|
Post by lolly on Nov 5, 2013 7:32:21 GMT -5
I guess there's two side to every story. I deal with a lot of different people with all kinds of beliefs, and it's not my place to validate and discredit all that... it's more my place to understand as best I can, and make the best of what's there.
I understand that in spiritual cliques there are notions of Truth, and the tendency is to think in absolute terms, and I wonder why I have no such notions myself, I really do. I personally consider truth to be a way of life, be truthful and you need not look over your shoulder. I mean untruthfulness can be found out, and it catches up with people eventually, so in the long term, there are no secrets... or as the religious express it, nothing is hidden from the eyes of God! I guess the truthfulness is 'showing God'.
Crikey, I sound like a holy roller. I'm not like that, I'm just trying to convey a meaning.
The point being, I can be myself, anyone can. There is a lot of judgment in the world, and people are affected by the way they are treated in that judgment puts pressure on people to live up to expectations, and creates an effort to be someone. Mostly all that is unintentional, and I prolly do it myself without realizing too, and in retrospect I realize how awfully stupid I have been. Memory and regret are like endless lovers, really... but I did some good too, so there's evidence for my lights and shades, strengths and weaknesses... but I stand before you as the sum of it all, and this is how it averages out... this is what I have to show God, as it were.
Beside the point, as people are born and they grow, not everything is nice, much is 'unacceptable' and it's necessary to conceal parts of the persona to navigate society... and there are many that reflect that with their lifespan stages theories and psychology models, not to mention spiritual healing models like Louise Hay or Byron Katie... I just have to say that there 'spiritual' ideas are just simplified small parts of much more comprehensive theories, but I can't see spiritual folk digesting clinical journals.
This bring me back to the question, "is it true?"... a lot is said on spiritual sites which is Told as Truth... and the Battle of Truth ensues like a friggin holy war of words. They have these things called 'no attack threads' which tells tale of internal war... which then an even greater authority needs to repress for the sake of the 'appearance' of peace.
There is no peace here or in the world, how can there be? All man has a conflict inside. Life isn't the peace that gurus promise, such expectations again merely belittle the truth of the actual conflict which occurs. What man retains a single mood? Not one I know of. We go through life's ups and downs and there's no way it comes easy. Everyone has their struggles much like I do, and no-one has ever had an easy life.
This means that, although it's respectable to be one's best and purify the mind and soul, and improve evolve and grow, and open the mind to wider and wider possibility, and cultivate quietude, equanimity and joy, and expand your capacity to channel infinite love and manifest it throughout your life and the lives of others... all that is very beneficial... but today it comes down to this. THIS is what I have to show God.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Nov 5, 2013 8:32:35 GMT -5
That's why I say that I'm not interested in an enlightenment for which one has to do something. The only enlightenment I'm interested in is the unconditional one, one that I get right now and absolutely for free. Because if I have to do something for enlightenment then that means that I'm not good enough for it as I am right now, which means that the thing isn't enlightenment at all per my definition.
And of course there is no such enlightenment. But what does that mean? It means that existence is a mistake, and the mistake is incorrigible. It is impossible for anyone to live with this realization, so we all must create some kind of fantasy to repress this realization, we all have different fantasies and then we fight each other when our fantasy is threatened, because if our fantasy collapses then we must face the fact that existence is a mistake, and nobody can do that. It is better to be dead than live a totally hopeless and meaningless life of mistaken existence, that's why people fight to the death for their beliefs. Ego is not the problem at all, the problem is existence itself, namely that it is an incorrigible mistake.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 12:20:43 GMT -5
What a joy to read.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 5, 2013 12:26:13 GMT -5
ditto
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 12:32:26 GMT -5
That's why I say that I'm not interested in an enlightenment for which one has to do something. The only enlightenment I'm interested in is the unconditional one, one that I get right now and absolutely for free. Because if I have to do something for enlightenment then that means that I'm not good enough for it as I am right now, which means that the thing isn't enlightenment at all per my definition. And of course there is no such enlightenment. But what does that mean? It means that existence is a mistake, and the mistake is incorrigible. It is impossible for anyone to live with this realization, so we all must create some kind of fantasy to repress this realization, we all have different fantasies and then we fight each other when our fantasy is threatened, because if our fantasy collapses then we must face the fact that existence is a mistake, and nobody can do that. It is better to be dead than live a totally hopeless and meaningless life of mistaken existence, that's why people fight to the death for their beliefs. Ego is not the problem at all, the problem is existence itself, namely that it is an incorrigible mistake. Why 'mistake'? When I hear that it sounds the same as saying that existence has a purpose. Both are figments of the imagination.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Nov 5, 2013 12:46:35 GMT -5
Why 'mistake'? When I hear that it sounds the same as saying that existence has a purpose. Both are figments of the imagination. Things like suffering, pain, delusion, etc actually exist. I can imagine a better existence that doesn't include all these bad things, therefore the actually existing existence is imprefect, therefore it is a mistake. Joining a debate by saying "oh, it's just imagination" is at best dishonest and at worst a poor attempt at trolling. There isn't anything in the world that couldn't in some way or another be called a product of "imagination". You yourself don't actually believe that it's just imagination.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 12:55:52 GMT -5
Why 'mistake'? When I hear that it sounds the same as saying that existence has a purpose. Both are figments of the imagination. Things like suffering, pain, delusion, etc actually exist. I can imagine a better existence that doesn't include all these bad things, therefore the actually existing existence is imprefect, therefore it is a mistake. Oh okay. Because it doesn't match up with what you imagine it is a mistake. Putting existence in the category of 'mistake' is something I'm calling an activity of imagination. I'm not disputing existence. When I eat a sweet potato kale burrito, I say yum. When I wake up in the middle of the night with inflamed athletes foot I say damn. Where's the mistake?
