Quotes from Sasakis Record of Linji book. Seriously the notes are super thorough. Google it, get a PDF or buy it for 27 bucks on Amazon. Read all of it including the notes.
I'll post the quote, relevant notes, and my thoughts so it has some original content and this isn't just some ctrl c Ctrl p post.

““If you wish to diff er in no way from the patriarch-buddha, just don’t seek outside. “The pure light in a single thought of yours—this is the dharmakāya buddha within your own house. The nondiscriminating light in a single thought of yours—this is the saṃbhogakāya buddha within your own house. The nondifferentiating light in a single thought of yours—this is the nirmāṇakāya buddha within your own house. This threefold body is you, listening to my discourse right now before my very eyes. It is precisely because you don’t run around seeking outside that you have such meritorious activities.

Note
The pure light… within your own house In this passage Linji speaks of the human body as a house that is the dwell- ing place of the trikāya, the threefold body of buddha 三身, which reveals its presence through the three aspects of each instant of human thought. Th e three bodies of the trikāya are:

1. Dharmakāya 法身: the unconditioned, absolute buddha, beyond all form. Th e dharmakāya is buddha viewed as truth itself, and as such is the essence of wis- dom and purity. Linji is referring to this latter attribute when he characterizes the light of the mind in its fi rst manifes- tation as 清淨 (Skr., pariśuddha), that is, pure and free from any defi lement. Th e dharmakāya is symbolically represented by Vairocana Buddha, whose name means “omni- present light,”
   
2. Saṃbhogakāya 報身: the “reward” or “recompense” body. Th is is the body that a buddha receives as a reward for fulfi ll- ing the vows taken during bodhisattva- hood. It is defined under two aspects: as the body received for the buddha’s own enjoyment 自受用身, and as that received for the sake of others 他受用身. In this second aspect the saṃbhogakāya reveals itself to the bodhisattvas, to whom alone it is traditionally said to be visible, in order to enlighten and inspire them. A typical representation of the saṃbhogakāya is Amitābha/Amitāyus Buddha.
   
3. Nirmāṇakāya 化身 or 應身: the body that the buddha assumes when, in human form, he appears in the world for the purpose of bringing enlightenment to others. A typical representation of the nirmāṇakāya is Śākyamuni Buddha.
   

Th e doctrine of the threefold body of bud- dha is confi ned to Mahayana Buddhism, although undoubtedly its origin can be found in ideas that arose in the older Bud- dhist traditions.
Me:
We can see right from the get go, interpreting the trikaya as something outside is the nonzen way of going about it. Trying to understand them apart from ourself is seeking outside. The notes make it clear that no one considered Shakymuni to have more than one body, the "bodies" were represented by other Buddhas, these other Buddhas are from various sutras.

““According to the masters of the sutras and śāstras, the dharmakāya is regarded as basic substance and the saṃbhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya as function. From my point of view the dharmakāya cannot expound the dharma. Th erefore a man of old said, ‘Th e [buddha-]bodies are posited depending upon meaning; the [buddha-]lands are postulated in keep- ing with substance.’ So we clearly know that the dharma-nature body and dharma-nature land are fabricated things, based on dependent understand- ing. Empty fi sts and yellow leaves used to fool a child! Spiked-gorse seeds! Horned water chestnuts! What kind of juice are you looking for in such dried-up bones!

Notes:
According to the masters…. Compare this passage to the words of Linji’s teacher Huangbo in the cf:
A buddha has thre e b o dies. The dharmakāya preaches the dharma of the universal voidness of self-nature; the saṃbhogakāya preaches the dharma of the universal purity of things; the nirmāṇakāya preaches the dharmas of the six pāramitās [see page 211, below] and all other good practices. Th e dharma of the dharmakāya cannot be grasped through words, sounds, forms, or the written word. Th ere is nothing to be said, nothing to be demonstrated; there is nothing other than the universal voidness of self-nature. Th us it is said, “Th ere is nothing to be preached as the dharma; this is called preaching the dharma.” Th e saṃbhogakāya and the nirmāṇakāya both appear in response to particular circumstances, and the dharma they preach corresponds to outer con- ditions and to their listeners’ capacities; in this way they guide sentient beings. None of this is the true dharma. There- fore it is said, “Th e saṃbhogakāya and the nirmāṇakāya are not the true buddha, nor are they the ones who preach the dharma.” (t 48: 382a)
Dependent understanding translates 依通, an unusual term that is not found outside of Chan writings. Japanese com- mentators take it to be an abbreviation of the phrase 依倚通解, “understanding that depends upon something else.” In the section of the gy devoted to Nanquan Puyuan, an exchange between Nanquan and a certain monk is recorded:
Th e monk asked, “Is a student not permit- ted to understand the Way?” Th e master said, “To understand what Way? Also, how understand?” “I don’t know,” the monk said. Th e master said, “Not knowing is all right, but if you take my words you will be called one of dependent understanding.” (x 68: 70a)
Th e wl of Huangbo Xiyun has:
But to one who has seen into his own nature, what place is not his own original nature? Th erefore the six gati (destinies); the four ways of birth; and the mountains, rivers, and great earth, all are the pure and bright substance of our own nature. Therefore it is said, “Seeing form is no other than seeing mind, because form and mind are not diff erent.” One who accepts form and, on this basis, sees, hears, and perceives, and who then tries to see into [nature] by reject- ing things as such—such a one will fall into the ranks of those in the two vehicles [śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas], whose understanding is dependent 依倚通解. (x 68: 21b)
Empty fi sts and yellow leaves used to fool a child! translates the two expres- sions 空拳黃葉、用誑小兒, metaphors for something that is passed off for what it is not. They are found frequently in the Nirvana Sutra and other scriptures. The Mahā-prajñā-pāramitā Sutra, for example, uses the expression “empty fi st” 空拳 as a metaphor for deceiving others with false views:
It is like deceiving a young lad with an empty fi st. Because he is ignorant he thinks there is something real in it. (t 7: 1104c)
And the Northern Nirvana Sutra uses “yellow leaf ” 黃葉 to indicate expedient teachings:
It is as, when a child cries and wails, its father and mother will pull a yellow leaf from a poplar tree and say, “Don’t cry! Don’t cry! We will give you a piece of gold.” Th e child, on seeing the yellow leaf, imagines it to be pure gold and at once stops crying, though in truth this poplar leaf is not gold. (t 12: 485c)
Dried-up bones translates 枯骨, an expression likely deriving from an alle- gory that is found in texts like the Zhengfa nianchu jing 正法念處經 (Sutra on con- templating the true dharma) and the Da baoji jing, in which a dog licking a dried bone mistakes its own saliva for juice from the bone.
Me: I think it's pretty obvious just from these bits that the three body of Buddha has nothing to do with the man Siddhartha Gautama. We can also see that they are founded in Buddhist Sutras. Most of what Zen masters say is based on their understanding of sutras. These terms were expedients, like literally all of the teachings of Buddha and all the Zen masters. Gold leaves to stop children crying, a phrase which also originated from a sutra

"It seems to me you’ve probably had enough teaching, but the tendency is to always want to hear more, to compare and to end up in doubt as a result." I started reading The Collected Teachings of Ajahn Chah a few days ago and this line from the Dhamma goes Westward really struck a cord with me. I've sort of danced with Buddhism for several years, but also other spiritual practices. Recently, I've been drawn to giving it some more serious contemplation and application in the day to day.
I have this habit, however, whenever I begin to study a topic, I need to have like every book written on that topic, then if there are different schools of thought on said topic, I like those as well. And in the end I create this daunting amount of information that really doesn't leave me with a practical way to practice what I'm learning. I've been guilty of that even with Buddhist literature, I bought most of the Nikayas a few years ago when I thought let's learn about Buddhism but only recently have started a sutta practice where I've gradually begun working through the Middle Length first. But initially, I created this daunting amount of info for myself haha.
Anyways, I just thought it was cool to have this moment of recognition and see how I'm trying to resolve that craving for more and make full use of what I already have. I've been dedicating a lot of time lately to dhamma study(I have a decent amount of time to read at my new job) and keeping my meditation practice steady and so it was just a cool moment and for me and I don't have a Sangha so I wanted to share.

The concept of blue zones is usually distorted by carnivore advocates who claim all the blue zones were based on diets high in animal fats and proteins or nonsense from keto quacks like Steven Gundry who claim it is because the old people in these zones were smoking or drinking sheep's milk.
The truth is, there isn't any scientific evidence to support the blue zones concept, the idea has never been embraced by the medical and scientific communities. The blue zones was a research project not a scientific study, modern diet influencers promoting this idea on social media are unaware about how the concept was developed. If you read the original papers, the idea of diet hardly came up.
There are no controlled studies, no long-term epidemiological studies. Much of the evidence is anecdotal due to lack of records and is second-hand taken from interviews of relatives.

The problem with trying to determine how many very old people are alive in an area is that the further back you look to verify ages, the worse the records get. It’s reasonably easy to figure out where and when a person was born if they are 80. But when we’re talking about 110-year-olds, the records are decidedly patchier. (The supercentenarians at the start of the Blue Zones study were born in the late 1800s.)

https://slate.com/technology/2023/11/centenarian-blue-zone-health-long-life-netflix.html
In regard to alleged supercentenarians in these zones, there is a recent article that notes the likelihood of fraud

These pockets of extreme longevity seem to occur in areas with “greater poverty, higher illiteracy, higher crime rates, and worse population health” than the norm, according to Oxford scientist Saul Newman. Data from the United Nations even suggests that Cambodia was a blue zone of sorts during the genocide of the Khmer Rouge. These hotspots can be chiefly explained by welfare fraud, identity theft, name-saking and criminal abuse of the pension system, or by genuine confusion over dates or lack of birth certificates. Some are banal in any case.

https://archive.is/d9beK
Another issue is the abuse of the pension system

“Whenever you get an investigation of the pensions system, the rate of centenarians suddenly collapses. That is what happened in Greece after the financial crisis,” said Dr Newman, now at Oxford University’s Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science.
The Greek labour ministry concluded that 200,000 pensions were being paid to fraudulent claimants. Most of the country’s 9,000 centenarians were dead. The same happened in Japan in 2010 after the mummified corpse of Tokyo’s “oldest” man was discovered. His family had been drawing the pension from his bank account for 32 years. The inquiry discovered that 238,000 people listed as aged 100 or more were unaccounted for. Some had died in the Second World War.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/sunday/audio/2018708179/dr-saul-newman-debunking-the-blue-zone-longevity-myth

Only 18% of ‘exhaustively’ validated supercentenarians have a birth certificate, falling to zero percent in the USA, and supercentenarian birthdates are concentrated on days divisible by five: a pattern indicative of widespread fraud and error. Finally, the designated ‘blue zones’ of Sardinia, Okinawa, and Ikaria corresponded to regions with low incomes, low literacy, high crime rate and short life expectancy relative to their national average. As such, relative poverty and short lifespan constitute unexpected predictors of centenarian and supercentenarian status and support a primary role of fraud and error in generating remarkable human age records.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/704080v3
Saul Newman who wrote the above received a lot of abuse for questioning the blue zones.
The blue zones concept is mostly a marketing myth to sells books and ideas about diets. Dan Buettner is most well known for this. There was a recent series on Netflix about the blue zones.
Michel Poulain who originally proposed the blue zones published a paper in 2011 in which he was unable to verify the claims of longevity in Okinawa due to lack of records surviving WW2.
https://www.demographic-research.org/articles/volume/25/7/
Since 2011 no new evidence has come to light.
If we actually look at the oldest people in the world right now whose birth certificates have been validated
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_living_people
They are mostly from Japan, Spain and Brazil. None of these are blue zones.
I realise that all sorts of diet gurus promote the blue zones online but if you go looking there isn't any good scientific evidence to support this concept. The concept has now just become a marketing myth to promote diets.
If you read Michel Poulain's original research he hardly mentions diet, it's literally mentioned twice in passing yet online influencers only talk about this topic.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200302043123/http://austriaca.at/0xc1aa500e_0x00307bb6.pdf
Interestingly if you read Poulain's work, he says

In Okinawa, as elsewhere in Japan, the individual validation of age is based on the koseki, a family register containing records of all members of a family, including gender, dates and places of birth, names of parents, dates of marriage and divorce if any, date and place of death. Unfortunately, for privacy reasons, data extracted from the koseki such as birth and death records are only accessible by directly asking the relatives of the concerned persons or for official legal proceedings.

