I've been a philosopher and a student of various religions for a very long time. During the course of my study, I have been exposed to many different worldviews, all of which have borne different inconsistencies. In seeking to rectify these inconsistencies, I believe I have perceived the truth behind everything.
This being the case, I thought I'd give people the opportunity to ask the proverbial "man on the mountain" anything they cared to. The answers to all of life's riddles can be yours. I can advise you on any number of things. Am I the real deal? Am I right? Am I insane? Does it matter?
I can give no proof but my own word that I do earnestly believe that I have done what I claim. You be the judge of my value.
If you're going to leave it in bed mode most of the time, I'd go with the sofabed. The space that you can save when you have company is really great. If you have a lot of company, I'd say go with the bed and integrate it into the seating arrangements of the room (i.e. place surfaces near it on available walls).
I've been doing the same thing for some time. I find it discouraging to see the inconsistences and different world views stupidly trying to convince themselves they're the ones with the answers. Still, there seems to be truth underneath all the fluff.
Do you recommend any reads ir something?
The shortest distance between two points is sometimes a winding road.
Logic is a test of consistency, not truth.
Perception dictates action, perfect perception is perfect action.
You can never be wrong unless you want to be.
Knowledge is created through attention.
It already happened, and it wasn't that bad.
>And the not so kind
There is no one else to help you.
You are a prisoner in a trap specially made to keep you there as long as possible.
I have done terrible things.
Eternal bliss is boring. Hence, we exist.
>If you could let the whole world know one thing in an instant, what would that be?
It always has been done.
No problem! I forgot to mention the Foundation series by Asimov, along with C.S. Lewis' more uncknown work, such as The Great Divorce and the Perelandra books. All of them are on the right track.
>But what's outside?
There are no sides.
>are here for our own Good or for others profit?
I'm here because I wanted to see what it was like to be someone else.
>Is better here or outside?
Is red better than blue?
It seems to me that the christian religion sprang from the sumerian religion. In that religion tiamat representing chaos was slain and humans were made from her blood
Does this make us living embodiments of chaos?
If you really know the secret then why bother talking to people about it?
>Inb4 to help people.
There is no one to help, if the self is an illusion, you, in fact cloud the truth by claiming secret knowledge.
If you truly know, then you realize no matter what you do, even when interacting with other entities which seem to be outside of the self. You're just basically pulling your own prick.
I mean, come on.
A useful position to watch from when trying thought experiments. A useful metaphor for the cyclical nature of existence. I find it more useful to represent Kali as an aspect of Shiva in the yuga cycle. The "climax" of the Kali Yuga is Shiva being revealed to all as Kali, and in the face of that perception all perception is corrected.
Sometimes there is one perfect being, sometimes there are many, sometimes there are none. There is no limit to the number of end states, there is merely one possible end state that can be achieved. You can expand your sight to any degree you please and in doing so necessitate there being things to see there.
There are many ways to cross the river. I feel that the Aghori are needlessly concerned about the animal passions, and in actively seeking to burn them out, they drift farther from the point.
Heh, since you're here. I'll continue, convince me any of this matters, and I mean anything, including death, of you, of loved ones.
I would love for you to convince me, take your best shot. And you're not talking to someone with no experience, I have plenty of experience in altered states of consciousness and life in general.
Why is your act different to any other?
Christianity is not internally consistent actively, doctrinally, or philosophically. There exist too many instances of "just trust us on that" and not enough instances of "that just makes sense."
For instance- you've got the "Problem of Evil," the question of how to reconcile the existence of evil with that of a deity who is, in either absolute or relative terms, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. If Christian cosmology is correct, then logic must be false.
As a person who sees value in logic, and strives to be internally consistent in action, I could not accept Christianity as truth. My continued engagement, and active assent to the proposed principles by way of Confirmation, became quite impossible once I had come to this realization.
That's not to say that Christianity is bad. For people who find it compatible with their thought patterns, it is as serviceable as any other boat.
I strive for absolute efficiency and am always looking for shortcuts, so it didn't work for me.
Think of it this way- Christianity is for people who invest in savings bonds. Relatively secure, a lot of people trust them, and they seem fairly reliable. I'm more of a "try to pay off my bar tab with a pool game" kind of guy.
I will tell you the main problem. You believe in a eternal resting place, Heaven, Hell.
Have you ever stopped for one second to contemplate what an eternity doing ANYTHING would be like?
Eternal bliss for eternity? Do you even know what eternity is? Imagine spending an eternity as you.
You don't want this.
Why not? If you think you're right, why not tell people about it? If people think they need help, why not help them? There's no difference between an addict and a priest. What matters is what they are for you.
A person who thinks they're insane should go see a psychologist. A person who thinks they need a guru should find one. A person who thinks they are a guru should be one. Right now I am here, and later I will not be. It's all theatre- I just got tired of playing a particular role.
Christianity is revelation from God, religious practice has become corrupted. There is an underlying evil, and it is people that are against the rest of the world.
Your soul is eternal, deal with it.
It doesn't. It's all a game, but what most people don't realize is that it's a child's game of make-believe. You can make the rules as complicated or as simple as you like. Want to play catch? Play catch. Want to pay your taxes? Pay your taxes. Want to be god? Be god. It makes no difference, because no matter how hard you try, you'll always remember who you are eventually, because you've always known.
>Why not? If you think you're right, why not tell people about it?
Because the person is a fake, and the ego does'n't want to be told it has no worth, no substance. When you look at people, do you really think they need help?
I mean, its all paper thin and superficial, once you see through this, why try to help?
op what do you think of the works of CG Jung?
I agree, so then, you must see my point, once you know this stuff, for real. There is nothing else to do but forget about it.
There is really nothing to talk about! I mean there is, we could talk, we could have a thread that lasts days, but in the end, what the fuck did it matter.
You were killing time, amusing yourself, NOTHING more.
I know it, you know it.
Standing between the edge of the Abyss and the edge of the world, between the edge of wisdom and the edge of foolishness, the edge of knowledge and the edge of ignorance, the edge of light and the edge of darkness...all i see is edges...and edgy threads.
Why do musicians make music? Sitting around all day just thinking about music isn't terribly interesting or exciting.
Similarly, sitting around all day enjoying enlightenment isn't terribly interesting or exciting. It's quite a simple concept, and once you've grasped it, you're done.
It's more fun to play the game again on god mode, I guess. Everything looks different, you notice things you never would have. Enlightenment isn't perfect knowledge, it's a perfect perception. Applying that filter is where the real fun lies.
Op is mistaken equating himself and his own Self with Godhead instead of realizing he is but part of The One, like a digit within pi, not pi itself, pi can not know pi. Only parts of pi for pi is eternal and never ending and itself but a part of Anima Mundi. You may catch glimpses of your own tail but to swallow well I I'm sure sure it to be possible.
I think that he provides a lot of useful language and patterns for a student to use as a jumping off point, but his conclusions are only of as much utility as you find in them.
Generally, the more words it takes to explain a simple concept or its interactions, the less you should trust the conclusions and focus on the "atoms" of the system. Hence the brevity of some of my answers.
>Applying that filter is where the real fun lies.
Going to have to disagree there, in my opinion that filter that is making you think that there is some sort of duality, a here and there, me and you, night and day ect.
Do you know what its like, to truly comprehend, that its all in your fucking head?
No seriously. I know a lot of people talk about it, but have you TRULY experienced it?
You are correct. Time is an obstacle native to this locale, so the best thing to do is pass it as quickly and painlessly as possible. The more people who do this, the faster our locale changes, and the faster we get to the next adventure.
>Time is an obstacle native to this locale, so the best thing to do is pass it as quickly and painlessly as possible.
Time, time is not real, you know all your memories, all the past, its actually all happening right now. Well to be more specific, it never did happen, you just "pretend it did"
You do this so you can make sense out of something, the big bang never happened. Was here in this moment, this moment is all that is, don't let your mind fool you into believing in passing time!
