Icedude

Nah, just the same posting style, didn't find out anything (yet). He just can't post for a few days now while the mods figure out what to do.

You thought I was this "erss" for awhile too, so comparing IPs is a more reliable method.

I didn't have you down as a the voice of reason but there you are.

I know. I surprised myself too, seeing that I've recently been in TERs shoes somewhat. Sometimes we get all worked up until we burst, and then we say stupid arrogant things like "Moahaha, I don't have to face any sort of consequences!". I hoped that it would be just a temporary suspension, because maybe he just needed to calm down, but as it seems they found out that he was previously banned, I don't know. I think I missed all his hurtful posts, because I just saw him as just another guy.

I was tempted - really tempted - to post this in the taoist subforum, but I have a feeling that people don't trust me there enough.

Knytt Stories is a fairly popular computer game. It's a free indie platformer exploration game. It's also a beautiful nature experience.

The beauty about Knytt Stories (especially the official story The Machine) to me, is that it shows a different perspective. It shows the beauty and serenity of being small and energetic. Juni doesn't involve herself in politics. She doesn't watch the news about the war in Over-there-istan. She just runs around and climbs whereever she can, like a force of nature. Her hands and feet speak, and nature speaks back, and we have this beautiful friendly, non-judgemental conversation going on, without a single word spoken.

I hope that you will feel as calm and refreshed from playing it as I've done.

http://nifflas.ni2.se/?page=Knytt+Stories

...and after that, there's hundreds upon hundreds of fan stories to play, if you want more. (A warning, though: Many of those are made to be unfair jumping puzzles, so watch out.)

When I speak of "master Juni", yes, I'm talking about the protagonist.

I was uncivilized because I challenged the norm thought? Please.

I have absolutely no idea what this argument is about, or if you're innocent or not. I'm just saying that laughing at people getting irritated, without the slightest regard, and refering to mods as essentially bullies, might not be the best of tactics. I've tried to see if the mods are up to no good at this forum, and so far I've not seen any misconduct. Again, I might be mistaken. I'm just saying "Let's not go completely nuts here, okay?".

Consequences? Like what? Mod squad? LOL

While I don't particularly like it, 99% of all forum rules at the internet, include sentences like: "You agree to not post something that is derogatory, inflammatory, insulting, obscene, inappropriate, degrading, annoying, repetitive, or start with the letter Q." This is why the "mod squads" are knocking at your door: We are all here because we've agreed to act "civilized" toward eachother. Sometimes that's hard, especially when we want to convince people, but at least we need to make an honest effort.

Oh, luv the moose. Are they all tame like that? :-)

This was a tame one. The one who's talking is probably his "zoo" keeper.

People commonly hunt them for the meat, so while I don't know, I'm guessing that it's in their best interests to not be friendly around humans. Their "crown" (horns) can be used to toss people up into the air like a tractor shovel. ...but I think they mainly eat berries.

If there's a problem with irritation, I find that eating when hungry, sleeping when tired, and soothing music, helps.

See where it says "Grand Marsupilami" above my avatar picture? You can change that to say whatever you want.

On the top of the screen, click on your name.

In the dropdown menu, select User Settings.

In the Profile Information section, under the option to edit your About Me page, there is a box for Member Title.

After you've typed in your title, scroll to the bottom of the screen and press Save Changes.

You're welcome.

Hehehe, Yeah, we are pretty much opposites.

 

However, I will pretty much agree with your last paragraph.

 

But the concept of appropriate is still valid, IMO. We can't just "Do It In The Road".

 

And then there is the concept that for all things there is a season.

 

I hope you get to stay here as long as you wish too. It is possible that we may not always agree but please don't take that as a personal challenge or insult.

 

So anyhow, you like Monty Python and I like Benny Hill and I have no idea who Shintaro Kago is.

 

Best Wishes.

Best wishes to you too.

You should at least try to read Shintaro Kago at least once. (He's a manga artist.)

Excellent challenging response. No, I don't have that watch either and do not claim to have it.

 

But I do claim to have the control over which threads I am going to get involved in and how I am going to interact with post from others.