In conclusion the blue zones lacks scientific evidence. The concept is best explained through welfare fraud, pension abuse, identity theft and confusion due to lack of birth records.

Hi everyone,
I wanted to share with you my response to the introduction found in the only edition of Use of the Self currently in print. I believe it's a rather misleading intro to FM Alexander's work, so I'm sharing this in the hope that I can help clear up misconceptions people may have about the Alexander Technique, not derived only from Anthony Kingsley, but many bland blog posts one tends to encounter when researching the Alexander Technique. That said, this is not intended to be an introduction of its own, but rather something experienced students, teachers, and anyone enthusiastically learning the Technique may find useful. In the tradition of Alexander himself, I've included extensive footnotes, some painfully long. I'm happy to answer any questions or otherwise discuss what I've written. Understand these are my own interpretations and opinions about what some call "the work," so take them as you will. I've taken lessons for a number of years and currently am training as a teacher, so my view of the Technique is based on these experiences, as well as my interpretations of Alexander's writings. Some of these interpretations you may object to, but I hope you find my arguments reasonable.
Response to Anthony Kingsley's Introduction to The Use of the Self
The Use of the Self may be FM Alexander's most important work, since it contains his own account of how he developed what is now called the Alexander Technique. While Alexander's other volumes are available from Mouritz, the only edition of The Use of the Self currently in print is published by Orion Spring. This edition replaces the philosopher John Dewey's introduction—which praises the technique's "genuinely scientific character"—with one by the contemporary teacher Anthony Kingsley, who is heralded on the book's front cover as a "leading Alexander Technique teacher." Therefore it is probable that many readers' first impressions of the Alexander Technique will be framed by Mr. Kingsley's opinions. I submit this is problematic, since his introduction is in my view contradictory to fundamental principles of the Alexander Technique. I write this response to address the introduction's two most dire faults: Kingsley's misrepresentation of the concepts inhibition and direction, and his dismissal of the concept of the primary control. I'll begin with the second, since it is a more straightforward error.
Primary Control
Kingsley opens his paragraphs on the primary control with the opinion that the concept should be "recast," then describes Alexander's definition of the primary control as a "particular relationship of his head, neck and back [that] acted as a master reflex that conditioned his whole organism." Then he discards this definition, claiming the head-neck-back relativity should instead be "regarded as an indicator[sic] of overall health rather than an area considered in isolation." He concedes the "region of the neck and back is a [...] barometer of our state of being," but concludes that "no single element is actually primary," since our eyes, breath, digestive system, and all other psychophysical elements are "simultaneous and interdependent" and also like barometers. Finally, he reveals his "recast" of the primary control, defining it as "the unknown and unseen self-righting and self-healing mechanism that can be restored and vitalized."
In sum, Mr. Kingsley has presented the primary control—which Alexander wrote extensively about and considered central to his technique—with an ill-defined mystical force which, accordingly, Alexander must have unwittingly stumbled upon and mistaken for a certain relativity of the head, neck and back.
Ironically, it is in The Use of the Self where Alexander wrote of discovering the necessity to first free his neck in seeking a better condition for his vocal apparatus, since that was the sine qua non of taking his head forward and up, of widening the back, and so forth, which are in turn the necessary conditions of freedom and stability in the limbs. This is the genesis of Alexander's use of the word "primary" in describing the head-neck-back relationship, and in my experience, as in Alexander's, it holds true: the sequence of directions given to oneself matters greatly, since tense feet, for example, can hardly flatten on the floor if the head is taken back and down, whereas the head can be taken "forward and up"1 to a fine degree even if there is tension in the lower extremities, particularly while sitting. Further, and maybe most significantly, the relativity of the head-neck-back rarely need change during any manner of activity, whereas the arms and legs are constantly bending, rising, stretching, and so on. Small wonder Alexander considered this relativity primary.
Of course, Kingsley is not wrong to point out the interdependence of all processes in the body. It is certainly true that undue tension in the feet creates a downward pull on the head, neck and back. Yet what is crucial to understand here is that in the context of learning and teaching the Alexander Technique, the primary control is an indispensable concept. It instructs the pupil to guide his or her attention through the body in the sequence most fit to facilitate proper relativity of all the parts, and it names succinctly that natural, visible, dynamic yet enduring relativity of the head, neck and back observable in little children and animals as well as many great musicians and athletes. Thus Kingsley discards a practical concept in favor of a truism about "interdependence;" and so we come to his second, graver error.
Direction
Here it begins to seem that what Kingsley writes of in his introduction is not the Alexander Technique at all, but in fact the Kingsley Technique, since he has redefined not only the primary control, but two other conceptual pillars of the technique: inhibition and direction.
First, he takes aim at direction, neglecting to elucidate Alexander's own definition of the concept before setting out the axiom that "aiming for postural improvements using postural directions leads to a bodymind[sic] attitude of effort and trying, which simply reinforces the problem." Dismissing as superfluous all "ideas and images about heads, necks and backs," he declares that "the trying[sic] self is the obstacle, and the shift towards a non-trying[sic] self is the solution." Finally, he offers his own definition of the directions as "the natural flow of energy and vibrancy that exists within the organism," directions which are interfered with "when we are in a condition of stress and reactivity."
Here, again, Kingsley takes a practical concept which Alexander developed based on careful observation of his own muscular action, and replaces it with a kind of mystical or spiritual phenomenon which, implicitly, only the initiated can perceive.2 Thus the famous directions are not, as Alexander described repeatedly, a series of mental orders or intentions projected to oneself before and during muscular activity along lines one has reasoned out in advance, but a "natural flow of energy and vibrancy"—just as the primary control is not, as Alexander saw it, a concrete, observable relativity of the head, neck and back, but an "unknown and unseen self-righting and self-healing mechanism." These pseudo-spiritual definitions do a massive disservice to neophyte readers, and reveal Kingsley's muddled seeing in relation to the central problem addressed by the Alexander Technique: how to shed habit and coordinate the bodymind through reasoned conception and conscious awareness.
But for a moment let us leave aside direction, since a subtler and more misleading error still lurks in Kingsley's presentation: his dismissal of conception itself. He explicitly warns that "ideas, concepts and cognitive efforts reinforce the very mental instrument that is the problem in the first place," he advises us to simply trust that "the prevention or inhibition[sic] of reaction, maintains or liberates this stream of energy [or direction] in the body."
To understand Kingsley's error, we must return to Alexander. In Man's Supreme Inheritance, Alexander sets out four stages to the "performance of any muscular action by conscious guidance and control:"

1. The conception of the movement required;
2. The inhibition of erroneous preconceived ideas which subconsciously suggest the manner in which the movement or series of movements should be performed;
3. The new and conscious mental orders which will set in motion the muscular mechanism essential to the correct performance of the action;
4. The movements (contractions and expansions) of the muscles which carry out the mental orders.