The here and there is a metaphor for states. You exist in a state of always having been known, without ever having been. What you see as the ego is merely a quest hook, a set of rules for a game. Play it or don't, do things, or don't. Eternity must either endured or whiled away. Right now it's being whiled away, and it will be endured again, as it always has.
Have a fun story, fellow traveler:
A zen buddhist priest was attending a dinner party one evening. The guests were all seated on the floor around a low rectangular table. On the table in front of each guest was a small hibachi grill filled with hot coals. The diners were cooking their own servings of meat and vegetables, which they took from various bowls on the table.
Several geishas were serving the guests. The priest noticed that one of the geishas conducted herself as if she might have had some zen training.
He decided to test her, so he called her over.
The geisha knelt across the table from the priest and bowed. The priest bowed in return, and said: "I would like to give you a gift." Using his chopsticks, he reached into the hibachi, picked up a hot coal, and offered it to the geisha.
She hesitated for a moment, then finally pulled the sleeves of her kimono down over her hands. She grabbed the coal, ran into the kitchen, and dropped it into a pan of water. Her hands were not hurt, but the beautiful kimono gown was ruined.
The geisha went back to the table and knelt across from the priest. She bowed to the priest. He bowed in return. Then she said: "I would like to give you a gift too."
"I would be honored," the priest replied.
She picked up a pair of chopsticks, removed a hot coal from the priest's grill, and offered it to him. The priest reached into his robe and took out a cigarette.
As he leaned forward to light his smoke he said, "Thank you. That is exactly what I wanted."
Actually no, it isn't. You make these extraordinary claims but provide no extraordinary evidence. You speak riddles and proffer circular logic as your core reasoning. You claim others have inconsistent and irreconcilable issues with their ideology, and yours is just as bad.
>hurr durr the whole universe is roleplay!
No one is typing at you moron. I am typing at Chenrezik, take your fucking Abilify.
All consciousness is consciousness. You think the radio is playing something from outside of you, but it's you. Once you listen to everything like you would yourself, you'll drown. And you'll drown again, and again, and again, until you're perceived by the whole as the whole, and after that, you'll do the whole thing over again. What else is there to do? Being perfect is boring.
>No one is typing at you moron. I am typing at Chenrezik, take your fucking Abilify.
I was addressing your comment anyhow, I'm sure he doesn't mind. What? You unhappy that you just found out you're roleplaying to?
There is not a human currently in existence that isn't playing a fucking role, when you say you're human, you're roleplaying.
When a Human is born they take on a role. A name, a personality. Ect. Say it aint so!
There is no functional difference between truth and belief. If you believe that there is a monster in the closet, and act accordingly, it is as if the monster is real.
So too, if you believe your god is telling you to kill the infidels, and you kill the infidels because your god told you to, your god has as real of an impact on this locale as he would have if it existed in a verifiable sense.
I've found a way across one river. Perhaps there will be others soon, perhaps not. My riddles are attempts at pointing directly at the truth, rather than getting bogged down in the inefficiencies of language.
As for circular logic, logic is a test of consistency, not truth. It is entirely possible, for instance, for you to be living in the Truman Show; a Truman Show so advanced that the stage was so big you could never escape, and was constantly expanding and changing to keep you from escaping. In such an existence, no amount of logic would ever reach better than a 50-50 chance that that was in fact the case.
Formal logic is useful for guiding thought and examining assumptions, but it suffers from a lack of a wildcard operator. What if something is unknown? Both true and false? Neither? All of these? These states exist, some in our experience, and some within the set of possible experiences, yet logic fails to address them.
Of course nobody should believe me, unless they want to. I am like a musician or a poet- I provide entertainment in the form of input. Do whatever you like with it.
Either a shitty roleplayer or self-deluded "guru." Either way, your answers show the lack of any serious foundation.
Try studying some actual philosophy beyond wikipedia pages and mystical hogwash.
That said, I'll still humor you for amusement value and ask you questions about questions.
1. What are your most valued questions?
2. What are some of your thoughts on the subject of questions?
Just perform your act and see who shows up. If nobody shows up, at least you got some practice for next time.
I always have Alan Watts answer this one for me. The experience provided by this video in particular (music, visuals, etc.) expresses the answer better than I ever could: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ5upMz0_ig
Just because he listens to Watts doesn't mean he might not know a thing or two. I listen to Watts,I'm also pretty experienced with psychedelics. Watts is good with what he says, but its just a repeat of what has been said since as far back as writing goes
>it is as if the monster is real.
Not to a disinterested third party.
>[...]as he would have if it existed in a verifiable sense.
That's wrong too. God would have a far greater impact on this world if God was verifiable. Science got us to the moon because it was verifiable. If simply praying got us to the moon, well...
>inefficiencies of language
Riddle is the epitome of inefficiency of language. What you are doing is using florid language to obfuscate your positions so that they are unassailable by your critics.
>As for circular logic, logic is a test of consistency, not truth.
So you avoid addressing circular logic by first redefining logic. Clever, but not enlightened or intellectually honest.
More redefinition's? I am tired of your chicanery and wont eve read the rest of that paragraph.
>Of course nobody should believe me[...]
Oh what a humble guru you are... such a masterful and marvelous specimen. I yawn in your general direction.
>Maybe your not so full of shit afterall.
Just because someone is an expert at Harry Potter trivia doesn't mean Harry Potter isn't fiction for children.
>What are your most valued questions?
1. What is it?
2. What if it isn't?
3. What are we gonna do about it?
>What are some of your thoughts on the subject of questions?
Only ask questions if you want answers.
The first answer is usually the best one.
Anybody can answer any question.
I've got one from the University of Alabama too, but honestly the forums taught me more.
Your role appears to be an angry one, if we are all playing a role, and none of it means anything then why pick the angry role rather than let the matter roll off you while you seek more enjoyable parts of the game to play
He's got a very no-bullshit style and a great voice. Very easy to passively absorb. He also talked about most everything under the sun at least once. I've found a lot of benefit in using his thought patterns as a jumping-off point for further exploration and synthesis.
What do you expect? they are all admitted self-medicators and drug aficionados. They see it as such a part of their being that they have to reveal it here.
>I have taken a lot of drugs that make you see shit as it fucks with your brain chemistry!
Wow, such enlightenment!
You see, the farther we get from the original statement, the more we have to say about what was said. We winnow down avenues and causeways, losing ourselves in the minutiae.
This focus and attention is what reinforces your belief in self, because continuity implies identity for many in this locale.
Until you can see that this conversation is entirely one-sided, you won't be able to see the path I've followed.
That's not to say that's a bad thing. It's nothing. Think of me as packets in a random sea of data that your particular node's firewall settings have encountered and chosen to reject. My ideas have no meaning unless you give them meaning.
>[...]losing ourselves in the minutiae.
Lay off the drugs and you won't get lost so easily in internet banter.
>2nd paragraph non-sequitur
Although I do not disagree with that, it still has nothing to do with our conversation so far.
Until you realize that not all things originate in you, you wont escape your first-world special snowflake syndrome.
>4th paragraph, random musings and a total misunderstanding of how computer networks operate.
What you are is a poster on an anonymous imageboard. You present your ideas as something new, even though it is just ivory tower solipsism. When your position is critiqued, you skirt the issue and give more juvenile solipsism couched in metaphysical language as the excuse.
Your words mean something, they just aren't as deep and poignant as you think they are.
>I hope your choices in the next 24 hours leaves you happier, at least after pissing in wind you can now go forth with an empty bladder
>What are your thoughts on DMT?
Not op. but I have been doing dmt for a pretty long time. Haven't used it in the past year, because we have a baby now, but I'm bored and willing to answer questions about it best I can.
>Until you realize that not all things originate in you, you wont escape your first-world special snowflake syndrome.
You don't understand that the same consciousness is flowing altogether at once, everything originates in yours as well
>hippy dippy new age horseshit
Hey man, like DMT man, and ... like psychedelics, whoa!
In the end, you're the only thing you can be sure exists. Also, everything is an expression of a singularity. Humans just cannot frame something without duality or contrast, hence differences. Light is only light due to the presence of darkness, etc.
>How do you access the akashic records?
Follow the music.