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Nov 5, 2013 13:34:28 GMT -5
Things like suffering, pain, delusion, etc actually exist. I can imagine a better existence that doesn't include all these bad things, therefore the actually existing existence is imprefect, therefore it is a mistake. Oh okay. Because it doesn't match up with what you imagine it is a mistake. It doesn't matter whether it is imagined or not. A parallel universe where everything is the same as in this one except that in the parallel uiniverse I didn't cut my finger today is obviously a better one than the one we're living in. Therefore this one is less perfect and more of a mistake compared to the other one. You're just imagining stuff. Idiot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 13:36:59 GMT -5
Oh okay. Because it doesn't match up with what you imagine it is a mistake. It doesn't matter whether it is imagined or not. A parallel universe where everything is the same as in this one except that in the parallel uiniverse I didn't cut my finger today is obviously a better one than the one we're living in. Therefore this one is less perfect and more of a mistake compared to the other one. You're just imagining stuff. Idiot. I tried calling the fungus eating my foot an idiot but it didn't work. So I tried calling it a mistake. Still didn't work.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Nov 5, 2013 14:12:48 GMT -5
I tried calling the fungus eating my foot an idiot but it didn't work. So I tried calling it a mistake. Still didn't work. And?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 14:51:47 GMT -5
I tried calling the fungus eating my foot an idiot but it didn't work. So I tried calling it a mistake. Still didn't work. And? Clotrimazole.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Nov 5, 2013 15:40:20 GMT -5
I don't know what that is and I'm too proud to look it up. How about you stop trying to be the smartáss or funny guy or whatever and get back on topic?
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Nov 6, 2013 4:55:32 GMT -5
Every time I read your name I feel a certain joy, as the name reminds of a song, 'Forever Autumn' (that means 'fall' in English teehee). A song from long ago, memory is within a song, and a lot of me is revived or relived by reminiscing a song, so through that, you remind me of myself.
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Nov 6, 2013 5:25:30 GMT -5
Things like suffering, pain, delusion, etc actually exist. I can imagine a better existence that doesn't include all these bad things, therefore the actually existing existence is imprefect, therefore it is a mistake. Oh okay. Because it doesn't match up with what you imagine it is a mistake. Putting existence in the category of 'mistake' is something I'm calling an activity of imagination. I'm not disputing existence. When I eat a sweet potato kale burrito, I say yum. When I wake up in the middle of the night with inflamed athletes foot I say darn. Where's the mistake? It's fair to say that all suffering does exist and that there are terrible things in the world. I guess we all do our share and everyone has the capacity to cause harm to others. This reminds me of David Hume's Is and Ought... like I can imagine how it ought to be, as opposed to how it is. Things are never easy because there are no overall rules, for example, there is some contentment in accepting it as it is, but complacency about injustice? There's an ethical dilemma in 'allowing' injustices, so we protect children from vile predators... or at least we 'ought' to... and that would imply that both action and non-action would be mistakes depending on circumstances. It's not always easy to determine an appropriate response or make the right decisions. Sometimes we just don't know what to do... it's inevitable then that some things we decide or do will be regrettable in hindsight, and we call that a mistake, so everyone makes mistakes. The truth applies because there's such a thing as an honest mistake... like we can hurt others without ever intending to, it's unfortunate, but it's an honest mistake. Other times we might just react really badly, and through anger, lash out and say hurtful things or become violent and begin a cycle of anger and guilt. A violent person can be truly sorry, but that doesn't mean they won't do it again, when temper gets out of control it is so harmful, and unstoppable. I know people have their psychological theories about this kind of thing, but we find that the theory is very difficult to apply in practice, and there is quite a large difference between the ideal and the real... yep, is and ought.
|
|
|
Post by ???????? ???????????? on Nov 6, 2013 7:09:15 GMT -5
It's fair to say that all suffering does exist and that there are terrible things in the world. I guess we all do our share and everyone has the capacity to cause harm to others. This reminds me of David Hume's Is and Ought... like I can imagine how it ought to be, as opposed to how it is. Things are never easy because there are no overall rules, for example, there is some contentment in accepting it as it is, but complacency about injustice? There's an ethical dilemma in 'allowing' injustices, so we protect children from vile predators... or at least we 'ought' to... and that would imply that both action and non-action would be mistakes depending on circumstances. It's not always easy to determine an appropriate response or make the right decisions. Sometimes we just don't know what to do... it's inevitable then that some things we decide or do will be regrettable in hindsight, and we call that a mistake, so everyone makes mistakes. The truth applies because there's such a thing as an honest mistake... like we can hurt others without ever intending to, it's unfortunate, but it's an honest mistake. Other times we might just react really badly, and through anger, lash out and say hurtful things or become violent and begin a cycle of anger and guilt. A violent person can be truly sorry, but that doesn't mean they won't do it again, when temper gets out of control it is so harmful, and unstoppable. I know people have their psychological theories about this kind of thing, but we find that the theory is very difficult to apply in practice, and there is quite a large difference between the ideal and the real... yep, is and ought. I like your short posts much better, when you condense the message to a (maybe provocative) one-liner. Your longer posts though are pretty much commonplace drivel, many words that don't say anything of substance.
|
|