Alexander considered "conception of the movement required" the very first stage in his technique, to precede even inhibition. Thus he made clear, if indirectly, that in the context of his technique, clear conception is essential to achieving a desired end. Incidentally, this is a fact any competent artist can attest to; if a composition is not unambiguously understood and organized within one's memory, it cannot be brought to fruition. Even the most simple act, such as extending one's arm to grasp a nearby object, requires a detailed conception of distance, weight, strength, and so forth; if the object turns out to be heavier than expected, the conception of these variables and their relation to one another, and hence the muscular action, must change. This is direction in action, albeit subconscious.
Yet Kingsley belittles conception, instead leaning on concepts like "ease," "letting go" "acceptance," and the like. He is not alone in this among teachers, but in my opinion, they overlook the influence of what Alexander termed "erroneous beliefs," a concept closely related to that of "unreliable sensory appreciation." Both could be read in the spiritual lexicon alongside "letting go," etc.; but that would place their referent outside the realm of what words and concepts can describe. On the contrary, Alexander was pointing to something concrete and empirically observable: to errors of spatio-motor perception able to be observed phenomenologically and in other people's behavior; not to transcendent truths about observation itself. Thus the classic example of an Alexandrian "erroneous belief" is a person who raises their arm and believes their shoulder has remained still when it has not. The key for the pupil in this instance is to gain an accurate conception5 of their own muscular action, in reference to bodily sensations; not to simply "let go" or "do nothing."3 And this conception must come about through active tutelage—e.g. Alexander Technique lessons—or, dare I say, the way Alexander himself did it: by reasoned experimentation, conceiving hypotheses based on careful register and analysis of his own sensations, and also by watching the behavior of others. John Dewey called the technique scientific for a reason.
All of this is not to understate the importance of concepts like "release" and "effortlessness," including in the context of the Alexander Technique. Seeing more or less what is meant by them is doubtless the key to mastery of all activities, all practices, all techniques. Yet those spiritual concepts should not blot out the very concrete technique Alexander developed for improving what he called "the use of the self:" that coordination of the muscular system, achieved through conscious reason, which influences for better or worse the functioning of the whole organism.4
Inhibition
So much for direction. What about inhibition? Under the heading "Inhibition and Non-Doing," Kingsley describes Alexander's understanding of inhibition as "an artificial pause between stimulus and reaction," after which he could "give directions to himself." Then he lays down the gauntlet, stating that in the "real world […] life does not offer us the choice to inhibit:" since according to neuroscience research, "neural reactions take milliseconds and are faster than conscious thought processes." In other words, "we either react to the stimulus, or not." So, with inhibition proven impossible, Kingsley is left with no choice but to "reformulate" another of Alexander's concepts, offering us a supposedly scientifically enlightened6 view that inhibition is really "a quality of non-doing[sic] that needs to be already available in the organism before the receipt of a stimulus." This is "a way of being[sic] rather than a way of doing[sic]."
This Kingsleyan inhibition turns out to be the essence of the technique, since it is this very "condition of non-doing[sic]" the teacher is supposed to transmit, through a touch Kingsley describes as "a dance of poetry and a symphony of silence." With it, the teacher imparts a "deep sense of acceptance" by which "change emerges in the pupil."7 He goes on to compare the Alexander Technique to "Zen Buddhism, mindfulness and the philosophy of non-duality," identifying the uniqueness of the Alexander Technique in "the transmission of immediate experience." In fact, there is no Alexander Technique as such, but only inhibition:
The Chinese Tao has a concept of Wu Wei[sic], which translates as surrendering to the effortless flow of life[sic], or non-doing[sic] action. Ultimately, the Alexander Technique needs to reinvent itself and relinquish the Technique. The Alexander Teacher really teaches nothing[sic!]. But this nothing or emptiness is in fact the deepest essence of being and the fullness of life. Like grace, it drops onto us and into us when the conditions are ripe.
The problem is that Alexander's own writings indicate that inhibition is not a "quality," a "condition," or a "surrendering to the effortless flow of life." On the contrary, according to Universal Constant in Living, it is "the act of refusing to respond to the primary desire to gain an end, [which] becomes the act of responding (volitionary act) to the conscious reasoned desire to employ the means whereby that end may be gained." As clear as day: inhibition is an action in response to the stimulus of conscious desire: a conscious, continuing refusal to do a thing the way one normally does it. Alexander saw that this inhibitory act had to precede in every instance any attempt to change his habits. Everyone is well familiar with the inhibitory act. The act of not indulging an immediate desire, however small, is it. So, inhibition is not an "artificial pause," but a phenomenologically observable process within the organism, a process that can be made habitual through practice. It is no more abstract and transcendent than blinking or moving one's finger.7
Here Kingsley again takes something ordinary and concrete and makes it mystical, going so far as to "relinquish the Technique." The trouble is that there is a good reason the Alexander Technique came to be known as such. A technique is a skillful way of doing something; a mental tool; a procedure. Ways of doing can be found everywhere: techniques for dance, for romance, for healing, even for attaining nirvana or enlightenment. Each has a goal in mind and is based on what worked in the past; each resorts to concepts to explain itself; each prescribes action, or doing something a certain way. Yet Kingsley dismisses the idea of doing anything at all. Equating the Alexander Technique with "nothing," he tosses out the concepts Alexander spent decades refining, when Alexander's genius was precisely to conceive a useful, coherent way of doing things through patient observation of the phenomena he termed inhibition, direction, primary control, and the rest.
So, the technique may encompass all the acts of living, but it is still a technique. Alexander often used the term "procedure" to describe it, and I think procedure is as apt a word as any to describe the application of his technique to the acts of living. He constantly stressed the technique's sequential, stepwise nature and recorded countless practical examples of it in action, both in hypotheticals and accounts of lessons. The technique is not a metaphysics or a philosophy like non-duality; it is a practical procedure with a clear purpose: restoring
advantageous, natural relativity of the head, neck and back.
Conclusion
The technique is blindingly simple but surprisingly subtle and difficult to master; and, as far as I am aware, it is unique. Unfortunately, Kingsley is not alone in overlooking the uniqueness and subtleties of the technique in favor of spiritual truisms and platitudes. I suspect there are two main reasons for this.
The first is the tendency of serious pupils of the technique to become more open to "spirituality," both philosophically (e.g. non-duality) and in terms of sadhana (e.g. meditation, yoga, self-inquiry). Many are enthusiastic about the similarities between the Alexander Technique and, for example, mindfulness practice. It is certainly true that the technique requires the pupil to have some degree of "mindfulness," or the ability to realize when the mind has wandered; and it is also true that a few people who devote themselves to the technique come upon some of the same insights one might find in spiritual practice. Yet spiritual insight is not the purpose of the technique. In my opinion, the Alexander Technique is a relative of energy practices such as Hatha yoga, qigong, and TRE (trauma release exercises). Such techniques are often used in tandem with spiritual practices meant for the cultivation of insight, but their purpose has traditionally been preparatory and salutary, not "spiritual." One need not stray too esoteric to encounter the idea that the real goal of spirituality has nothing to do with "ways of doing." On the other hand, Qigong explicitly aims to regulate qi in the body; kundalini yoga is concerned with the flow of prana; the Alexander Technique seeks to restore the good use of the primary control. More practically, the technique teaches mental discipline, and ultimately the ability of the nervous system to regulate itself. Such a practice may lay the groundwork for spiritual realization, but it is by no means indistinguishable from it.
While there is no point speculating about Alexander's private insights, one thing can be certain: he left us a definite procedure with a practical, concrete purpose—not a transcendental one. Yet Kingsley's introduction continually implies the Alexander Technique is an essentially spiritual practice with heavenly fruit. Disparaging the core concepts that constitute the Alexander Technique, he invites us instead to simply "surrender," "let go in faith," and blindly trust that its real essence—nothing less than Wu Wei—will be transmitted through the "rare, "unconditional" touch of the teacher.
The second, more obvious reason Alexander has been so misunderstood is that he rarely wrote concisely, and in any case, recognition and conception of the primary control can never be refined through words, but only through unfamiliar sensory experiences—either reasoned out, as Alexander did, or in the hands of a good teacher. Hence there is more than a kernel of truth to Kingsley's view of the "supreme value of guidance with the hands;" yet I differ from him in that I insist the Alexander Technique cannot be divorced from intellectual understanding and, indeed, conception.
The Use of the Self and Alexander's other works certainly were not without their flaws, but at their best they illuminate concepts which are nuanced, rich, and useful when applied. Primary control, direction and inhibition are three such concepts. Whatever their flaws, Alexander's books point the way to a wonderful technique, and they deserve thoughtful, probing introductions like Dewey's—not dismissals.
1 Like many other Alexandrian terms, the concrete meaning of "forward and up" seems incredibly controversial among Alexander Technique teachers. While I conceive it roughly as freedom of the atlanto-occipital joint, the term cannot be understood in isolation from the rest of the parts—namely, from one's conception of the primary control. It seems to experience it, one must discover it, as Alexander did, or be shown it by a teacher.
2 This is not to say there are not phenomena only some people perceive.
3An overemphasis on "letting go" and the like obscures the fact that Alexander always described the technique as consisting of stages or sequential steps, which in my opinion constitute the "means whereby" he wrote of.
4 "Use of the self" is another problematic term. Related to the concept of "good form" and "good technique" among athletes and musicians, it refers essentially to coordination of the musculature along reasoned lines, which is not separate from conception of the primary control. Equal and opposite is the term "misuse," since one's idea of misuse depends on one's idea of good use. Different teachers understand the term differently. Kingsley states that "bodily tensions and distortions become fixed and reinforced as we react to the general stimuli of living." True enough. Yet he goes on to imply it is associated only with fear, anxiety and distress. Again he couples this concept to the language of contemporary spirituality, trumpeting that it "alienates us from our own true nature." This is to completely ignore the point Alexander returned to again and again in his own writing: that the use of the self is inextricably linked with conception. No doubt, tension and imbalance are very often inextricable from fear. But there may be another class of misuse: one based on misconceptions about the body, unexamined movement patterns from childhood which have little or nothing to do with manifestations of stress or emotions in the body. I suspect one may experience profound psychophysical quietude yet still tend to throw their head back and down in relation to their neck and back, especially in movement.
5Kingsley writes that the teacher's touch indicates the "negation of trying and doing within the pupil." Even a token mention of guidance viz. the relativity of the body parts is nowhere to be found. Yet in my opinion this discussion of touch is misleading, since nothing like it can be found at all in Alexander's writings. On the contrary, Alexander stressed that the teacher's role was to demonstrate manually the proper relativity of the pupil's parts, with the means whereby of the technique; not to transmit "a way of being," nor indeed enlightenment or gnosis.
6 Neuroscientific findings relating to will and volition have proliferated in recent years. They may raise fundamental questions about the nature of self and will, but in my opinion they have little to do with the Alexander Technique, no more than they do with dancing or playing an instrument. If there are really recognizable activities Alexander termed "inhibition" and "direction," then his writings are timeless, since they speak from direct observation and experiment, not philosophy about "free will" and the like.
7 In spiritual literature one encounters, almost universally, the idea that there is no "doer" of action, or no "doer" but God. Hence Kingsley is implying that Alexandrian inhibition is somehow related to this concept, which Buddha famously summarized: "Events happen, deeds are done, but there is no doer thereof." In my opinion, the Alexander Technique has nothing more to do with this than does reading, writing, or playing a game. There may be "procedures followed, but no follower thereof."

Six Senses Krabey Offers

Posted on May 18, 2024 by Andrew Larder

Six Senses Krabey Offers – Krabey Island, Cambodia

Six Senses Krabey Island Rewarding Summer Offer A special offer for a rewarding time on the private island with incredible natural beauty. Enjoy a 20 percent savings off the contract rate, plus generous amenities with our compliment. Stay validity • Now to October 31, 2024. Booking validity • Now to August 31, 2024. Rate • 20 percent savings off Best Flexible Rate Commission • 15 percent (before taxes & service charge) Minimum stay • 2 nights. Complimentary experience and benefit Two Nights Stay Amenities A three-course dinner (excluding beverages) per stay. Four Nights Stay Amenities Choose between A three-course dinner (excluding beverages) per stay. A round-trip transfer between Sihanouk airport (KOS) and the resort OR A round-trip transfer between Phnom Penh airport (PNH) and the resort
EXCLUSIVE CONSORTIA AMENITIES • Daily breakfast. • Complimentary upgrade to the next category (excluding two-bedroom villas), subject to availability upon arrival. • Early check-in (12-noon) and late check-out (4 pm) subject to availability • $100 resort credit per stay for Food, Beverages, or Spa

Six Senses Krabey Island Cambodia

A gem of a tropical island hideaway Your very own back-to-nature tropical island featuring just 40 private free-standing pool villas that blend into the lush canopy of trees. Dine on authentic cuisine at our resort in Cambodia, or for a truly transforming wellness experience, all paths lead to the spa! De-stress with a traditional Khmer massage or dive deeper into our signature spa menu and Cambodian healing treatments.

12 Experiences:

Six Senses Krabey Island
For sporty types and serenity seekers alike Six Senses Krabey Island in Cambodia combines and customizes activities for when you want to get up and go or unwind and relax: sports and leisure facilities, private sugary sand beach, ocean boardwalk, sky observatory, and an outdoor main pool. The resort also features Grow With Six Senses at The Nest Kid’s Club.
Castaway picnic at Koh Ta Kiev Escape from civilization (but bring all the comforts with you).
Go Ta Kiev! Island Jungle Hike at Koh Ta Kiev Take an early morning walk on the wild side, complete with a refreshing dip.
Hook, Line and Catch ​Your very own catch of the day will be prepared how you like it.
Island Hopping in Cambodia ​Discover the fascinating local island life beyond Krabey Island.
Ream Pagoda Monk Blessing ​Fascinating cultural excursion with a sacred traditional highlight.
Drinks Adrift Nothing quite equals the sunset hour afloat, with refreshments.
Khmer Cooking Class Learn how to surprise and delight your dinner guests by incorporating elements of Cambodian cuisine.
Cambodian Sea Breeze Signature Dining Experience An unequalled dining experience that will be long remembered.
“Flying High” with Aerial Yoga It’s a little bit quirky, but the results are well worth the effort.
Mindfulness in the Meditation Cave A unique calming environment for meaningful meditation.
Forest Bathing Wander, wonder and stay grounded with the ultimate tree therapy. Just being in the moment is enough.
Illuminating Plankton Gazing A nighttime swim surrounded by a magical glow-in-the-dark natural wonder.

Six Senses Krabey Reservations

Contact me to book a stay at any Six Senses, worldwide:
Andrew Larder, FORA Travel Advisor

Help Spread The Word!

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• More

Customize buttons

Like this:

Related

Six Senses Con Dao 2024 offer

May 18, 2024
In "Travel"

Six Senses Rome – Roma Italia – Discounts

March 30, 2024
In "Travel"

qualia Resort – Luxury Lodges Of Australia

March 31, 2024
In "Travel"
Travelcambodia, Cambodia resorts, cambodia travel, Six Senses, Six Senses Cambodia, Six Senses Krabey, Six Senses Krabey Booking, Six Senses Krabey Cambodia, Six Senses Krabey Island, Six Senses Krabey Offers, Six Senses Krabey Offers 2024, Six Senses Krabey ReservationsSix Senses Krabey Offers

Hi all, I’ve been Buddhist for maybe 4 years now? For a long time I didn’t really know where I fit in. I had a family friend who taught me about Nichiren Shōshū, but that wasn’t really my thing. The only temple in my very small, rural town (and the only one within 8 hours of my location) is a Theravada temple, which isn’t really my thing either. I still attend on occasion, because I feel it’s better than just being at home. After reading books, watching youtube videos, lurking on this subreddit for about a year I’ve become very interested in Tibetan Buddhism, but I’ve also noticed many of the practices are Vajrayana and require lung or empowerment. I don’t have any teachers nearby and likely won’t for years, even though I am interested in Ngöndro in the future it’s obviously not possible for me to receive transmission right now, so I’m not sure where to start for this path.
Can anyone help me out with some common practices to this path that aren’t tantric? I know the seven offering bowls are common, I’ve heard of bumpas and rice pots and tingshak and kapalas and all that, but there’s so many intricacies and it’s all very confusing to me. I already have a routine I try to do as often as possible (sometimes work and life gets in the way) but it’s not really “Tibetan” if that makes sense?

Continuing on from this post, this information also comes from Helen Hardacre's book Kurozumikyō and the New Religions of Japan, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1986 - "Chapter Seven: The Unity of the New Religions" (pp. 188-193):

This study has identified a vitalist, spiritualist world view as the most fundamental factor unifying the new religions. Whereas prior studies have recognized a rather standardized list of traits as shared by a number of the new religions, this study has tried to show how those traits are unified in originating from a particular conceptualization of self in relation to other levels of existence coupled with regular patterns of thought, action, and emotion. The kingpin of the system is the idea that the self-cultivation of the individual determines destiny.

You can see this clearly expressed in this SGI saying:

"A great human revolution in just a single individual will help achieve a change in the destiny of a nation and, further, can even enable a change in the destiny of all humankind."