>Is discordianism connected with NWO/age of aquarius?
The NWO/Age of Aquarius aren't really part of my locale, so I can't comment satisfactorily- I just haven't done the research. If you can outline the basic concepts at play, or the interaction with which you're interested, perhaps I can shed more light.
There are many ways to cross the river. With respect to drugs and the like, there is a distinct difference between using them as intoxicants and using them as tools.
In other words:
1) Don't try to call god unless you really want to talk.
2) Once god answers the phone, don't keep calling just for the hell of it.
Just because something is connected to you doesn't mean it's necessarily good, or that it has any effect whatsoever on practical causality, unless you choose to interpret it like that. Also, if you've never tried psychedelics, you're not qualified to talk about them desu senpai
>Have you seen the nonhuman entites?
Of course, I have seen all sorts of entities, but in my opinion, they're all aspects of the same thing, that's what they seem to communicate to you anyway.
But there seems to be levels of duality in other states of consciousness, for instance I have woken up in a dmt state to see that we're all in fact what people would call aliens I guess. Literally spinning all this up for fun. Happens really fast but. Whole lifetimes to that being go by in an instant, from here it seems slower.
>Are they separate from the self or creations of your own subconsious, in your opinion?
I don't see how anything can be separate, although, there is different layers of duality in different realities. I think the higher you go the more they thin out. Till you are left with just a state of awareness. That awareness knows its everything.
>solipsism, drug addiction and a fundamental lack of understanding about the phenomenon of consciousness.
>drugs give me special insight into the REAL nature of reality, and stuff, like whoa man!
Psychedelics are fun, but they do not make you some sort of fucking enlightened guru, you ape.
Congratulations, your just an old burn out stoner hanging out with children on the internet.
They don't give you anything unless you treat them properly and even then you can get the same and more without them. However, still, if you've never done them you don't know what they're like, at all. Try some and you'll see what I mean.
>Psychedelics are fun, but they do not make you some sort of fucking enlightened guru, you ape.
Dmt, in that short experience, will show you more than countless human experiences, you really can't compare the two.
A dmt state transcends everything, what do you think all the people in the holy scriptures where on about, when they talked about mystical visions?
I think the idea of "quantum consciousness" is a needlessly complex metaphor that can be expressed better with less controversial premises.
>Is eternal recurrence the only way?
It doesn't have to be. I suspect after a certain number of recurrences of the entire process, which we'll call Maha-Kalpa (the lifespan of the self which contains all this data which we live in), the self might choose to self-eradicate and never recur. I don't know why it would, but it is a possibility.
Then I am dumb and willfully ignorant.
Whichever one you like better.
>moribund bullshit that white people like, for $500 Alex.
>They don't give you anything unless you treat them properly
Fucking stoner logic.
>Fucking DMT man, it will change you and shit, yo!
Let me guess, your the re-incarnation of the Arch Angel Michael? Fucking stoners, I swear to god.
Get off your phone and go clean the bathrooms Jimmy.
>It doesn't have to be.
> I don't know why it would
>Whichever one you like better.
>Then I am dumb and willfully ignorant.
If he defends nothing and has no solid position from which to stand, he can be anything to anyone. Of course, that means he is nothing to no-one. Hence all this bullshit on 4chan, not some blog.
>That awareness is the HGA, and the great work of all magic. Nonduality (personified?)
I'm not really familiar with the term HGA, but, my most profound experiences, were the ones where you just get back to that thing, its like a state of nothingness, but something is there. Not nothingness as in blackness, but a place absent of all thoughts expectations and attachments.
I guess its you feel this at some point after death before you fold back into something else. Forgetting where you came from again.
>Let me guess, your the re-incarnation of the Arch Angel Michael? Fucking stoners, I swear to god.
Everything is a reflection of it. There is nothing that isn't. Even the most trivial of things, like your desk or laptop.
The guys speaking some truth, whoever he is.
If you've done any esoteric practice or research you'd know this.
and if your definition of truth still needs to be "absolute, concrete the way it is" rather than something good to hold on to to get you through the day and keep you on the path that makes you the happiest- then shave YOUR fucking neckbeard, pleb.
Hitler spoke of the sky being blue, that isn't always true, but it is true enough. Maybe you should go read Mein Kampf for more hidden truths after you take a hit from the bong.
Harry potter trivia? This guy just showed insight into the oldest tradition in the world, made me think about things i thought i knew well and have been practicing for years.
He doesnt seem as full pf shit as i thought he was
>He predicted my race based on the bullshit that I like, he must be racist against white people!
Nope, you just fit the mold society has crafted for you. Such a predictable little cog.
You do know that DMT is naturally produced by the pineal gland, don't you? I've been extensively studying psychoactive substances for a while now. A good place to start is with Dr. Rick Strassmans books.
>really really wants his religion to be the right one, and not just the same childish fiction as everyone else.
Believe what you want to believe. Smoke a bowl bro, chill dude man. Your in a safe space.
All the anti psychedelic people just lack experience, and believe everything they read. Rather than taking a hands on approach.
It would be silly to listen to someones conclusion unless they have had experience, even then you would have to experience it and come to your own conclusion.
>implys i want my religion to be the right one
>thinks im not satyrical
Im just saying that he has atleast a thorough knowledge about the world. He might not have been enlightenend but he did his reading.
>You will die and be forgotten. No escape from that.
That's true, but, there's no such thing as no experience( nothing). Its not as if you die and a game over screen plays forever.
The enzymes necessary to produce DMT from tryptamine and serotonin--N-methyltransferase (NMT) and indolethylamine N-methyltransferase (INMT)--as well as the mRNA necessary to produce the enzymes have been shown to exist in human tissues (like the lungs) outside the pineal.
The pineal gland is the first to produce DMT since it's so close to serotonin receptors in the limbic centers of the brain. If the pinal where to be removed, or lose its function in any way, the lungs would take on the job sending DMT through the bloodstream.
>Whoa dude, drugs make me enlightened. All these other religions are so much cooler than the one my parents believed in! Like, the world needs drugs man, peace and harmony bro!
You are a first-world drug addicted moron who mistakes chemical highs for the state of enlightenment. You are not special, you are rotting meat crawling over a mud ball. Soon you will face horrors you never thought possible, and they will be nothing like the highs you experienced in the comfort of your home.
Even if you live to die of old age, you will not escape the horror that awaits you as your mind and body decay at an accelerated rate. You will not be cool and collected as your prepare to meet your demise, that is just the ego talking.
Go smoke another bowl you pseudo-enlightened stoner.
Always interesting to see people so butt bothered simply because they can take the stance of doubt and denial. To me all you are doubting is your ability to value creative experience.
There is more to the human experience than nihilistic meaninglessness. It doesn't make you appear smart to needlessly deny the creative realm that manifests our reality unilaterally across all conscious life.
Being a bitter asshole who attacks everyone who agrees with the desire to know our existence more deeply I suspect is a projection of the emptiness they feel inside for rejecting their own path.
This hyper rationality and dogmatic logical pandering is no way to discover anything other than beating the proverbial dead horse of modern indoctrinated cultural belief systems based off human secularism.
Such an empty way to be.
Someone seems to be struggling with his own mortality, lashes out at others in an attempt to act out the battle within his own mind
Yes we will all die and before gotten, so what? Why are you so angry?
Thw universe is so vast anything you achieve will mean nothing so just roll with it
Have you tried using them in the methods that shamans used? Have you tried contemplating reality while under the effects of things like shrooms or LSD? Try it and see what you get, record the thoughts that you produce and judge their validity later while sober. Some won't make too much sense, but you'll get profound insights if that's what you try and seek.
I hope you find happiness and peace. I used to smoke a lot, quit in recent months. The message of Christianity, Buddhism, and whatever other religion you subscribe to are just tools to reach a better mental and spiritual state. If you had an imaginary friend who always gave you good life advice, taught you about your place in the universe and kept your spirits up, you could end up a happy calm well-adjusted person despite the bizarre origination of said knowledge. People in the western world who looked at eastern religions do so because monotheism is not for them. It's like people who would prefer to bike rather than drive. They both get you places, it's just that they have different ways of doing so.