 

Even if my post was inspired by something someone else had said, it was I, and "I" only who chose ignore or respond to the post.

 

Yes. I am a believer in free will. If I were a religious person my religion would be Zoroasterianism. The primary tenent is that God gave us free will bu also charged us with taking responsibility for all our thoughts, words and actions or inactions.

 

I must accept responsibility for trying to be humorous at an inappropriate time. And I must also take responsibility for being critical toward another. And I must also be able to justify my criticism.

(I don't really know what your post was about, so I'm only speaking in general terms here. Yes, this "is" my thread, but I give up on keeping up with all the posts, and don't want to get sucked into being "uncivil".)

I guess we're simply opposite in this regard, because "appropriate" isn't in my vocabulary. If there ever was a word that means the opposite of "awakening", it's "appropriate". ...at least according to my vocabulary. I read Shintaro Kago, and think he's an awesome guy for blowing my mind. I love Monthy Python. I love rape jokes. I shaped 4chan in its infancy. I love to break free of norms and rules, and find the freedom beyond it. I am holding back at this forum, because for once I'd like to be able to stay at a forum for more than a few months.

...but some people like "appropriate" a little too much. It's not only an armor to them to shelter them from other peoples opinions and the real world, but it's also a weapon to swing at people. They know there are knights out there with sharp swords, that will swing at anything at the mention of "inappropriate". When they're children they hit people and then run behind one of their parents crying. When they grow up to be adults, they're called "professional victims". They cry and pull strings at the same time. ...and in a sense you can't fully blame them for this, when knights are wired to obey the laws of "appropriate" to begin with.

And yes, I enjoy humor. I oftentimes try to cause others a smile or a laugh. But there is a time for humor and a time to be serious. Sure, I have on occasion missed the mark and tried to be humorous when it wasn't the right time for others. You will never see me trying to put my errors or responsibilities on others. I accept full responsibility for every word and every post I present on this forum.

How can you accept full responsibility, when you don't seem to possess the necessary watch to tell what time it is? There seems to be all these times to be different emotions, and I sure don't have a watch either, but I wouldn't dream of accepting full responsibility for every word and post I present on a forum. That's like claiming that your posts are childproof, flameproof and generally omniproof. Some of your posts will poke someones eye out sooner or later, and you'll end up taking responsibility for being a sadistical eye gouger.

It is pointless talking with you.

Yes. I am sorry.

Ok sure...and I thought I made it clear that I understood this, but didn't get the manner in which you chose to approach it. Admittedly, there was some more overflow from the other thread we were bickering in also. If I'm not in agreement, and if I perceive something you've written as being sarcastic or in bad taste, it's only natural that I respond the way I seem fit, right?

 

That said, it felt to me that you thought you had the need to get defensive because I was highly opposed to some things you said. Like you didn't wan't the challenge or were "above it" or whatever. You didn't answer most of the things I've been asking and to my mind, you've been quite dismissive...plus, you have made many blind judgements of me!

 

But this is just my opinion. I am unsure whether you can even perceive things any way like I do - so our little debate is probably not worth the energy anyhow.

Yes, I am "above it all". The things you've pointed out are constructs made and shaped to attack me. It's like saying: "Your poo is disgusting and completely inedible." So don't eat my poo then. It wasn't meant to be eaten.

What, people with a job that go to work everyday and work in the conditions you outlined above, common type people that have to work for money?

 

How do enlightened people (such as yourself) get by? Money just 'manifests'... they are beyond the need for shelter, food and water .... rich mummy ?

You don't have to work for money. Even in countries that doesn't have wellfare for people who "has a severe lack of concentration and motivation", you can just work, and then people will usually force lots of money on you. You can also work in order to get paid, without really chasing money. Basic needs are often cheap to satisfy, even when you don't have a farm of your own.

I mean "common people" as in "not monks". I am assuming that the people who are now building this temple, aren't spiritual, because monks don't tend to have an official education in construction, and hiring employees based on their religion is discrimination against atheists.

I stand corrected.

Well if you want to understand the TTC its good to go back to the Chinese characters.

Read at your leisure obviously.