That's the belief, at least. We don't see SGI members having anything close to this kind of impact on society or the world at large, and they've had over 80 years to show us all, almost 65 years here in the US. Nothing.

The religious life consists of such cultivation and of repaying the benefice of deity.

Before anyone tries to say, "There's no 'god' in SGI!", remember that Ikeda HIMSELF defined the Soka Gakkai/SGI as a "monotheism". Considering that Ikeda is defined as "the world’s foremost authority on Nichiren Buddhism" and "the supreme theoretician" (with the only qualification apparently being the all-controlling leader of the Soka Gakkai/SGI), so whatever Icky says, goes.
And don't forget the SGI's emphasis on YOUR eternal gratitude.

Textual erudition, esoteric ritual, and the observance of abstinences will not serve as a basis for elevating the religious status of priests above that of the laity. The laity therefore tend to be central.

Hence the inherent tension in the relationship between the Soka Gakkai and Nichiren Shoshu, ultimately showing that the "new religions" and the "old religions" simply don't mix.

Since individual self-cultivation is the primary determiner of all affairs, fatalistic notions and ideas of pollution must be recast. Unhindered (or less hindered) by notions of pollution, women play key roles.

The "new religions" are so much better positioned to exploit this huge source of donations and free work! The Ikeda cult certainly has.

Because all problems can be traced to insufficient cultivation of the self, one cannot expect fundamental social change to occur through political action.

Even though, ironically, this attitude simply entrenches the status quo and creates no change at ALL. As explained here, this belief simply produces a conservative attitude that rejects society's efforts to collectively help those in need. How many times did you hear in SGI that such-and-so needy person didn't need actual help; they "just need to chant to change their karma!"?? The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. put it succinctly:

Now the other myth that gets around is the idea that legislation cannot really solve the problem and that it has no great role to play in this period of social change because you’ve got to change the heart and you can’t change the heart through legislation. You can’t legislate morals. The job must be done through education and religion. Well, there’s half-truth involved here. Certainly, if the problem is to be solved then in the final sense, hearts must be changed. Religion and education must play a great role in changing the heart. But we must go on to say that while it may be true that morality cannot be legislated, behavior can be regulated. It may be true that the law cannot change the heart but it can restrain the heartless. It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me but it can keep him from lynching me and I think that is pretty important, also. So there is a need for executive orders. There is a need for judicial decrees. There is a need for civil rights legislation on the local scale within states and on the national scale from the federal government. Source

And civil rights legislation has done far MORE to advance the causes of equality and justice than ANY religion ever has. For example, the SGI still clings to its anachronistic, old-fashioned "4 divisional system" based in traditional Japanese patriarchal family norms, even though this is ill-fitting and inappropriate, even offensive, in Western cultures.

Similarly, attempting to cure disease through medical therapies alone can produce only a shallow healing.

As discussed here, this kind of selling point might've flown in the 1800s, even in the early 1900s, and in the chaos of post-WWII defeated/occupied Japan, when people didn't really have access to medical treatment that worked, but now? GTFO. There are very few who will go for this, and they tend to be uneducated. You'll notice this "faith-healing" is hardly a major selling point any more.
Keeping in mind that the focus of this book is on one of the oldest of Japan's "new religions", Kurozumikyō, to illustrate how very similar ALL Japan's "new religions" are to each other, with only minor differences, and this includes Soka Gakkai:

The code of ethics seen in Kurozumikyō is not solely its own invention but is generally shared by both new and established religions. It rests in principles of family solidarity, authority of elders, and a clear-cut division of labor between the sexes.

Is it still required in Japan that female Soka Gakkai employees retire as soon as they marry?
From the March 2022 paper, "‘Genderism vs. Humanism’: The Generational Shift and Push for Implementing Gender Equality within Soka Gakkai-Japan":

This paper investigates how young Japanese women in contemporary Soka Gakkai (SG) navigate Japan’s continuous gender stratified society that remains culturally rooted in the ‘salaryman-housewife’ ideology. How are young SG members reproducing or contesting these hegemonic gender norms that few seek to emulate? While SG has long proclaimed that it stands for gender equality, its employment structure and organization in Japan until recently reflected the typical male breadwinner ideology that came to underpin the post-war Japanese nation-state and systemic gender division of labor.
As an organization that has long claimed to support an internationalist/global ‘humanist’ agenda, driven by Daisaku Ikeda’s interpretation of Nichiren Buddhism, SG in Japan also rose to prominence in a society that culturally and ‘legally’ stratified men and women through a systematic gender division of labor.
According to the global gender gap index reported by the World Economic Forum, Iceland followed by Finland stood at the top of 156 countries as the most gender equal societies in 2021; Japan was ranked at 120 as one of the most unequal societies; the closest other OECD country was Italy, ranked as number 633. Even though the rate of female employment now mirrors other OECD countries, no significant change in women’s employment status and position in Japan has occurred. Women in management positions, economic participation and opportunity ranked 117, while their educational attainment stood as number 92, and political empowerment was close to the bottom, at number 147. Why would Japan, as an affluent, post-industrial society, find it so difficult to achieve gender equity on par with other OECD countries?

The Soka Gakkai (SG) certainly is not at ALL "progressive" on this issue! Ikeda blathered endlessly about "the century of women" and "empowering women", yet the organization HE CONTROLLED completely subjugates and exploits women! There ARE no female Soka Gakkai vice presidents.

Even if SG may be one of the biggest private organizations in Japan, the core work force by comparison is much smaller than the SG organization as a whole. Core regional or national male leaders were typically employed and remain employed as core workers on the general track, while until more recently the equivalent female leaders employed by the SGHQ would retire from paid employment upon marriage, and continue ‘unpaid’ leadership positions in the local area. ... SGHQ consists of the central leadership of the organization, but as an employer was built on the model of a typical Japanese company. This meant male employees were stratified as the core labor force and female employees as periphery, disposable labor. This thinking, on the one hand, reflected assumptions about women’s role as homemakers and mothers, which meant that SG female staff upon marriage would stop paid employment. In reality, this did not mean ‘retirement’ to become homemakers, but rather that married women continued ‘working’ for SG as leaders in the local voluntary organization. The vast majority of female and male members of SG never work for the organization as employees, including most of its women leaders. The organization throughout its post-war period relied heavily on the women’s division or fujinbu 婦人部 (see also McLaughlin 2019 who translates this more narrowly to refer to married women). However, particularly those women trained through working for the SGHQ moved onto become effectively unpaid staff and leaders in local areas once they had married and were economically supported by a husband. Women in SG, both those who were employed at the SGHQ and those that were in employment in other places before marriage—a much larger number—could be said to have been and still today remain the key driving force behind SG’s development in Japan: women organize, execute and lead a range of activities that involve the majority of members in the voluntary organization.

Yes, Soka Gakkai women work hard - just without pay. It's utterly exploitative. You can imagine how utterly dependent women are within this system and how vulnerable in cases of divorce. It's NOT AT ALL "humanistic" OR consistent with any "century of women"!

This family-centered ethic is found in established Buddhism and Shrine Shintō, and no new religion denies it. Some in fact go much further than Kurozumikyō to articulate it plainly and to implement it with a vengeance. The main difference in the familistic ethic between the established religions and the new lies in the sustained attention, systematic socialization, and organizational support available to the follower in the new religions. Specifically, counseling helps followers implement the world view's patterns of thought, action, and emotion, and rewards them for doing so.

Within the SGI, this is the whole "guidance" framework buttressing the (non)discussion meetings as a consistent source of indoctrination, I mean "support".

The question why this world view of the new religions arose as a pervasive orientation at the end of the Tokugawa period (1603–1867) is quite remarkable. In large part the new religions themselves are responsible for its propagation. In addition, however, it harmonized well with social institutions and mores prevalent before 1945. ... The family system as codified in the Meiji Civil Code of 1898 embodied a familistic ethic closely resembling that of the new religions. No doubt these religions were greatly supported by the promulgation of this ethic by the pre-1945 educational system. Even when compulsory education dropped morality courses from the curriculum, the new religions continued to preach much the same content, shorn of chauvinistic rhetoric about the divinity of the emperor and the sacrality of the Japanese nation.
In all the new religions, persons over about fifty years of age occupy most positions of leadership, and the consequences of this fact are weighty.

Indeed. In 1986, when this book was published, Icky was 58 years old. While the Soka Gakkai started out as a "young" movement, the fact that Ikeda held onto power as he aged and never ever "passed the baton" to a younger successor or "turned the reins over to the youth" meant that the Soka Gakkai was doomed to become old and stale. Perhaps it was only the fact of Toda's death at this same age (58) that enabled the Soka Gakkai new religion to ever gain a reputation as a "young movement"; Toda held onto all the power and control until his own death, though it seems more a function of his leadership and less akin to Ikeda's pathological grasping, and it was a lucky break for Icky that Toda cacked it so early. Otherwise, he'd have been left like poor Harada, who only became President of the Soka Gakkai when he was already retirement age, 65 years old. Soka Gakkai is now an elderly, declining organization, and that's because Ikeda chose to gather ALL power and control to himself and KEEP it until his own death. Hardly "progressive" or "visionary"!

These individuals were educated under the prewar system, and they have received as part of their primary education a view of the family as a microcosm of the nation, of its roles as pervaded with a sacred character, paralleling a view of Japan as a divine nation. They tend to see the family in terms of the ie rather than in terms of the nuclear family, and to regard its organizational principles as sharing the quality of sacredness.

This "ie" concept is unfamiliar; in the West, it is most closely approximated by Britain's noble families, such as the "House of Windsor".

when the ie or household system dominated in Japan. According to this system, the eldest son was responsible for the social and economic well-being of everyone living under his household, including parents, spouses, children, and siblings. This was considered particularly important in the years leading up and during World War II when “the government re-emphasized the virtue of the ie system by claiming strong family unions to be the basis of a nation ruled by the emperor, the head of all families.” During this time, almost all marriages were either arranged or approved of by the head of household. Source

This is an interesting angle, because perhaps you may recall the incident, immortalized in whatever form in the original "The Human Revolution" novel series, when Toda approached Ikeda's father and asked him to "give" Ikeda to him - Ikeda's father sounded quite overjoyed to be rid of Ikeda. It was Toda who arranged Ikeda's marriage. Toda was clearly acting as "the head of household" here.
Similarly, Ikeda claimed to be "father" of everyone in the Soka Gakkai/SGI, quite possibly in preparation for replacing Japan's Emperor with himself.
Here is a bit more on the "ie" system - you'll be able to see some of the aspects of SGI that seemed odd while you were "in", I think:

Thus it is not simply efficient or proprietous to obey elders, for women to defer to men, or to maintain clear role distinctions between men and women. It is sacred; failure to uphold these principles is immoral and worthy of censure.

This mentality is behind former SGI-USA national women's leader Akemi Bailey-Haynie's statements about the "ironclad" (as she put it) four divisional system. She knew which side her bread was buttered on, so naturally she was going to lean all the way in.

the SGI’s attempts to feign social progressivism.
SGI attracts many progressive leaning people, because the teachings appear to be democratic and universal. (How many of you heard that Nichiren Buddhism was the only school of Buddhism that held women could also attain enlightenment? I did, too many times to count.) Large gatherings in my area were notably diverse - racially, socioeconomically, and country of origin. The SGI also positions itself as an egalitarian organization without an elite Priesthood class. Everyone is a Buddha - and therefore a spiritual equal. The never-ending propagation focus is inclusive - much in the way of the Borg. Prepare to be assimilated!
All of this masks an utterly authoritarian, patriarchal, Japanese-controlled, socially regressive organization that says one thing and does quite another.

It's the Ikeda way...and of course Ikeda is THE ultimate "elite", the BETTER "Buddha" than any of YOU losers could ever hope to become. No one will ever equal the "eternal mentor", and don't even fantasize about surpassing him, because you can't. That's SGI DOCTRINE. It's Ikeda's game and no one else gets to play, even when he isn't here any more.