While I admit weed can bring out the worst in people, and I'm sure that perception is what lends truth to your opinion, but understand that very rarely is anything black and white. People ruin their lives from alcohol, but there are also people who make their living making fine wines and enjoying a good healthy life with alcohol as part of it. People like shamans have deep spiritual experiences from psychedelics that change them for the better, but there are also people that see psychedelics as a form of entertainment and nothing more. Everything has to sides to it, my friend. Before you condemn something take a look at what people are saying about the positive aspects of it, alright? You'll expand your worldview and become more informed as a result, and if you still feel they aren't for you, that's fine. But if you fear or hate something then that's usually a sign that there is an issue there that needs to be addressed, and when you do you'll feel a weight lift off your shoulders. Good luck and I hope you find what it is you're looking for in life.
>You can never be wrong unless you want to be
This is one of the most egotistic fucking bullshit "truths" I've heard on this board.
You can be wrong, everyone can be wrong, simple as that.
The world is filled with many troubles. Wars, hunger, climate changes... One thing though, really bothers me, and I feel like I need an answer.
Will green trousers still be trendy this year?
Depends on what level of truth we're talking about.
In some games, it's hard-coded that you can't kill NPCs. In some games it isn't. The game you play determines the value of things, and their truths.
If you're an art collector and someone gives you the choice between a lost painting by your favorite artist and an equally-valuable pile of specialized computer equipment, you're going to take the art. If you're a computer guy, you'll take the electronics.
Neither choice is right or wrong, and there's no one choice that is in any meaningful way "better" than the other.
Truth doesn't exist in a vacuum.
What's with this false analogy bullshit?
When you ask a simple question
>Does gravity affect me?
There is only one answer, yes. The only way to avoid said answer is to go through retarded mental loops, but that won't be a problem for you since you are the master of retarded mental loops.
All the nesseary parts it takes to make a vacuum work is enough factual evidence as to why the vacuum works.
If you miss an essential piece, it doesn't work/isn't a vacuum. The vacuum isn't worried about relative truth, not only because it is inaminate, but because it needs certain functions in order to properly operate
I'm talking about a complete vacuum, not a vacuum as you're thinking of it. I should have been more clear about my terms.
An existential vacuum. Void.
There's no truth in void. There's no thing in void to be any thing.
Did you do any drugs to reach your conclusions? Your conclusions and mine are very similar.
I'll rephrase it:
What you call "YOU" calls existence void.
I never used drugs or alcohol for the purposes of expanding consciousness. My experiences with those substances have necessarily influenced my conclusions, but so did everything else I've ever done. People who tout drugs as transformative agents misinterpret them as magic, when in fact, they are merely what you make of them. You can reach the same conclusions about life from watching grass grow as you can from taking LSD.
Believing that drugs can show you something outside of yourself is a kind of intoxication in and of itself.
End the guitar solo.
Yes, I agree all insights that can be made on drugs can be made without them, it's more about whether or not your attention has been focused on such things.
One salvia trip lead me to the same conclusions that you reached. I had inklings of those conclusions before I took it, but that experience gave me the intuitive understanding of it. The remembering aspect was the most profound, and yet I knew it all along, but had dismissed it.
What drugs did you do? I'm interested to see if we have a common experience.
Also, you speak of a musical metaphor. I am unsure the "guitar solo" can be ended. Could you elaborate on that?
I'll rephrase it:
What Hank Williams Jr. calls 42 is pale green with chocolate sprinkles and rides around Texas applebox swing particles.
I'll rephrase it:
A guy walks into a bar and has a nice time.
I'll rephrase it:
I am the Way, the Truth and the Light.
I'll rephrase it:
I'll rephrase it:
I'll rephrase it:
I'll rephrase it.
I'll rephrase that:
>I could not accept Christianity as truth
>Christianity is for people who invest in savings bond
Just some stuff u said ITT.
>What drugs did you do?
I was a big drinker and a heavy smoker. Spent around 8 months blacked out. Taken all sorts of antipsychotics and antidepressants. I've been at times a walking pharmacy.
Vision-wise? I accidentally took too much Benadryl one night while I was drunk and saw crystal spiders, which was strange.
I've never felt like it was the right time for psychedelics- that's not to say that I'm not interested, but I'd like to maintain my local self's status quo for the time being. It's in a good place- I'm not sure if it would be if I took the plunge into full shamanism.
>Also, you speak of a musical metaphor. I am unsure the "guitar solo" can be ended. Could you elaborate on that?
I can, but I'll give you the same disclaimer I usually do. Any elaboration upon an attempt at direct pointing is necessarily farther from the truth than the pointing itself. The more words I use, the less sure I am that I have conveyed what I intend to properly.
Think of this like a joke. You either get it, or you don't. When someone explains it to you, even if you do get it, it's less funny. So too, if you do not understand my answers, when I explain them to you, they will be less useful.
You know how you get accustomed to sounds? For instance, if you have a fan on all the time, you stop noticing it, because your "firmware" has decided that it's a constant, a part of the status quo, and therefore not really relevant to your survival unless it changes.
This happens with everything- objects, people, places, sounds, feelings, tastes, what have you, but it's easiest for me to talk about in terms of sound.
Imagine you're in a room for years. No sight. No feeling. Just sound. Every few days or so, a new sound is added. You perceive it for a while, and then stop noticing it. Multiply this effect across eternity. Pipe in every sound and every possible combination of sound unto infinity.
Once you're done, what do you hear? Is it nothing or everything?
It's more of a "come up with an initial impression, then put it into words." It relies more on understanding the question that's asked for what it is rather than what it purports to be.
Why does plant matter matter?
I'll clarify. The words do tend to get in the way.
It's like submitting a query to a database. I don't really do anything actively, I just pay attention to the answer. It's like the Library of Babel (https://libraryofbabel.info/About.html). I just look at the right book. I don't know what book to look for unless someone asks, and often the books are different for different people, even if they ask the same question.
>I've never felt like it was the right time for psychedelics
I don't think you'd benefit much in terms of insight, they mostly get people to where you seem to be. Still a fun and interesting experience.
>Once you're done, what do you hear? Is it nothing or everything?
You hear everything but are listening to nothing.
I get what you mean. Or maybe I don't.
I'll just say that I think death will be the most interesting journey a living thing will experience.
I asked that particular question for a specific reason. Your acceptance or rejection of my statements is your choice- go to a different movie if you want to, or don't. Just choose.
I really like the art installations at local libraries. The architecture is also usually pretty neat.
> Still a fun and interesting experience.
I plan to arrange to take the largest dose of LSD in human history on my deathbed, if for no other reason than to say I did.
>I get what you mean. Or maybe I don't.
>I'll just say that I think death will be the most interesting journey a living thing will experience.
It would be, if death was something to be experienced.
If you still happen to be around here – that's one point which matters to me, out of those you mentioned in your OP. Is that an inconsistency? Who knows.
Am I barren, OP? Trick question, as I seek an answer on more than one "plane," so to speak.
Regardless of the answer to that question; must I seek another land (and whether I should care if that one is barren or not – that's another consideration), or can I do this (mysterious, unelaborated-upon "this") on my own? Will I, perhaps, be spared the burden of seeking, and simply find what (or more likely, who) I need (or have found it, indeed)?
>I asked that particular question for a specific reason. Your acceptance or rejection of my statements is your choice- go to a different movie if you want to, or don't. Just choose.
>accept my parameters
>Do what i say
> >Once you're done, what do you hear? Is it nothing or everything?
> You hear everything but are listening to nothing.
I'd just like to interject and—you can experience a related sort of phenomenon without dying (arguably). Look for The Voice of Silence (Liber seventy-something, I believe) and the special "supplement" of the first issue of the first volume of The Equinox, which references said "voice of silence" (or was it "song of silence?" I forget) and has some quaint acoustic metaphors for (meta)physical sensations.
>If you still happen to be around here
I'm here sometimes.
>Am I barren
If you have a jackhammer, why would you try to do the job with a toothpick?
