It's quite handy that you can't question it you just have to accept it, it gives anyone who reads it and believes a pretty simple mechanism for dismissing criticism or if they have doubts getting rid of them. It's almost like a conspiracy mindset where you can just say something like "that's what they want you to think".

I'm pretty concerned about it to be honest, I think people will watch blueprint and think I should read up on this tolle guy. Tyler has filtered out the crap but I think people less well versed in Philosophy and accustomed to critical thinking are going to believe every word he says.

I have heard about half of it and it's got a lot of spiritual padding and vagueness to it, with some contradictions which you fail to address camarda where he thinks to reach conclusions. I don't think i'm going to be swayed by the rest of it but I'll give it go some time but I have more important things to read than something recommended by Oprah.

I think i'll wait for thug's or kowalski's input I don't think i'll get anything other than the standard "you can't understand you're thinking" line from you.

Whats so bad about oprah? Never seen anything by her.

Tom why not read the book. Its going to take you 2 weeks at most.

But i fear you wont even see the big picture due to the fact you want to justify your shit comments. Hes a 'whiney german' remember.

Have an open mind. He might educate you on yourself a little.

I'm not gonna comment on Tolle till I've finished the book.


You must know who Oprah Winfrey (s/p) is man? Among other things she also supports The Secret which is 'a bit nutty'.


I thought I was supposed to be the hippie.


Peace,

kowalski

I've already explained the good points but i'm not going to blindly accept everything he has to say all you do is say the same thing over and over.

Yes he has a whiney voice but if I was that opposed to him why do I keep pointing out his good points? Why did I agree with the part thug explained about identifying with a limiting belief and identifying with a thought that they are making real in their mind?
If I'm so hostile why am I doing this? You're the one who tells me I don't and will not understand dismisses the whole thing with a few lines.

It seems to me like you've just taken the whole thing and accepted it all as fact, have you? Or are there some points you don't agree with? Do you have you're own opinion on this? Or are you just going to keep saying feeling is the only way and that I don't understand because if you are I might as well just copy and paste your previous comments again and again.

For example do you agree with him when he says that... the start of the cosmos was when consciousness took on an outer form by creating and infusing itself in the physical cosmos. Then this consciousness lost awareness of itself as divine and humans identified themselves not with their inner divinity but with their outer physicalness.

Or this?

Males are generally more identified with their mind and females with their bodies and about five thousand years ago the mind took over. (that sounds like something Duncan would say)

Don't worry I know you don't like debate a simple yes/no will do, all I can tell from your responses are that obi wan has taken over and I should trust my feelings.... luke

I will read the book, you've pointed out the main teachings which he gets to pretty quickly. You've had all this time to explain further ones but I don't see any or won't I understand oh enlightened one or can't you express it because that would envolve thinking?

For someone so well versed in this you have very little to say on the matter

This is quite a funny discussion between Tom and Camarda (Adam?). I think a lot of it boils down to your different styles of thinking about and explaining ideas. I tend to agree with Tom that the tone of the book is wishy-washy, arrogant and pretentious, that Tolle takes things a little far and that some of what he says might not even make sense. I tend to agree with Adam that it's a very worthwhile book to read and is probably a lot more coherent than it seems at first glance.

Tolle is not saying thinking is bad full stop. I have the book here so I'll try to explain it better. In Chapter 1: You are not your mind, he says the following.
Then, in the same chapter he talks about trusting feelings rather than thoughts. He is not saying everyone's feelings are always absolutely correct. It's just that if you want to know the state of your own mind, and if there is a conflict between how you think you feel and how your body tells you it's feeling, then you should trust your body rather than what your mind seems to be thinking. Often we are not conscious of all of our thoughts: we can feel nervous while thinking we are not worried for example, but the feeling reflects something that is going on in your head even if you aren't aware of the thoughts.

In Chapter 3: Moving deeply into the present, he defines "clock time" as time used in a practical way with a focus on the task at hand, and "psychological time" as "identification with your past and continuous compulsive projection into the future". Clock time is essential for everyone, whereas psychological time is always harmful. Clock time includes thinking about logical patterns, science and planning events as well as learning from the past, as long as the focus is on the present moment. This last bit is not totally clear to me tbh but he gives some examples:

That turned into a longer quote than I intended but I'm a sucker for good writing! Anyway these ideas of Tolle's seem ironically very thought-provoking.

Tom come back after you've read the book and noticed your pain body in action.

Just do that.

Once again u fail to see what this book can bring u because u probably have no real life experiences with the concepts he brings.

This is what my stance is about. You have missed the concepts he brings and instead talked about the fucking cosmos. You've bought a big mac but are more concerned with a scratch on the box than the burger... You want your money back

Trust me the concepts it brings are profound.

Now once again i have to mention how it was easy for me to see the light in tolles teachings. I have suffered a lot of self inflicted pain. I can see someone who is not like me not relating to the teachings and instead critiquing the filling and what not.

Tom you do seem a genuinly happy person so maybe this could be the case

kowalski i know who oprah is.

I just hoped tom had some filler as to why tolle should be knocked by being associated with oprah (and not just because shes american)

Or maybe what you have actually bought is a 6 year old's rendition of a big mac made from plasticine. But that is an unacceptable position for you because you've already eaten it.

And, Tom is trying to show you where on the box it says 'Big Macs sold separately', 'For entertainment purposes only' and 'Not fit for human consumption' he's prodded it, smelt it and had a little taste and found that the warnings on the box seem to be accurate, while you are just shouting 'Shut up and eat it' at him.


Peace,

kowalski

Oh ... and that whole argument about a pain-body is The Emperor's New Clothes again, and we all know what happened there the Emperor walked down the street naked believing he was fully dressed. This is dangerous thinking.


Peace,

kowalski

Since your repeating I might as well just save my time and paste some responses

and yes adam I only asked you about the cosmos...

Also what's all this stuff about how you have experienced more pain therefore that's why I don't get it? (even though as I've said many times I've pointed out the good points and you haven't come up with any others)

You have no idea how much pain I've experienced and in fact your comment goes against what you've been preaching all this time, you're prejudging.

I'm not going to prejudge you on this because I don't believe in it and I don't want to get into some weird kind of pain comparison contest but my life hasn't been idyllic, far from it but I didn't need to get spiritual to sort it out.