That the SGI would have an affinity group for LBGTQ members that simulates inclusion - and simultaneously maintain the divisional structure that is by definition exclusionary - is as dysfunctional as it gets. Source
For SGI to devise a special group for LBGTQNAA members ("Courageous Freedom", whatever THAT means) that is supposed to represent inclusion, while simultaneously maintaining a divisional structure that BY DEFINITION excludes them - proves that this show of "inclusion" is nothing more than a façade, window-dressing to promote itself and conceal its rotten core, while the "ironclad" dysfunction of the SGI remains unchanged. Source

Regarding the "ie" structure of Japan's hundreds-of-years-old family businesses:

The logic of the “ie” system can be described with the following points:

1. The primary objective of the parties in the “ie” relationship is to survive and prosper. The “ie” is neither a contractual venture whose objective is to maximize profit nor is it a venture which can be liquidated after squeezing it dry.
   
2. Ideally, the “ie” must last forever, and as the “ie” prospers so does the family. Therefore, if the “ie” does not exist, neither can the family.
   
3. It is the parents’ responsibility according to the “ie” to continue to have it prosper for the welfare of the family. In a certain sense, it is feudalistic, whereby the parents give children unconditional orders, and the children receive unconditional support.
   
4. The “ie” is an organization in which members will give their all for the benefit of the “ie” by sacrificing their own personal benefits.
   
5. Each “ie” has its specific precepts, habits, and culture. Members are brought up under the same philosophy, or religion, to create a strong team.
   

With regard to that last point, that was apparently the basis for counting all new converts as "households" - they were expected to convert everyone in their family to Soka Gakkai. The Ikeda cult took that as a given, which actually makes some sense, given the pre-war school indoctrination the leaders of the Soka Gakkai had all experienced; as stated above, it harmonized well with social institutions and mores prevalent before 1945.
Unfortunately for Ikeda and the Soka Gakkai, the appeal of this kind of structure was losing strength post-WWII; it's easy to see Toda's wisdom in declaring in the 1950s that, "If we don't achieve 𝘬𝘰̄𝘴𝘦𝘯-𝘳𝘶𝘧𝘶 within Japan within the next 25 or 26 years, it's game over." The Soka Gakkai's success in taking over Japan ("kosen-rufu") depended upon that conditioning that was no longer happening in the schools or in the family. Ikeda believed he was great enough that he'd be able to overcome the fading of that all-important cultural conditioning within the population after 1945, and somehow "win" against the odds. He didn't.

The new religions continue to think of the ie as the model for family relations. That is, the idea of a corporate body passed from generation to generation, engaged in a common means of subsistence, its eternality symbolically manifest in the cult of ancestors, continues to be the conceptual norm.
Conversion is almost entirely limited to urban areas.
Large corporations in Japan typically screen prospective employees to eliminate members of the new religions. There is an inherent conflict between these two types of organizaitions, based upon a paradoxical similarity. The company at its largest and most elaborate seeks to accommodate nearly every need of its employees until the time of retirement, with a corresponding claim upon their loyalties and to a lesser extent, those of their families. Thus individuals already committed to a creed and to an organization over which the company has no control are suspect and probably unable to commit themselves to the extent of someone who has no such commitment. But it is necessary to recall that only a small proportion of the work force is employed by large corporations. The new religions provide ladders of prestige and reward for achievement, and this is a potent source of their appeal. ... Much as a man rises through the ranks in a company, members of the new religions can win reward and recognition that might well be beyond their reach in secular society. Since secular success so often depends heavily upon education and personal connections, persons lacking these may find themselves barred from many opportunities.

And there you have it!

Jacob Boehme (or as some say Behmen) was a German mystic and spiritualist who began to write in the 17th century. In his works he inserted a picture of an angel blowing a trumpet, from which issued these words: "To all Christians, Jews, Turks and Heathens, to all the nations of the earth this Trumpet sounds for the last time." In truth it was a curious emblem, but he, the author, was a mystic, and as all experience shows, the path of the mystic is a strange one. It is, as Job says, a path which the "vulture knoweth not." Even as a bird cleaves the eternal ether, so the mystic advances on a path nor ordinarily manifest, a way which must be followed with care, because like the Great Light, which flashes forth and leaves only traces when it returns again to its centre, only indications are left for those who come after seeking the same spiritual wisdom. Yet by these "traces," for such they are called in the Kabbala, the way can be discerned, and the truth discovered.
Boehme was poor, of common birth, and totally devoid of ordinary education. He was only a shoemaker. Yet from the mind and out of the mouth of this unlettered man came mighty truths.
It would be idle to inquire into the complications of Karma which condemned him to such a life as his appeared to be. It must have been extremely curious, because though he had grasped the truth and was able to appreciate it, yet at the same time he could not give it out in its perfect form. But he performed his work, and there can be no manner of doubt about his succeeding incarnation. As Krishna says in the Bhagavad-Gita, he has been already or will shortly be "born into a family of wise devotees"; and thence "he will attain the highest walk."
His life and writings furnish another proof that the great wisdom-religion―the Secret Doctrine―has never been left without a witness. Born a Christian, he nevertheless saw the esoteric truth lying under the moss and crust of centuries, and from the Christian Bible extracted for his purblind fellows those pearls which they refused to accept. But he did not get his knowledge from the Christian Scriptures only. Before his internal eye the panorama of real knowledge passed. His interior vision being open he could see the things he had learned in a former life, and at first not knowing what they were was stimulated by them to construe his only spiritual books in the esoteric fashion. His brain took cognizance of the Book before him, but his spirit aided by his past, and perchance by the living guardians of the shining lamp of truth, could not but read them aright.
His work was called "The Dawning of the Eternal Day." In this he endeavors to outline the great philosophy. He narrates the circumstances and reasons for the angelic creation, the fall of its chief three hierarchies, and the awful effects which thereupon fell upon Eternal Nature. Mark this, not upon man―for he was not yet―but upon the eternal Nature, that is BRAHM. Then he says that these effects came about by reason of the unbalancing of the seven equipoised powers of forces of the Eternal Nature or Brahm. That is to say, that so long as the seven principles of Brahm were in perfect poise, there was no corporeal or manifested universe. So in the Bhagavad-Gita we find that Krishna tells Arjuna that "after the lapse of a thousand ages (or Night of Brahm) all objects of developed matter come forth from the non-developed principle. At the approach of that day they emanate spontaneously." (Bhagavad-Gita, Chap. 8. ) Such is the teaching of the Secret Doctrine.
And again Boehme shows the duality of the Supreme Soul. For he says in his work "Psychologia Vera cum Supplemento" that these two eternal principles of positive and negative, the yea and the nay of the outspeaking Supreme One, together constitute eternal nature,―not the dark world alone; which is termed the "root of nature,―" the two being as it were combined in perfect indissoluble union.
This is nothing else but Purush and Prakriti, or taken together, what is referred to in the Bhagavad-Gita where it is said: "But there is another invisible, eternal existence, superior to this visible one, which does not perish when all things perish. It is called invisible and indivisible. This is my Supreme Abode."
Clearly the Supreme Abode could never be in Purush alone, nor in Prakriti alone, but in both when indissolubly united.
This scheme is adhered to all through this great philosopher's works, no matter whether he is speaking of the great Universe or macrocosm, or of its antitype in man or microcosm. In "De Tribus Principiis" he treats of the three principles or worlds of Nature, describing its eternal birth, its seven properties, and the two co-eternal principles; and furthermore in "De Triplici Vita Hominis" he gives the three-fold life of man from which the seven is again deduced.
In "De Electione Gratia" he goes into a subject that often proves a stumbling block to many, and that is the inevitableness of evil as well as of good. From this it is easy to pass to a contemplation of one of the difficult points in occultism as shown in the Secret Doctrine, that nothing is evil, and that even if we admit evil or wickedness in man, it is of the nature of the quality or guna, which in the Bhagavad-Gita is denominated raja―foulness or bad action. Even this is better than the indifferent action that only leads to death. Even from wickedness may and does come forth spiritual life, but from indifferent action comes only darkness, and finally death.
Krishna says in Bhagavad-Gita, Chap. IV: "There are three kinds of action: first, that which is of the nature of Satyam, or true action; second, that which is of the nature of Raja, or bad action; third, that which is of the nature of Tamas, or indifferent action." He then says: "Although thou wert the greatest of all offenders, thou shalt be able to cross the gulf of sin in the bark of spiritual wisdom"; and a little farther on "The ignorant and man without faith, whose spirit is full of doubt, is lost and cannot enjoy either world." And in another chapter in describing Himself, he says that he is not only the Buddha, but also is the most evil of mankind or the Asura.
This is one of the most mystical parts of the whole secret doctrine. While Boehme has touched on it sufficiently to show that he had a memory of it, he did not go into the most occult details. It has to be remembered that the Bhagavad-Gita, and many other books treating on the Secret Doctrine, must be regarded from seven points of view; and that imperfect man is not able to look at it from the centre, which would give the whole seven points at once.
Boehme wrote about thirty different treatise, all of them devoted to great subjects, portions of the Secret Doctrine.
Curiously enough the first treated of the "Dawn of the Eternal Day," and the second was devoted to an elucidation of "The Three Principles of Man." In the latter is really to be found a sevenfold classification similar to that which Mr. Sinnett propounded in "Esoteric Buddhism."
He held that the greatest obstacle in the path of man is the astral or elementary power, which engenders and sustain this world.
Then he talks of "tinctures," which we may call principles. According to him there are two principles ones, the watery, and the igneous. These ought to be united in Man; and they ardently seek each other continually, in order to be identified with Sophia or Divine Wisdom. Many Theosophists will see in this a clue not only to the two principles―or tinctures―which ought to be united man, but also to a law which obtains in many of the phenomena of magic. But even if I were able, I should not speak on this more clearly.
For many inquirers the greatest interest in these works will be found in his hypothesis as to the birth of the material Universe. On the evolution of man from spirit into matter he has much more than I could hope to glance at. In nearly all of it he was outlining and illustrating the Secret Doctrine. The books indicated are well worthy of study not only by Western but also by Eastern metaphysicians.
Let us add a few sentences to support this hypothesis from Count Saint Martin, who was a devoted student of these works.
"Jacob Boehme took for granted the existence of an Universal Principle; he was persuaded that everything is connected in the immense chain of truths, and that the Eternal Nature reposed on seven principles or bases, which he sometimes calls powers, forms, spiritual wheels, sources, and fountains, and that those seven bases exist also in this disordered material nature, under constraint. His nomenclature, adopted for these fundamental relations, ran thus: The first astringency, the second gall or bitterness, the third anguish, the fourth fire, the fifth light, the sixth sound, and the seventh he called BEING or the thing itself."
The reader may have begun to think the author did not rightly comprehend the first six but his definition of the seventh shows he was right throughout, and we may conclude the real meanings are concealed under these names.
"The third principle, anguish, attenuates the astringent one, turns it into water, and allows a passage to fire, which was shut up in the astringent principle."
There are in this many suggestions and a pursuit of them will repay the student.
"Now the Divine Sophia caused a new order to take birth in the centre of our system, and there burned our sun; from that do come forth all kinds of qualities, forms and powers. This centre is the Separator." It is well known that from the sun was taken by the ancients all kinds of power; and if we mistake not, the Hindus claim that when the Fathers enter into Para-Nirvana, their accumulated goodness pours itself out on the world through the "Door of the Sun."
The Bhagavad-Gita says, that the Lord of all dwells in the region of the heart, and again that this Lord is also the Sun of the world.
"The earth is a condensation of the seven primordial principles, and by the withdrawal of eternal light this became a dark valley." It is taught in the East, that this world is a valley and that we are in it, our bodies reaching to the moon, being condensed to hardness at the point where we are on the earth thus becoming visible to the eye of man. There is a mystery in this statement, but not such an one as cannot be unravelled.
Boehme proceeds: "When the light mastered the fire at the place of the sun, the terrible shock of the battle engendered an igneous eruption by which there shot forth from the sun a stormy and frightful flash of fire―Mars. Taken captive by light it assumed a place, and there it struggles furiously, a pricking goad, whose office is to agitate all nature, producing reaction. It is the gall of nature. The gracious, amiable Light, having enchained unerupted Mars, proceeded by its own power to the bottom or end of the rigidity of Nature, when unable to proceed further it stopped, and became corporeal; remaining there it warms that place, and although a valet in Nature, it is the source of sweetness and the moderator of Mars.
"Saturn does not originate from the sun, but was produced from the severe astringent anguish of the whole body of this Universe. Above Jupiter the sun could not mitigate the horror, and out of that arose Saturn, who is the opposite of meekness, and who produces whatever of rigidity there is in creatures, including bones, and what in moral nature corresponds thereto." (This is all the highest astrology, from one who had no knowledge of it.) "As in the Sun is the heart of life, so by Saturn commenceth all corporeal nature. Thus in these two resides the power of the whole universal body, and without their power there could be no creation nor any corporification.
"Venus originates in effluvia from the Sun. She lights the unctuosity of the water of the Universe, penetrates hardness, and enkindles love."
"Mercury is the chief worker in the planetary wheel; he is sound, and wakes up the germs in everything. His origin, the triumph of Light over Astringency (in which sound was shut up silent), set free the sound by the attenuation of the astringent power."
It is certain that if this peculiar statement regarding Mercury is understood, the student will have gained a high point of knowledge. A seductive bait is here held out to those striving disciples who so earnestly desire to hold converse with the elemental world. But there is no danger, for all the avenues are very secret and only the pure can prevail in the preliminary steps.
Boehme says again: "The Mercury is impregnated and fed continually by the solar substance; that in it is found the knowledge of what was in the order above, before Light had penetrated to the solar centre."
As to the Moon, it is curious to note that he says, "she was produced from the sun itself, at the time of his becoming material, and that the moon is his spouse." Students of the story of Adam being made to sleep after his creation and before coats of skin were given, when Eve was produced from his side, will find in this a strong hint.
The above is not by any means a complete statement of Boehme's system. In order to do justice to it, a full analysis of all his works should be undertaken. However, it is sufficient if thoughtful minds who have not read Boehme, shall turn to him after reading this, or if but one earnest reader of his works, or seeker after wisdom, shall receive even a hint that may lead to a clearing up of doubts, or to the acquisition of one new idea. Count Saint Martin continually read him; and the merest glance at the "Theosophic Correspondence" or, "Man―His Nature, &.," of Saint Martin will show that from that study he learned much. How much more then will the Western mind be aided by the light shed on both by the lamp of Theosophical teachings.
"Let the desire of the pious be fulfilled."
WILLIAM Q. JUDGE
Theosophist, April, 1886.