>Do what i say
As long as you believe that things must either be true or false, you will be upset by this.
In the game you're playing, "Do, or do not," necessarily encompasses all action, so doing anything at all is necessarily doing what I say to do.
You can stop playing that game any time you want- you absolutely should, if it causes you anger or discomfort.
It used to.
>I plan to arrange to take the largest dose of LSD in human history on my deathbed, if for no other reason than to say I did.
I plan to arrange to take the largest dose of LSD in human history on my deathbed, if for no other reason than to say I did more than you.
Thanks for this, here are links for others interested.
>Must I seek another land (and whether I should care if that one is barren or not – that's another consideration), or can I do this (mysterious, unelaborated-upon "this") on my own? Will I, perhaps, be spared the burden of seeking, and simply find what (or more likely, who) I need (or have found it, indeed)?
Stop trying to mend an unbroken vase.
Very nice! I'm going to set aside some time for this. Sounds right up my alley.
That's a glorious pic.
> Stop trying to mend an unbroken vase.
I've been doing that far too often for far too long. Well, a challenge, then. Any approach you'd suggest?
> If you have a jackhammer, why would you try to do the job with a toothpick?
Because I believe in searching for the optimal power output by a linear search on the—exponential, ogarithmic? Both look the same from different points of view, no matter—scale, and I must have gotten stuck/distracted somewhere around the "toothpick" stage.
By the way, what's your take on the right to property? Or, not being evasive: is it my own (probably neglected) jackhammer I want here?
I'm not sure if love is a useful concept. It's a very fun game, because it's complicated, and it gets you really, really high, and lets you feel really, really low. It's kind of like the "extreme sports" of activities the self can partake in.
The reason it's hard is because you're trying to make a new psychic organism with its own needs/desires that are different from the needs/desires of the component egos. This can make things very confusing, and that's why lots of people have problems with it.
I guess the best way to think about love is like you would about satori or liberation:
1) If you look for it you won't find what you're looking for.
2) If you find it, you'll know.
3) What it is from one angle it might not be form another.
4) You don't need to find it to be ok.
The issue is that even when you know all that, it can be hard to see the value because of intervening thoughts and emotional responses.
Most people don't want to know what love is, they want to know how to be good at "romance" or "seduction" or "relationships."
The only thoughts I have on this last are that every single problem in a relationship arises from unbalanced expectations, i.e. a thinks that b is the one and b just wants to have sex, or a thinks that b should call every day and b isn't big on constant contact.
My general advice, when people come to me with relationship problems is to look for the unbalanced expectation, address it openly and honestly, and if there is no possible reconciliation (I'm deliberately avoiding the term "compromise" here), then they should end their relationship immediately. I think more people should break up over little things, like leaving the toilet seat up or buying 2% milk over whole. It would save time and pain.
Don't think of relationships as any different than acquaintances you interact with in a certain way. When you find one that shatters this idea, you won't need to use it as a guidepost anymore.
>Any approach you'd suggest?
I suspect that you might derive a lot of meaningful learning from becoming an expert in something utterly trivial, like sliding down banisters, close-up magic, or rolling a coin across your knuckles.
The trick is to not become an enthusiast. Don't buy a book on it, don't watch youtube videos, don't read articles. Just figure it out. Then when you understand the value of the information out there regarding the subject, take what you need and leave the rest. Go your own way.
>and I must have gotten stuck/distracted somewhere around the "toothpick" stage.
I call that "spiritual ADD." We really have trouble keeping our attention in useful places.
>What's your take on the right to property?
If you need to label something as "yours" or "mine" for convenience, go right ahead.
That's not to say that you should just give away all your possessions, just don't hesitate to give them away if you think you should.
That's also not to say that you should take what other people think is theirs. If you truly need it, ask and it shall be given- though the form it will take may not be the form you expect.
>Is it my own (probably neglected) jackhammer I want here?
The form of the tool doesn't matter- what matters is the skill of the operator.
>Are you not entertained!?
You know, now that you mention it, Gladiator is not only a great movie, but a great metaphor for all this.
Right now I'm sitting atop the stepped scarlet pyramid of the Eastern Seaboard Fission Authority, burning beyond the green cubes of Mitsubishi Bank of America. High and very far away I see the spiral arms of military systems, forever beyond my reach. I like it here.
> I call that "spiritual ADD."
Well, I keep claiming that I've got the mundane kind, so I'm using that name from now on too. I hope you don't mind.
Something utterly trivial... there's little in my life that could be called that, and I'd need to find something of the sort, preferably connected to the occult... that would be my go-to, at least, and those are never quite as trivial as they appear.
> what matters is the skill of the operator.
And yet again it's "stop sitting on your behind and start practicing." How I hate the unseen ways of magic, disturbing my sacred right to procrastrination and talking and talking instead of doing.
(I don't hate them, of course. A better response would be: do you have any direct advice that would be helpful to me, personally, with the issue I've hopefully adequately communicated?)
I'd say that the recipient of a miracle has experienced satori out of context-like finding a piece of junk on the beach and not realizing that it was a valuable artifact.
Ultimately, I don't think that miracles are any different than everyday life- they're part of everyday life because we're talking about them. I think the importance of miracles is like the importance of anything else- if they are useful to you, then use them, if they aren't, don't.
I very much enjoy Alan Watts' answer to this question. Generally I defer to experts unless I have a better way of putting it- so with that introduction, here's a link: http://www.innerself.com/Spirituality/beliefs_miracles.htm
Or you could undertake a great work. Try to figure out how to time travel, investigate the link between philosophy and programming, carve an elaborate mural into the side of Mount Everest, continue doing what you're doing now, etc. Stop worrying about the "what" and the "when" and the "how."
Just be, and with practice, you will be gracefully.
The idea of simple ritual practice is merely a suggestion for the transference of a thought pattern through direct experience rather than direct pointing. The perception you'll arrive at will be similar to a perception I had, but it's still a matter of comprehending that perception in a particular way, and comprehension is a process unique to every individual, which supervenes on the continuity that they see as "I."
In other words:
Some people like mincemeat pie. That doesn't mean everyone needs to eat it.
I'll leave you with this (dear old Alan's got me beat again):
You never really know what is going to happen, and therefore I would not presume to say that you ought to be different than the way you are. I am not a guru, in the sense of a spiritual teacher or an authority from which you may expect something more than what you have. When you confer spiritual authority on another person, you must realize that you are allowing them to pick your pocket and sell you your own watch.
How can you be certain with any great teacher (or scripture for that matter) that they know what they say they know? You may believe in a religion; that is a choice you have made. But how do you know, and why do you believe?
Time for me to head to bed, thread. I hope I'll speak with you again.
Since you've been kind enough to pay attention I'd like to take advantage of the situation and bother you a bit more with my personal issue regarding that topic.
This is the first time in my life where I've reached a true crossroad without knowing which road is better purely by rationalizing. I currently have a very loyal girlfriend who's a solid 8/10, always willing to get in bed (good at it too), smart, shares my worldviews, tolerates all my bullshit, loves me just the way I am and would even be down with threesomes or the occasional cheating from my side.
All in all she mostly fulfills everything I want and were I a bit older I wouldn't hesitate much about marrying her.
However I feel like I'm in a phase where I'm not really looking for long term commitment. Random women on the street keep catching my eye and I'm constantly asking myself "what if". I realize this sounds extremely shallow but I can't shake it. Should I just attempt to rid myself of my desires or have fun at the expense of losing a potentially once-in-a-lifetime opportunity of being with a someone that truly understands me and is a good addition to me as a person? What's your 2 cents on the matter
If you truly knew then you would simply say what is. Asking others to come to you is ego play and is not helpful for those who do not know cannot possibly know what to ask. Calling your bullshit for those gullible enough.
Your answer was indeed lacking.
Alan Watts' take was indeed interesting.
However,I'm not talking about turning water into wine or taking a peak into reality's source code or so to speak. I'm talking about a curious case of a selfless miracle...a disappearing tumour. The woman's tumour had completely disappeared over the course of 3 nights. She was very religious and when a checkup was done and she found out the tumour was gone she gave all the credit to God. She had tears of joy in hear eyes and it was her that had me curious about religion. I always knew religion was just another philosophy with no other appliance than to give meaning to human life. I now see I was wrong. What do you think?
