny non consensual judgement.

What you write isn’t honest enough.