Hi,
I am very new to this genre, but I came here via horrorlit while looking for cozy horror that was gentle, mysterious, slower paced and not jarring/traumatic. Since browsing this space, I have really been thinking what I am seeking may be more likely to fall under cozy fantasy.
Some context:
I am looking after a parent that's very ill. We are not very close (they were abusive), but life after their passing feels like an odd mix of hopeful and devastating. I have mostly come to terms with it and am well supported in therapy, but I have really been wanting to lean into cozy, relaxed, fantasy reads that may/may not be about bereavement but are about finding ourselves after loss.
I love the idea of finding joy and meaning not just in suffering but beyond it, in picking up the pieces and living anew, fresh starts.
I think I'd enjoy "finding ourselves" and adult coming of age novels involving travel, meeting new people (maybe even love interests), making friends in unexpected places, career changes that are more fulfilling and aligned. I tend to like books involving cute/fun/creative clubs, like a new person moving to a small town being invited to join the local book club kinda thing.
Themes I enjoy:

• Humor (gentle, witty, acerbic, dark, satirical, just not oppressive/harmful to marginalized groups)
• Book Clubs
• Seaside/mountainside towns/villages with beautiful descriptions of these settings since I can't travel right now
• Baking/cooking/chocolate/coffee shops
• Supernatural elements are always cool (pets/familiars, vampires, ghosts etc.)
• Mystery like even a whodunit recommendation would work where folks get together to solve a murdecrime ( but nothing super disturbing, like think Nancy Drew all the way up to T. Kingfisher, Simone St. James and Gilian Flynn at most but not Jack Ketchum)
• BIPOC authors and characters (protagonists) preferred but do not have to be BIPOC-only (am open to a wide range of suggestions)
  • BIPOC spirituality like Buddhism, Santeria etc. (and only if these books are written by folks who [as in individual or whose ancestral communities] practice these faiths i.e. not yt authors appropriating these faith traditions in their books)
• Feminist, women/nonbinary folx centered
• Wise elders/teachers/making new friends who are seniors
• As a reader myself, I also like books that feature tarot/divination/psychics
• YA is not my top preference but is okay
• Romance that is cozy, non-toxic, has elements of fantasy
• Found family
• Career changes, moving to a small town and starting afresh after burnout / job stress in a demanding profession (Fresh starts broadly)
• Halloween/autumn/winter vibes/themes

Themes I am not into:

• Space, aliens, machines/time machines, math/physics/tech/stem heavy plots, high school setting (too young to feel resonant in my 30s), loss of pets/children or heavy bereavement, SA, emotional/physical/psychological abuse (mentioned in context is okay but not in detail).
• I tend to enjoy children's lit, but I am just not too sure if that's what I am seeking right now.

Thanks in advance folks. <3

FYI, I'm (F25) a Vietnamese Buddhist, my ex (M27) is a Muslim from a very religious area of Malaysia. We met through an online friend of mine over a year ago, dated for a year (he is my first bf), was in LDR the whole time, and didn't know the first time we met irl was the last time. Was trying to work hard to get a chance to visit him too, because I only got a job a few months ago after I graduate.
We just broke up 2 weeks ago, the reason was because his family has been pressuring him nonstop for months about the state of our relationship. They gave us one year to figure it out, their condition being me moving to Malaysia, converting to Islam, in order for them to accept our marriage. They went to the extreme of threatening to disown, guilt tripping, even trying to arrange a marriage behind his back and use that as a condition for him to either get married now, or breakup with me and keep his freedom.
Me and my bf had some conversations about this topic back then earlier in our relationship, and for me the compromise that I'm comfortable with is him moving to Vietnam with me, and I'll do the convert, because I believe that if he can make such a big sacrifice then I could too, for the sake of our relationship. I was thinking if the religion is so great that built a good man who is willing to go miles for me, then I don't mind converting. Will my parents like that decision of mine? I hardly doubt so, but I know that all they want is for me to be happy and even if they don't like it, I'll prove to them that this person is the right one I chose, and I'm the one to decide my happiness. If they want me out of their house? It's okay, for me parents will always be with you if they're angry, because afterall I'm always their daughter.
Sadly, that wasn't the case for him. Although he is a very good guy, he has been content and consistent throughout our relationship, make effort to come and meet me, he's a sweetheart and will always be special to me. On the night that we broke up, he told me "I love you but I love my parents more, and I will always obey them even if they decide to take my life.", and that to me was over. I appreciated the fact that he had been convincing them for months, fought with his family for 2 days (which he has never done in his life, and he has anxiety problems on top of that) for our relationship, but afterall he still couldn't stand his ground and gave up, ending the relationship with me to fulfill his parents' wishes. He couldn't even get the last chance to meet me, although he promised.
I think the thing that broke me the most was the amount of promises the he wasn't able to deliver, he used to promise me the world, "I'd do anything to be with you", "I'd give you my life", but then afterall none of those was true. Did he mean it? Probably at one point, but 'til this day I think his love is conditional. He wants me to convert and actually practice, which I was skeptical at first, because I live in a liberal environment and my religion also doesn't force me to do anything. But then again as I said, I'm not saying never.
It's been 2 weeks since the broke up but it still hurts for me to accept that the man who once called me "the love of his life" will give everything up to obey his parents . He preaches "paradies is under your mother's feet", the son can't go against your parents' wishes, if not he'd be damned in hell.
And to think that my son, will believe that heaven is under my feet and owes me his life, I feel sick, I'm flawed af, I'm a human afterall, and in no mean he owes me anything, he doesn't ask to be born. My son should be a man with his own opinion, get the person who he loves, and respect me because I'm a good mom, not because a book told him if he makes me cry he would rot in hell. Don't get me wrong, Vietnamese culture and Buddhism also teach kids to respect your parents too, but they saying goes something like "Father's love is like a big mountain, mother's love is like the water from upstream", so yes, we are also big on respect and take care of our parents, but never to the point of if they take your life you should be okay with it.
If I do give in, leave everything behind, convert, move to MY, then will he ever be able to defend our relationship when there is issues, when he can't even defend it now? Does that mean I have to live my life in his parents' control, where they have every say about our marriage, and he is fine with that? He is not financially independent right now, and me leaving VN means leaving behind my career and start all over again (which can take years because I study urban planning and I don't think I can do that in MY), leave my beliefs, my family and everything, just to be sheltered under his parents' commands.
I just need some encouragement that leaving this relationship behind is the right thing, because even though I'm able to come to my sense and thinking rationally, it still hurts like hell and I miss him so much. I know it's best to let go, that he isn't the right man for me if he doesn't choose to stay with me, but somewhere deep down I still hope that he's around.
Crazy how some family cares about their pride more than their son's happiness.
Thanks for reading the whole thing, I just need to get it out of my system, hope everyone has a nice day.

🌿 Detailed Overview:
Explores the profound realization that Christ Consciousness and Buddha Consciousness are essentially the same state of enlightened awareness. Luminosity delves into the shared principles and teachings of Christianity and Buddhism, emphasizing the unity and universal truth at the heart of these spiritual paths. The book provides a guide for understanding and experiencing this unified consciousness in one's own life.
🔍 Key Themes and Insights:
Unity of Enlightened Consciousness: Luminosity asserts that the ultimate state of spiritual awakening, whether termed Christ Consciousness or Buddha Consciousness, is a universal experience of divine unity, love, and wisdom. This consciousness transcends religious labels and distinctions.
Comparative Teachings: Draws parallels between the teachings of Jesus Christ and Gautama Buddha, highlighting their shared emphasis on compassion, selflessness, inner peace, and enlightenment. Luminosity illustrates how both paths lead to the same ultimate realization of oneness with the divine.
Practical Spiritual Practices: Offers practical spiritual exercises and meditative practices designed to help readers cultivate and experience this unified state of consciousness. These practices include mindfulness, meditation, prayer, and contemplative techniques from both traditions.
Personal Transformation: Emphasizes the transformative power of realizing Christ/Buddha Consciousness. Luminosity discusses how embodying this state of awareness can lead to profound personal change, greater compassion, and a deeper sense of connection with all beings.
Integration and Harmony: Explores how the principles of Christ Consciousness and Buddha Consciousness can be integrated into a harmonious spiritual practice. The book encourages readers to embrace the universal truths found in both traditions to foster a more inclusive and holistic approach to spirituality.
Contemporary Relevance: Addresses the relevance of this unified consciousness in the modern world, suggesting that it can contribute to personal peace, social harmony, and global understanding. Luminosity offers insights into how these ancient teachings can be applied to contemporary issues and challenges.
Audience Takeaway:
"Christ Consciousness is Buddha Consciousness" is a profound and enlightening resource for spiritual seekers interested in exploring the unity of these two great traditions. Luminosity's work provides valuable insights and practical guidance for anyone looking to deepen their spiritual practice and experience the universal truth of enlightened consciousness.
💌 Your Experiences and Reflections:
Have you explored the teachings of both Christ and Buddha in your spiritual journey? How has Koananda Luminosity's perspective on the unity of Christ and Buddha Consciousness influenced your understanding and practice? Share your reflections on the significance of this unified state of awareness and how it has impacted your spiritual growth. Let’s discuss the insights and challenges encountered in cultivating this profound consciousness and its application in our daily lives.

• Purchase

When watching documentaries, listening to podcasts, or reading books about communist regimes, one common thread seems to be miscalculations of potential agricultural yields, or inaccurate information on the food supply already harvested and processed. The craziest example of this to me is the Khmer Rouge expecting farmers to produce three tons of rice per hectare despite a historical norm of one ton of rice per hectare. Did communist leaders simply lack experience in agriculture, or did they selectively listen to sources of information that painted an excessively positive picture of their agricultural capacity?