I promise I will do my best to address these in the morning- if the thread disappears, I'll start a fresh one. I'm just not as sharp as you or I would like me to be at the moment.
I hope this wallpaper will tide you over til then!
How do I do that?
I had an experience where I was being aware of my body going to sleep and right at the moment when my body went into sleep mode it felt like my head was being expanded or that there was space being created in it and as this was happening my thoughts became more and more distant and I saw them as if they were a distant stream that I was floating above. This only happened once and I try to do it again but it seems to happen randomly. The thing that was aware of all this also felt like it was always there silently watching everything. Was that thing the real me and is it absolute void?
If it is than do you know the best method to get back there again?
I do know why you can not decide rationally, your judgement has been completely sedated by two simple urges: FUCK WOMEN - DESTROY PERFECT LIFE. We all have the desire to burn our houses down and ruin everything every so often, so just give in to your desires and do it.
Also- I hate you.
Are you sure "thinking" and "alive" aren't the same thing?
So what if? If you need to be with her, you will be. I'd encourage you to pay less attention to "what if" and enjoy what is.
Changing bonds creates new locales. Locales organize towards simplicity, and simplicity is present in every locale. The water can't escape the sea, so to speak.
>Your answer was indeed lacking.
And for this I do apologize. Allow me to explain something I stumbled into today before I give you my thoughts on your tale.
It seems to be quite hard to see from this perspective all the time. Think of it like how you feel when you start a new job. You're uncomfortable, you're nervous, you're stressed, and you aren't really at your best because you're still settling in. You haven't made any work friends yet, so when you have time off, you fall back into familiar patterns with old friends. Sometimes I need to take breaks, otherwise the ego instinct creeps in because I get...not exactly bored...I just latch on to something else, and it starts to kind of chain out. The same thing happens in reverse, too. I completely forgot which way was up in a parking lot today, and it was because I was letting the current take me. I'm not sure if it will become easier to differentiate as I get more used to the idea, or if the periods of differentiation will grow farther apart. I can choose which way to go, but I also don't need to. I think this is the place where I choose whether to become a private Buddha, or a public Buddha, or a rhinoceros, or not.
>Was that thing the real me
It was not the real you, but it was you.
>and is it absolute void?
Absolute void isn't even absolute void, how could what you saw have been it?
>do you know the best method to get back there again?
I can perhaps help you see what you saw again, if you will derive meaning from it. I've always been able to lucid dream, but I can't control which dreams I can lucid dream in, and recognizing those dreams is difficult and exhausting. I accidentally discovered a way to get more of the kind of dreams I can control. It seems to work pretty consistently, for me at least.
Get relaxed. Music, whatever. Get comfortable. Put your hand on some part of your body it can just rest on naturally. Like on your stomach or thigh. Begin to apply pressure with your index finger in a constant rhythm that's comfortable for you. Reduce the pressure until it's more of a gentle pressing rather than a tapping or prodding. Pay attention to everything other than the tapping. Tie off the tapping. Make it automatic, like breathing. At this point you might experience a sort of rippling effect in your perceptions. Move with this, but try to move around within it. Once you've got motion down, FLING yourself in a circle. If you get a really confusing rush of body perceptions and thought perceptions all jumbled together, take a deep breath, and do it again- but this time, when you're halfway through the circle, open your eyes. If you see yourself sleeping, you're in. This may surprise you, but don't be afraid. The first time, you may wake up because you transfer your surprise to your body. Avoid strong emotion, as it tends to leak into your sleeping form and disrupt the split. It's a weird place. You can do anything, but it takes a lot of effort, because you're basically trying to shape the water coming out of a firehose, being so close to the raw data of your mind.
Dunno if this will work for you, but it's pretty fun for me.
>Are you sure "thinking" and "alive" aren't the same thing?
Not him, but no, not necessary. There is this state you can reach by meditation (which some schools/traditions explicitly target) which is basically thoughtless. And I would argue that this state is not the opposite of 'being alive'; it actually adds a dimension and a 'new space' to your consciousness.
What are your thoughts and viewpoints on consciousness and meditation?
>private Buddha, or a public Buddha
Also, interesting distinction, I believe I can follow you there, but it seems a bit of a sketchy concept (as in sketched out in a quick way).
Maybe you are projecting a certain aspect of structure into 'buddhahood', which isn't actually there and are basically mapping out your distance to it.
Looks like I'm not cut out for religious beliefs after all.
It's not like I don't understand higher consciousness and callings.
But,I've always been more drawn to things with pragmatic value. You failed to explain with stern words how religion made that woman's tumour disappear. I will continue with hard determinism.
Let me tell you something that you may have omitted in the end my dear pilgrim:"If you see Buddha on the road,kill him"
I was told
Instead of trying to control the emotions
Rather one should transmute them
I have had success some times
But not enough
Any tips Senpai?
>What are your thoughts and viewpoints on consciousness and meditation?
I think they can both be useful activities, but they are by no means necessary.
>Maybe you are projecting a certain aspect of structure into 'buddhahood', which isn't actually there and are basically mapping out your distance to it.
I think this is a true statement. Imagine finding yourself transported to a place where there was no need for directions, like "N, S, E, W," because the people who lived there had implants that gave them perfect internal compasses which they had installed at birth.
When you arrived, you would still probably think of directions and utilize them in your movement, despite the fact that it was unnecessary. Once you got used to the idea that any person could just tell you where to go with perfect accuracy or give you an implant, you'd start to use the direction thought-patterns less and less, until they were not a part of your everyday experience.
However, the fact that they were at one point part of your thought patterns will forever influence your present state. Buddhas are, I think, aspects of the same entity, but the form they take is unique, based on their activities before they achieved satori.
I suppose I am mapping my distance to a "pure instance" of the entity (Brahma?), with only the essential attributes of said entity. I'm not sure that entity has any attributes at all, though, or even if that phrasing is useful.
It's a confusing state.
I simply do not know how the tumor disappeared. It did so of itself so. I believe it was uncaused, but nonetheless a part of experience, like a cough or a sneeze. It's not an exciting answer, but I think now that it is the correct one.
>If you see Buddha on the road, kill him.
This is the only rational thing to do. The buddha exists to destroy who you are, and by extension, to destroy the world.
If you value your life, you must of course kill the buddha.
This is the other realm. It is infinite in scope and breadth, though no part of it is any better than any other. Each locale is necessarily the bearer of its own unique problems. It's merely a matter of choosing a stage and a role. Do it because you love the stage and the role, not out of desire for some reward, for the act itself is all the reward that is.
If you enforce a pattern of "correcting thought," correct thought will become your goal, and by extension its rewards. While it will carry you across the river, as everything does, such practice adds additional, unnecessary steps to the "process" of "salvation."
A: 1+1 = 2
B: (1+1)*1 = 2
Both are correct, but B includes additional, unnecessary steps.
It does not exist in a real sense, but it does exist in an experiential or perceptual sense.
For instance, no married bachelors exist in a real sense, but the fact that we can talk and think about "married bachelors" as an atom of thought, to which we can ascribe and decline various attributes to and from, means that they do exist to some people at some times as an aspect of experience and/or perception.
"The Christian heaven" seems boring to me.
For me the Christian heaven is boring.
Until a change in my perceptions regarding the Christian heaven occurs, it will be boring for me.
We can have useful discussions about things that don't exist. A vast amount of philosophy supervenes on metaphors and abstractions. For some people, certain concepts exist, and for those for whom they exist, they represent obstacles.
It's no use to tell a man in a locked room that the door doesn't exist, because it exists for him. Even if the door is all in his head, no amount of telling him otherwise will help him leave the room.
Utility is the store of value, not truth.
You don't understand. There is no distinction between matter and mind, there is nothing out there, nothing in there. What you express is solipsism from idealistic monism, which is not correct.