I 28M and my Wife 29F were recently visited Cambodia. I booked the trip for our 4th wedding anniversary.
On our last day there we decided to visit a genocide prison in Phnom Penh called S21.
We were warned by our tour guide that the place wasn’t for the faint of heart. The prison was used by the Khmer Rouge to massacre thousands of innocent civilians who were deemed as “too smart / intellectual” during the rule of Pol Pot.
I remember seeing torture chambers where they would beat people to death with chains. They didn’t hide any of the brutality. The pictures on the walls literally looked like something straight out of live leak.
In one of the prison cells there, there was literally dried up blood on the floor from presumably the captive held there all those years ago.
I remember walking past a tree dubbed the killing tree. They took kids as young as three years old and would bash their heads into it until they died.
Upon reading that I literally just started sobbing. I was visualising everything in my head and I just felt for the kids who had to watch their siblings / friends get massacred in front of them.
My wife saw me crying and instead of comforting me just gave me this weird look. After a while she did come hug me and asked if something was wrong. I just pointed to the exit and we left after that. I just couldn’t take it anymore.
While in our taxi she asked me if I was seriously crying. I just nodded and kept quiet. I was still pretty shaken up by the things I just read/saw.
That was last week and there has been this weird tension between us ever since. She tries to pick fights with me for no reason and just seems dismissive/disrespectful for no reason. A few days ago I came home exhausted from work and she asked me if I could do the laundry that day. I told her that I’d do it tomorrow and just wanted to relax for a bit. She then got mad and told me that she didn’t know she was marrying a woman and then stormed off. She has never acted like this before our trip.
I lost it yesterday night after she tried to pick another fight with me and confronted her about her behaviour over the past week. I asked her if all of this had to do with me crying. She tried denying it at first but after a while she just went silent for a few moments and then started nodding while keeping her head down. I asked her why and she just claimed that “humanity has done worse in the past” and she just feels weird about me crying over kids who have nothing to do with me. She also told me that she isn’t a therapist and she felt uncomfortable and was disappointed in me for shedding tears over something that happens all the time.
She saw me getting mad at her comments and tried backpedaling and apologising but I just couldn’t take it anymore and just went to bed in our guest room.
This was literally the second time she has ever seen me cry. First was when my best friend lost his life to a drunk driver.
To the men out there, have you experienced anything similar with your SO?
I’m just sort of lost for words. I can’t make sense of anything right now.
I don’t know who I can confide in with this so that’s why I’m posting here.
I just need a place to vent.
I’m seriously considering divorce but my brother claims that I should have known better and shouldn’t have let her see me like that. If I divorce her without trying couples counselling, I’m most definitely an asshole.
Could I have done something better to make her feel less uncomfortable?
How would you guys move forward in this situation?

I was shifting through the book "Stoicism for dummies" today because I've seen it recommended by some people here. I skipped immediately to chapter 9 which deals with the Dichotomy of Control and that is the only chapter I've read in this book. This whole chapter seems riddled with misconceptions. The authors were not satisfied with a dichotomy.
They write:

What about all the stuff that seems to be at least partly in our control? Maybe we need more distinctions. And, accordingly, some contemporary Stoic philosophers are now talking about “The Stoic Trichotomy,”

p.126
They don't clearly cite who these modern philosophers are here. But later on page 133 they cite William Irvines examples of his trichonomy, so I would suppose he is the main influence. From what I've gathered Massimo Pigliucci also wrote something similiar in one of his books? (I haven't read his books). But he later seems to recant this idea in an article here - however going on to elaborate with some form of vector model concerning the outcome of our actions.
Anyway, the authors then continue this idea even further, suggesting a sort of "spectrum" of control:

» Things completely under my control
» Things partially under my control
» Things I can’t control at all but may somehow affect
» Things I can’t directly affect but might indirectly influence
» Things I can at least try to do that might have some small relevance
» Things wholly outside my control and I should just give up

p. 127
They then go on writing

It’s one thing to agree that we think too much about things that are outside our control, and maybe even obsess over them, but it’s a bit extreme to say we should not focus on them at all, nor even concern ourselves with them and, as many ancient Stoics say, instead view them as literally “worthless,” or without any value that could justify our time or attention

p. 129
Later on they link this to relationships. They write that caring for others is a part of following nature, which would then somehow contradict focusing only on what we control (my paraphrashing). By the end they summarize by writing:

The farther something is from the envisioned inner circle of our seemingly direct control, the more loosely and lightly it should be held. Imagine again a spectrum. As we move out from the circle of more control, our embrace should be easier, gentler, and more casual, until it properly gives way to full release. This is a skilled behavior, or else everyone would be good at it. We need to practice various levels of engagement and disengagement, ranging across the spectrum from a tight hug to empty arms. We don’t need to restrict our goals and concerns to things that are internal to our own minds. But we do need to govern our desires, aversions, and associated emotions properly, so that outer goals are held and handled well, our outer activities enhance our lives rather than being a constant threat, and we have plenty of room for that virtue of courage that takes into account both the great value and the risks that we do sometimes need to experience as we seek to do what’s right.

To me this feels like a far cry from a "dummies" introduction to the dichotomy of control and I'm not sure what exactly they're trying to say or accomplish with their change. If anything I'm more confused by reading it.
To me it sounds like maybe they missed the point that how we interact (with virtue) towards external/indifferents is important. But again I've only read this one chapter.
I can't paste the whole examples they used to make their points (tennis player, novelist, relationship).
Edit: since the relationship one seems extra weird to me so I'll post a quick snippet:

But there’s a problem. Have you ever sought to act in a loving and lovable way and yet had your actions misinterpreted? According to the strict Stoic view, how anyone, including a spouse, interprets your attempts to be loving should not be a matter of your concern. It should not be a goal to have your loving intentions interpreted as such. So when your spouse misreads your best intentions, that shouldn’t be a cause for disappointment or frustration. But this just seems wrong. No, we can’t control how others see us or view our actions. And yet when we’re working hard to express and live truly loving intentions, then to have them misunderstood and rejected as the opposite of what they’re meant to be should surely be a matter of care and concern. Wouldn’t we indeed care so much that we’d want to focus on the situation very seriously, figure out the cause of miscommunication, and work hard on changing the external fact that’s admittedly not within our complete control?

p.134
They do go on to offer solutions to this, which according to them fall outside the dichotomy. They instead draw further ideas from buddhism and hinduism. Still, I fail to see why this situation of an unhappy wife would 1) not be a concern for a stoic 2) not understandable from a dichotomy

AskHistorians Weekly Round-Up and Newsletter 2024-05-17

A Recap of AskHistorians 2024-05-10 to 2024-05-16

​
Popular This Week: You might have clicked too early, so here are the responses to some of the most upvoted questions from the past week:

• "Why are Americans so historically obsessed with lowering taxes?", responses by Kochevnik81 and professionalkvetcher.
  
• "Where does the perception that the Nazis were but a few decisions away from victory in the Second World War come from?", responses by derprofessor and shalania.
  
• "Why are the Dutch not considered German while Swiss Germans are?", response by EenInnerlijkeVaart
  
• "In 1290, all 3000 English Jews were expelled. Were these people closer to what we would now call Ashkenazi, Sephardi or Mizrahi Jews?", response by ummmbacon
  
• "Why did Dante place the murderers of Julius Caesar in the Center of Hell?", response by ahuramazdobbs19
  

​
Things You Probably Missed: Great stuff flies under the radar every week! Here is a selection of responses the Mod Team enjoyed, but didn't get the attention they deserved:

• "In various categories, how effective were Roman Scale, Segmented, and Chainmail armor?", response by Iguana_on_a_stick
  
• "What was Truman doing while the first bomb was dropped on Hiroshima?", response by restricteddata
  
• "What was the relationship between the various African nobility with their colonial overlords?", response by DrAlawyn
  
• "When did the Irish start using English as their predominant language?", response by rimbaud82
  
• "How accurate is the calculation the Britain looted $45 trillion from India?", response by vir-victus
  

​
Still Looking for an Answer: Sometimes great questions don't get answered. Yet. Maybe you have the chops to give these the answer they deserve though?

• "What do we know about the mass production of Roman sculptures?"
  
• "What did an average day look like for men and women in 1750's in rural England?"
  
• "Why are Greek Letters used so often in Math and Science?"
  
• And if you have only a few minutes to kill, be sure to check this week's "Short Answers to Simple Questions" thread, as you might see something you can help with!
  

​
Flair Profile of the Week: Looking for some old classics to read? This week the randomly selected flair profile is that of moraglarsson, flaired for 'Medieval & Early Modern Scotland'.
​
Features You Might Have Missed:

• 2024-05-16: "AskHistorians Podcast Episode 227: A conversation with LostHistoryBooks"
  
• 2024-05-15: "I am Peter Samsonov, author of British Tanks of the Red Army. AMA about British armour in Soviet service."
  
• 2024-05-14: "Tuesday Trivia: Buddhism! This thread has relaxed standards—we invite everyone to participate!"
  
• 2024-05-13: "Office Hours May 13, 2024: Questions and Discussion about Navigating Academia, School, and the Subreddit"
  
• As always, don't forget to say "Hi" in Today's Friday Free-for-All
  

​
Features Coming Up:

• 2024-06-11: AMA with Daniel Melleno
  
• 2024-05-22: AMA with the_howling_cow on the interwar U.S. Army (1919-1941)
  

​
Corgi Corner
Sunny days are here!
​
Plenty more you might have missed though, so as always, don't forget to check out the most recent Sunday Digest or else to follow us on Twitter! For a complete archive of past newsletters, check out /BestOfAskHistorians.
If at any time you would like to unsubscribe from the AskHistorians Newsletter, please reply with !unsubscribe.

Kitchen Explained
Known applications
Dissect This is the ‘default’ slashing attack with a set output it’s essentially his primary ranged attack activated by Sukuna pointing his fingers to target an opponent and then firing like a gun we know that they actually travel and do not appear instantly due to Mahoraga and Maki being able to perceive dodge them,The world cutting slash is just a dismantle with a highly specified and complex target
These attacks scale to city block+ in a 5f state as they could deal lethal damage to Mahito whilst they should scale to around small town+-town lvl in a 15f state as they could more than damage Ryū Ishigori whom could take his own small town level granite blasts head on whilst they likely scale to town+-large town lvl in a 20f state as they could damage Gojo Satoru whom generated this much energy when creating his earthquake and his goodwill hollow purple and obviously the world cutting slash would be able to damage any 3 dimensional entity if it were to land
Filet This is a more specific attack with a varied output it’s his secondary knife this is activated with an open palm handsign it likely loses effectiveness the further a target is from Sukuna as seen when he needed direct contact with Ryū to instantly end his life where he was a few feet from Itadori which only caused him to be lightly shredded
These attacks when in direct contact with the opponent should scale to town lvl in a 15f state as they could deal lethal damage Ryū Ishigori whilst at range they may be around multi city block-small town lvl as it could damage Yuji Itadori whom scales higher than City block+ Nanami and Panda whilst they should be large town lvl with direct touch in a 20f state as they could damage Satoru Gojo and an unknown amount lower at range
Furnace/Fuga Kamino This is Sukuna’s oven,It requires a chant to use being ‘Open Furnace’ it also likely requires him to have struck his opponent with either dismantle or cleave additionally outside of his domain it cannot be used against more than one opponent after these three requirements are met he seems to gain complete control of flames,However outside of his domain they lack good activation speed,physical speed and range as seen when he uses it on Jogo however through a few binding vows involving his domain he covers these short comings using particles charged with cursed energy to create a massive thermionic bomb covering the range of the attack and due to the wide range speed is not an issue however Furnace seems to still lack good activation speed making it a risky option in a 1v1 against an equal opponent.
In a 15f state this attack was calced at large town-small city lvl whilst it is an unknown amount more powerful in his 20f state
Malevolent Shrine/Fukuma Mizushi. FUKU: 伏 = lurk, hide and wait MA: 魔 = demon, devil, evil It derives from FUKUMADEN. DEN symbolizes “palace” or “castle”, so the whole word essentially depicts a place where something evil is lurking around. MI: 御 = honorific prefix, used for showing respect; imperial, emperor, honourable ZUSHI: 厨子 = a Buddhism double-door shrine or altar The word MIZUSHI likely means “nobleman’s kitchen in this context,
In the JJK data book,Gege has stated that Sukuna was a cannibal and ate humans and Uraume was like his personal chef whom was skilled at preparing human flesh
So essentially Sukuna’s open domain represents some sort of hellish or perverted kitchen and within this kitchen he may use his knives freely launching both cleaves and dismantles with what seems like no restriction infact he can now use filet anywhere within the 200m range as if he himself is touching the target this seems to come with some restrictions though as within the domain only objects without cursed energy will be targeted by cleave whilst only objects with cursed energy will be targeted by Dissect this likely increases the effectiveness of each attack and bolsters the destructive capabilities of the domain
Possible Usages of the technique in Sukuna’s understanding
Pantry/Mikuriya A storage application for his technique with what would likely be a massive amount of conditions such as only allowing the storage of ‘ingredients’ or inanimate objects aswell as him bearing the weight of what he stores
Ice box/Hikura This would essentially be the opposite to Sukuna’s furnace allowing for the use of cryokenisis
Faucet/Jaguchi I admit this one is unlikely as he used max elephant to generate water but it could be a possible use
Menu/Okurimono I believe this would allow Sukuna to essentially prepare a ‘dish’ for someone a gift using his technique I suspect if he possessed some sort of Ice Box technique he gifted it to Uraume
Possible usages from Yuji’s understanding
-Freezer being similar to an icebox -An electricity ability as all kitchens have electric components -Stove similar to furnace -Raditation using microwaves -Water using faucet’s -Pantry