If all roads lead to Rome, while the time and manner of your arrival are entirely up to you, the destination is not.
The same way as I feel about all gods- they are positions of varying utility from which to conduct thought-experiments.
A god isn't a thing, it's an idea so strong it bends perception and action around it. If money is your god, you will seek it above all else. If your wife is your god, you will seek to please her above all else. Your demarcation of their godhood is the source of their godhood.
The existence or non-existence of some gestalt to which the godhood is bound is irrelevant.
I have two questions:
1. Is life succeeded by void/nothingness?
2. If my girl classmate I have a crush on labels me as the smartest person in the class and keeps complimenting me about it, whereas I keep trying to make myself seem inapproachable by sort of ignoring her (thus we barely interact with eachother), would she be glad to form a friendship and after a while even a relationship if I were to commit?
1. It's not a cycle, it's not even two sides of the same coin, it's not even a plane a quanta thick.
2. Romance, like anything else, is a game. Games are only as complex as you want to make them.
>Those who say don't know and those who know don't say.
True for you, not for me.
>The more you try to know and convince others of it the further you distance yourself from it.
I don't try to know. I know.
I don't try to convince, any more than a concert is a sales pitch.
I like this analogy and I can relate to what you say.
And yes, we can only make words about paradise here, and words display distance. That's why the saying goes 'Silence is golden'.
>It's a confusing state.
Satori isn't easy.
>"If you see Buddha on the road,kill him"
Not the guy you're talking to, but that's some heavy case of misunderstanding and misusing this expression.
Apparently you do not know much about the nature of Buddha. You sound like you're lost in fog and don't know it.
God as something omnipresent, omniscient does not exist, reading something like Theaetetus by Plato can make you realise that. I think OP is right in grounding the concept God back to earthly things. Perhaps review your thoughts, opinions and try to see if there's a crack there.
Shats your opinion on tantra in general? Especially the traditions stemming from the kapalika branch. Aghori, trika and kaula.
Are your beliefs dvaita or advaita, dual or nondual? Monist?
Yo Cenrezik. Whaddaya think Lovecrafts work was a metaphor for if anything... I feel like he was channeling some highly abstract shit.
On a related topic, do you think the mollusc species is a completely seperate "player" in the "game"?
>[W]hats your opinion on tantra in general?
I think that there is an inordinate preoccupation with the "obtaining" of siddhis within the tantric traditions, however these traditions undoubtedly have value to their adherents, and ultimately lead to the same end state as all other vehicles.
The issue I have with tantric practice is that for an initiate who receives measurable benefit through such practices, there is a temptation to associate the perceptions derived from the experiences of those practices directly with those practices, rather than with the perceptions themselves.
In other words, just because a particular ritual leads you to a particular perception, that does not mean that the ritual is tied to the perception in a necessary or causal way.
Thus, the initiate must not only overcome maya, they must also overcome the conclusion that the process they use to overcome maya is also maya, which may be more difficult than overcoming maya on its own.
The practice itself involves moving to another "locale," or epiphenomenal thought-state which supervenes on different principles than "the social norm," which is certainly a step in the right direction, but the tantric locales are self-reinforcing in the same way as the common locale is. So while there is benefit to be had, it requires the initiate to ultimately reject the tantric locale in order to truly achieve "freedom of motion" within the network.
The belief in a set of particular practices or actions which will lead to liberation is a crutch, and none of us are cripples, unless we choose to be.
>Especially the traditions stemming from the kapalika branch. Aghori, trika and kaula.
Of the three, trika seems to be the most useful to me (at least from what I read on Wikipedia), as it can be used as a metaphor for a system of ternary logic which comes close to the hybrid binary/ternary system which I believe what we see as "consciousness" utilizes for data transfer. Cont'd
Op my only question about life is what is the purpose of ignorant people? With all the technology and vast wealth of information at human finger tips why do some humans still decide to be morons? Ive observed other humans for years yet this is the one thing i have yet to fully understand.
But again, these things only bear as much utility as you ascribe to them. If you're trying to hammer a nail into the wall, you can use any number of things to do so. What matters is that the nail gets into the wall in a satisfactory manner. If using a heavy book gets the job done just as well as a hammer, who cares?
I prefer to base my determinations of utility around speed, consistency, and simplicity, so I seek those aspects in ideas when I need to retrieve them. Other nodes have other preferences with respect to utility. I am no doubt missing out on a wide variety of specific perceptions, some of which might be very useful and interesting, but I don't believe that there exist any particular perceptions which are required as prerequisites for perfect perception.
The best way I can put this is:
"You can find salvation in a salt shaker if you need to."
If tantric practice is useful to you, pursue it, but do not make it your god, or you'll end up further away from the point you started from.
If you need a guru, find one, but do not make them your god, or you'll end up further away from the point you started from.
>Are your beliefs dvaita or advaita, dual or nondual? Monist?
I don't know what the proper word for my beliefs is within the set you're considering. I think Nagarjuna's conception of existence as sunyata as outlined in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā is probably the closest example of the archetype of my truth. I'll borrow one of his stanzas and turn it into a dialogue:
"Whatever is dependent arising
We declared that to be emptiness.
That is dependent designation,
And is itself the middle way."
"The middle way leads to the garden
We declared that to be satori.
That is dependent designation,
And is itself the middle way."
And Nagarjuna laughed, for to say more would be to confuse the point.
Op are you meaning that one one human implies another human is "stupid" they themselves are stupid? If this is true then wouldnt it be true that if a human says they are enlightened they are indeed unenlightened? Because suggesting that you are enlightened would be suggesting that others are unenlightened and thus making you unenlightened?
This is EXACTLY right. He doesn't see that but, you won't get it across to him. If you see yourself as enlightened then everyone else is, because you see divinity in everything.
This anon knows what he's talking about.
When he sits there and says ask me questions I'm enlightened, automatically you know he isn't.
He says he wants to help people, but as other anons tried to point out in this thread, the person is a fake, so really he is increasing duality.
So op, you have failed.
>Whaddaya think Lovecrafts work was a metaphor for if anything... I feel like he was channeling some highly abstract shit.
I've found a lot of use in casting the actors within his cosmology as atoms of thought- ideas that are shaded in a particular way. For instance:
Azathoth could be "randomness,"
Nyalarthotep could be "the bent towards irrationality,"
Cthulhu could be "death,"
Bast could be "religion,"
Nodens could be "time,"
madness could represent "the indecision of being and not being"
the Mythos itself could be "the ineffable nature."
I've actually found far more utility in Robert W. Chamber's work in "The King in Yellow," as is now popularly applied to the Lovecraftian thought-system through the entity Hastur, who seemingly exists to promulgate a text called "The King in Yellow" for the purposes of driving humanity insane.
I generally take Hastur to represent a bodhisattva, determined to liberate all beings, despite the fact that in doing so, all beings will cease to be.
I'd highly recommend "The King in Yellow," if you haven't read it. It's probably the closest thing to a "mythos tome" I've ever found, and I've read through a bunch of "occult" texts in my time. If nothing else, it conveys cosmic horror on a much more personal level than Lovecraft's work, as the "investigator" is a character within Lovecraft's work, whereas it is the reader within the context of "The King in Yellow."
>On a related topic, do you think the mollusc species is a completely seperate "player" in the "game"?
I think that their neurological evolution is an interesting one. Only time will tell if their "firmware" is more adapted to philosophy than our own. Perhaps it already is.
What if the reason we have never conversed with them is because they've arrived at the conclusion that one must only speak if it improves upon silence, and that silence cannot be improved upon?
What if the animals and the trees and the water and the stones all know this?
Is there a cure for depression?
Is there a "correct" emotion?
Is it possible to "be someone else" at the drop of a hat?
Does anger cause cancer?
I know what my name is, but Who am I?
What's the best way to be aware of what Im unaware of?
Is there someone out there that is meant for me? Is that even a thing?
What am I worth?
What do you think of willingly hurting and killing other organisms?
>Is there a cure for depression?
Depression is a state of mind, change your state of mind, I know it may seem hard but its as simple as that.
>Is there a "correct" emotion?
No, there is only desirable ones and undesirable ones.
>Is it possible to "be someone else" at the drop of a hat?
Psychically no, mentally yes.
>Does anger cause cancer?
>I know what my name is, but Who am I?
You're the Universe. But you already knew that.
>What's the best way to be aware of what Im unaware of?
>Is there someone out there that is meant for me? Is that even a thing?
Not really a thing, you can spend your life comfortable with someone, but in the end the ego and personas are all fake.
>What am I worth?
One implies the other /now/.
The warp and the woof are the fabric.
The fabric is the warp and the woof.
Can there be fabric without the warp and the woof?
Can there be a warp and woof without fabric?
Everyone is in fact enlightened. Their reality is reality. To suggest that I can somehow change this is ludicrous, for all change must be created, and creation occurs within the mind of the creator. I can no more cure alcoholism than I can move a mountain or resurrect the dead. I merely exist to be what you need me to be, for I am what I am now, though that is no guarantee I will be forever.
It is useful to suggest the presence of a duality in this case in order to provide one for those who wish to see one, so that they might see in that duality what they need to see. So too it is useful to suggest the absence of duality for those who wish to see one, so that they might see in that conception what they need to see.
I do not come here as a prophet, or a god, or a guru- I come here as a street performer. Take away what you need, leave the rest.
If a man needs a trial to achieve satori, he will find one. If he does not, he will not.
I'm not here to help, unless you need me to help you, in which case I will, regardless of the manner in which I do so.
I think that communication is a self-optimizing process that evolves towards simplicity.
In Asimov's Foundation series, the Second Foundation optimizes their communication to such a degree that the use of actual speech is quite unnecessary.
I think that abstract art is an expression of a personal thought-dialect, but as it is generally unsupported by a clear connection to more commonly-used communication patterns, its meaning can more easily be confused or misinterpreted than more representative pieces.
I never said Hastur was right, nor that the bodhisattva is a perfect or infallible actor.
>Is there a cure for depression?
I'd recommend this video as a starting place- I've found that many people find some of the techniques described very useful. Pick and choose the things that resonate with you and give them a shot.
Beyond that, look for a cure, and you'll find it.
>Is there a "correct" emotion?
>Is it possible to "be someone else" at the drop of a hat?
>Does anger cause cancer?
>I know what my name is, but Who am I?
You never forgot, so why imply you did by asking me?
>What's the best way to be aware of what Im unaware of?
>Is there someone out there that is meant for me? Is that even a thing?
If you need there to be, there is.
>What am I worth?
As much as the wind.
>What do you think of willingly hurting and killing other organisms?
All pain originates with you. Your conscious participation in its propagation is meaningless.
>>Is it possible to "be someone else" at the drop of a hat?
How so? This is gonna sound pretty fucked up but I want to be a girl. Not without the brain and the personality I have right now, but just to look different. I mean, I know there's hormone therapy but that shit is a pretty sad excuse for a genuine transformation.
Why work with clay when you can work with mind?
If you see value in the clay, then by all means mold it in your likeness, just know that whatever you create in clay will always be less than the idea you seek to represent there.
Over each hill, another hill, over each summit, another summit.
>just know that whatever you create in clay will always be less than the idea you seek to represent there.
I dont want other people to "get" anything, I just want to appear in a way that I think suits my attitude. I want to try something new and I'm bored of being me.
>I just want to appear in a way that I think suits my attitude.
You already do.
>I want to try something new and I'm bored of being me.
Then try! Seek the answer in the best way you know how, and you will find it wherever you choose to look.
>What's the most spitefully negative thing you could truthfully say to me?
Only you can make that determination, and in making that determination, you will necessitate the existence of a still more spitefully negative thing.
Could eating the best hamburger in the world bring you any peace?
nice, i really enjoy your thread to be honest. would you mind creating a tripcode? it would be usefull.
what do you mean by sying that an inittiate needs to abandon the perception that a particular ritual causes a perception? if a perception is gained, does it matter where it came from?
>>I know what my name is, but Who am I?
>You never forgot, so why imply you did by asking me?
I have literally no idea what you mean by this. As far as I know, I genuinely have no idea why I exist. Who I am. Who sees what I see, who stares back at me when I look in my reflection, who decided what I would comprise, who is hiding from me for whatever reason. Who created me and for what reason?
>What's the most effective way to be happy then remain happy permanently?
Be happy and stay happy- though I can't imagine why one would want to be happy all the time.
>How do you get to the point where you need nothing outside of yourself to be content?
There is no trial involved, no secret. If you wish to find the answer outside yourself, all you have to do is as much as you care to, and you will find it. It's unnecessary to do so, but I understand why one would believe it to be.
Ever lose your sunglasses on top of your head?
>nice, i really enjoy your thread to be honest. would you mind creating a tripcode? it would be usefull.
Done and done.
>what do you mean by sying that an inittiate needs to abandon the perception that a particular ritual causes a perception? if a perception is gained, does it matter where it came from?
The source doesn't matter, no. However the belief that the source is in some way "special" or "superior" is a potential source of confusion for the initiate.
For instance, if you only ever got food at the drive-thru, and believed that that was the only way to get food, what would you do when a restaurant didn't have a drive-thru, or the drive-thru is closed?
>Who created me and for what reason?
First I will describe it using time as a crutch. Then I will describe it without it. Follow the spirit of the thing, not the words.
I) You created you, to see what it would be like to be someone other than who you were. In order to keep the game going as long as possible, it was necessary to make it seem otherwise than it was.
II) Your ego is a possibility. An element in a vast list of all possibilities. You know the outcome of all possibilities, because you know everything. Part of knowing everything is knowing what it's like to be your ego, constrained by the initial conditions of your particular shard of potentiality. These things seem very real to your ego- time, pain, loss, need, etc. When you ponder the concept of your ego, you experience it perfectly. You see it played out in a wild silver jag through the field of being, but your ego sees it frame by frame, moment by moment.
So long as you hold your ego in your mind, you will be both it and not it. This is not an inferior state, for there are no inferior states. Don't seek to annihilate the ego- it naturally erodes. The waves of being lap at it in an ever-increasing swell from your birth. The time and manner of your ego's release is meaningless- for your ego has always been released, not because it is, but because it exists in a state of "always having had been."
This is a memory of a thought you had, a perfect recollection of a dream. Nothing more. If you want to destroy it, do so- it does not change anything, for what is and is perfect cannot be changed.
The only thing left for you is to be, and if you are, and what is is, then naturally you are it.
>Why do you believe what you believe?
It makes life suck less for me.
>What was the last most compelling thing you believed before you stopped believing it?
That Jesus was the only savior.
It's a useful metaphor for visualizing the process, but its literal truth or falsity is irrelevant.
I see you too!
Should I go to therapy? I have chronic feelings of boredom and am having troubles connecting to people and appearing normal. I can't tell if I have an actual problem or if I'm just being a total cuck.
I ended up going down this tangent at one point. Brain started short circuiting or something.
Any tips on avoiding accidental enlightenment? or unenlightening oneself so one can "go back outside and play"
Never wanna appearing to normal..
When you wanna friends real friends.. who trust you.. who loves you.. just be what or who you are..
The boredom what you feel somekind of natural..
But i think you should try new thing in your life..
Maybe read a book.. search for one what really intresting for you..
Or search some activities like.. any sport maybe e- maybe outdoor who set fire in you..
Or try to write a short or long way what you feel inside every little detail in a diary or some kind of art like a novel or paint something or create some music..
Or try to find some girl or boy for what you can feel something.. then the boredom when you wanna know a lot of and then all things for her/him it's just be the past and your inner fire is being a huge glorious beam what is shine in your eyes and then the people when you watch them eyes just wondering who you really are.
Explore.. .Search... Discover..
Your feelings lead the way..
We waiting for you in the bay..
>>Why do you believe what you believe?
>It makes life suck less for me.
>>What was the last most compelling thing you believed before you stopped believing it?
>That Jesus was the only savior.
Thanks, that's literally all I need to know about you.
Shame you weren't something more interesting. But then, I already knew that.