I grew up in a Cristian environment, but not one of those crazy american ones you may imagine. I think Jesus was a great person and agree with his teachings, mainly the Golden Rule. However, I do not care for the old testament am not sure about God or any of that stuff. I just want to live a good life as a good person. Buddhism has interested me lately and although I havn't seen much the Buddha and Jesus seem to have similar teachings, besides the basis for them. Are there any books you would reccomend to better educate myself on this? I'm currently waiting on What the Buddha Taught by Walpola Rahula Thero.
Sorry for bad english

------------------
The Book of Harris-y
(Religion as it should be) -
by Zachary Harris
(cc) (NC) (ND) by Zachary Harris
May be copied, distributed, or displayed, verbatim only. non-commercial, not derivative works nor remixes.
First edition May 2024
Chapter 1 - What's in a name
Chapter 2 - A bunch of rules
Chapter 3 - Secrete origins
Chapter 4 - The end
Chapter 5 - Everybody's favorite topic: SEX
Chapter 6 - The 2000 year war
Chapter 7 - Humans and gods
Chapter 8 - Parables
Chapter 9 - Feedback
Chapter
CHAPTER 1
What's in a name
Some religions are named after it's main prophet. Christianity is named after christ. Buddhism is named after Budda.
I, Zach Harris, dub this religion HARRISy.
Where is it written that a religion can't have a sense of humor?
HARRISy is not a spoof or sarcasm.
But any religion without a sense of humor, absolutely NEEDS to be ridiculed.
I was raised in christianity. So most of my criticism will be aimed at the Abrahamic religions.
I intend to build harrisy on logic and reason. Not the superstition, lies, and, threats that the Abrahamic religions are built on.
As an alternative for conscientious objectors caught in the religious wars (see chapter 6).
Deities are not really necessary for inspiration or religion. An all-powerful creator wouldn't need the help or adulation of puny mortals.
Only cults and human puppet masters need that. So we leave deities to their own devises. They ought to be up to it.
Harrisy is a religion about/for humans, as religions should be.
My leadership skills suck. So I will avoid leading, to avoid becoming a cult.
Chapter 2
A bunch of rules
Everybody hates rules. But let's establish what Harrisy stands for.
10 rules is a nice round number. But when the first four are about loyalty to the cult, You have to question who the rules are meant to benefit.
The christian 'commandments' only benefit the christian cult. The commandments don't even benefit their god.
A true all-powerful, immortal, creator god, would not need human worship or loyalty. The same as humans don't need the worship of ants.
We don't make rules for ants to follow. Just stay out of our way. The Abrahamic god treats us like ants. Either ignores or steps on us. It was his cults that made the 'commandments', not their god.
(more about that in chapter 7)
Harrisy has rules to live by, to benefit HUMANS:
A) Cause no harm.
B) Treat others the way you want to be treated.
Christianity calls this 'The Golden Rule' as if they invented it. But this was part of every culture and religion that humans ever created. (except Is-lame)
C) Do not kill. Do not kill humans.
Self preservation may override this, but killing is still a bad idea.
When killing animals for food, respect their sacrifice. Killing for sport is a bad idea.
D) People are not property.
Do not try to own others, in any sense.
You belong to yourself, do not give yourself away.
E) Do not steal.
You would not want to loose your stuff. (see B) Stealing harms others.
F) Do not lie. Avoid those who lie.
You would want to know the truth. To make better decisions. (see B)
G) Do not rape.
Do not force yourself on others. Your pleasures are not more important than other people's.
This applies to more than just sex. Do not force your religion on others. Do not force harrisy on others.
H) Do not shit wherever you please.
You don't want to slog through other people's shit.
(it's a metaphor.) Leave the world better than you found it.
I) Guard your privacy. Respect the privacy of others.
Beware of others who might use info against you. Or might unduly profit off you.
We have no rules about loyalty. We understand loyalties change. Just be honest (rule E)
We have no rule specifically about Adultery. Adultery might be considered loyalty, which changes.
Or adultery might be considered stealing, stealing affection. (rule D)
Chapter 3
Secrete origins
No one knows how/why it all began. Anyone who says they know, for certain, is lying.
The answer night as well be 42.
Most religions make it a crime to ask questions about their creation myths. This promotes ignorance. Helps the cult, not the people.
We understand the 'scientific method'. Scientists ask questions and are willing to test and adapt to new info.
So, for now, we trust scientific conclusions about the beginnings.
The current best theories from science:
The universe started from what they humorously call 'The Big Bang', about 13.8 Billion years ago.
Many are curious about what came before that. But we find that to be irrelevant to our everyday life.
Some religions say their god did it so they can claim payment/gratitude/worship for it. But we owe them nothing.
The earth was formed about 4.5 Billion years ago.
Humans evolved from other critters over many, many, many Generations (not years).
Some religions claim their god did it so they can claim payment/gratitude/worship for it.
We do not owe Harrisy or any religion for our existence.
Chapter 4
The end
How does it all end?
No one knows. Anyone who says they know, for certain, is lying.
Christinity predicts a bad acid trip. (See Revaluations) Any day now. So buy your ticket to heaven early.
It's an obvious con, You sacrifice this life you already have, for the promise of another life they can't prove.
Science predicts 'Entropy'. Every atom in the universe will drift away from every other till they can't react any more.
But humans will be dead or evolved into something we can't recognize, by then. Too distant, time-wise, to worry about.
Your personal end? What happens when you die?
Most probably nothing.
Seems like every religion has a different 'afterlife'. They can't all be right. (but they can all be wrong)
You can't pick the one you want. If an 'afterlife' exists it is what it is. WE can't control it. No cult can control it.
The cults are telling you what you want to hear. So you give your CURRENT LIFE to their cult. The life that is certain, in exchange for an empty promise.
No guarantees, No refunds, You won't get your old life back if they are wrong (or lying).
Pascal's gamble is a sucker bet. It never pays out.
Harrisy aims to make This Current Life better, worth living for it's own sake. We give priority to This Current Life over any theoretical 'afterlife'.
Chapter 5
Everybody's favorite topic: SEX
What's the point of Sexual Taboos?
Why would an IMORTAL (non-sexual, non-reproducing) being give a damn?
For example in the christian cult:
*Masturbation is sin,
*Spilling your seed outside the womb is sin,
*Marrying outside the church is sin,
*Divorce is sin,
*Birth Control is sin,
*Abortion is sin,
*Marriages without offspring are invalid.
*Brand (circumcise) your males, so your females know who they are allowed to mate with,
And in Is-lame, Women are just sexual slaves.
Taken as a whole,
The only purpose served by sexual taboos, is to help the CULT out-populate rival cults.
A REAL "creator god" wouldn't give a damn. Or Wouldn't need our cooperation. it would just create more of us, as needed.
A REAL creator wouldn't threaten us, it would just change us.
Sexual Taboos are serving a cult, not a god.
Harrisy has only one sexual taboo:
Rule G) Do not rape.
Do not force yourself on others. Your pleasures are not more important than other people's.
Chapter 6
The 2000 year war
The Abrahamic religions have been at war with each other for about 2000 years. Sometimes hot, sometimes cold.
But like some other religions, at all times attempting to be 'the one true religion'. And by their competition, doing more harm than good.
And the Abrahamic religions haven't even shown that the 'good' stuff needs their religion to get done.
They preach that it is somehow noble or their duty to spread their faith. ("Onward Christian Soldiers")
There are dangers associated with proselytism and/or evangelicalism:
(Please note - I had help with the following)
Focus on Conversion over Service:
Proselytism/evangelicalism prioritizes conversion goals over humanitarian or service-oriented activities.
This undermines the credibility and effectiveness of religious organizations engaged in charitable work,
as it is perceived as conditional or insincere.
Dogmatism and Exclusivity:
Evangelicalism/proselytism promotes a rigid, dogmatic interpretation of religious beliefs that excludes other perspectives.
This exclusivity leads to intolerance of differing viewpoints and hinders constructive dialogue and cooperation with people of other faiths or worldviews.
Coercion and Manipulation:
Proselytism/evangelicalism involves coercion, manipulation, or exploitation of vulnerable individuals,
such as offering material incentives or exploiting power differentials to induce conversion.
This raises ethical concerns about respect for autonomy and informed consent.
Political Activism:
Evangelicalism/proselytism has been associated with political movements that prioritize specific social or moral issues, leading to controversy and polarization.
this politicization blurs the lines between religion and politics, compromising the integrity of both.
Interfaith Tensions:
Proselytism/evangelicalism contributes to interfaith tensions and conflicts, especially when it is aggressive or disrespectful to members of other religious communities.
It will undermine efforts to foster mutual respect, understanding, and cooperation among different faith traditions.
Fragmentation of Communities:
Proselytism/evangelicalism leads to the fragmentation or division of communities, particularly in contexts where multiple religious groups coexist.
This creates social tensions and weaken social cohesion, especially when proselytism is conducted in a confrontational or divisive manner.
Proselytization and Missionary Work:
We are concerned about aggressive or coercive methods used in proselytization/evangelicalism efforts,
especially when targeting vulnerable populations or in multicultural contexts.
This leads to cultural imperialism or disrespect for the autonomy of individuals and communities.
Cultural Insensitivity:
Proselytism/evangelicalism disregards or disrespects the cultural and religious traditions of the target community.
This leads to cultural imperialism or colonialism, especially when proselytism/evangelicalism is conducted in contexts where there is a history of exploitation or marginalization.
Misrepresentation or Simplification of Beliefs:
Proselytism/evangelicalism involves oversimplification or misrepresentation of religious beliefs and practices in order to make them more appealing to potential converts.
This leads to misunderstandings or misconceptions about the beliefs and traditions of the proselytizing religion.
For these reasons we conscientious objectors to the religious war, need an uncompetitive religion like Harris-y.
But don't push it.
Chapter 7
Humans and gods
Why do human religions have gods that are all too human?
A creator of everything that needs humans to wright/publish a holy book?
An all powerful god who needs humans to promote him?
An all powerful god with a vindictive human sized ego?
An immortal who is obsessed with human reproduction?
An all powerful god who needs humans more than we need him?
Any actual god wouldn't need human religion.
Harrisy serves humans, not gods.
Chapter 8
Parables
Corn In A Cow Patty.
Finding truth in the Abrahamic holy books,
is like finding corn in a cow patty.
Sure there are some good kernels in there,
but is it really worth digging through the shit to find them?
You can find uncontaminated kernels of truth anywhere.
Chapter 9
Feedback
Feedback should be sent to: [zachharris@mail2hell.com](mailto:zachharris@mail2hell.com)
Don't expect a timely reply.