Thank you.

TBs is a wonderful resource if you just bother to look around .. so I tempted to say you should find it yourself but since I am benevolent ... just this once ... http://thetaobums.com/topic/16539-ttc-study-chapter-five-of-the-tao-teh-ching/?p=227296

Yes, it's probably a wonderful resource, but it's also a very huge one, where a single discussion inside a single topic will be helplessly lost in subforums and other posts. It's obviously easier for you, since you know what you are looking for.

I tried to read through it all, but unfortunately the discussion is too long for me to keep up with. I expected a short one. I certainly didn't expect translations of all the chinese characters.

If I say, "ok, you're right", will that make things easier to communicate with you? Shall we try that?

You don't need to do that. Just don't complain. I've already explained that I only meant for you guys to grow, and that should be appreciated.

Who are we talking about? You are me? And I think we are as bad as each other here. If I in any way, implied that I wanted to be your student, I'm sorry lol. I didn't intend to confuse.

 

As for my faults, I am very aware of them myself, yes. I'm just not convinved that you are.

Everything I do right now, means I'm not in the stillness of Nirvana where I belong, so everything I do or say is inherently a "fault" that I've constructed in order to communicate with you.

It's not easy to be big either, because you aren't the only one who reacts like there's an elephant in their backyard. I'm a freak without a home. Don't feel ashamed.

I kind of agree with you ... but I refer you to the TBs TTC discussion on this very topic ... and the literal translation is 'not benevolent' and yes that does imply impartiality or perhaps because of the straw dogs image ... that value is only placed in things pro tem and that they have no inherent vale as such without functionality in a given context.

I'm not sure what you mean now, because the grammar seems a bit incoherent, but if you want to refer me to a discussion in another topic, could you link to it, please?

This was actually the thread that made me come here.

This is all I have to say:

 

Sadhguru says his own enlightenment is impossible?

Sadhguru (Jaggi Vasudev) is an indian mystic who claims he has reached enlightenment, leading to him becoming a spiritual leader.

He said that he achieved enlightenment by sitting in meditation on a small hill, and suddenly feeling at one with everything. He explains the realization like this:

"'til that moment I always thought 'This is me, and that's somebody else.' I had no issue with that somebody else, but that is somebody, this is me. For the first time I did not know which is me and which is not me. What was me was just spread all over the place."

He described this as becoming enlightened.

(Source:

)

However, in a speech about how business people should deal with stress, he says that the entire world exists only as sensory perceptions in ones own mind, and that feeling anothers sensations is *impossible*:

"You have never experienced anything outside of yourself. [if] the person next to you right now touches you, you think you're experiencing *his* hand. No, you are only experiencing the sensations in *your* hand - you are *incapable* of experiencing the other hand."

(Source:

)

So what Sadhguru experienced in his enlightenment (if he's even telling the truth) must have been that everything only existed as sensory perceptions part of him, and not that he was part of everything else. First of all, that's not an uncommon realization - narcissists have that mindset all the time - and second of all, that's the very *opposite* of enlightenment.

Yes but in a social context perhaps it is better to cultivate benevolence than hate for instance. And of course the TTC says heaven and earth are not benevolent and treat the 10k things as straw dogs ... same for the sage and people ... so how natural is that?

That passage means that heaven and earth (and sages) isn't partial, which is extremely natural. I mean "benevolence", as in the absence of ill will. In contrast, holding benevolence as a virtue means trying to infuse oneself with the unnatural urge to help people. In reality that just ends of in catastrophy: Jails full of the "bad" people, death penalties, cruelty, just because we don't understand eachother. A society that doesn't accept a certain percentage of people, isn't a just or good society. It only deludes itself that it is.

I agree with you up to the last bit. Actually nothing much wrong with cultivating benevolence at a certain level in respect to other people. I think Confucius has been downgraded a lot because Daoism is so popular. But Daoism is popular with many for the reasons you indicated because it seems to affirm the idea that 'whatever' is ok and right. No doubt Daoism is deeper an dmore direct that Confucianism as regard what is real but in many ways the two systems compliment each other.

I find that benevolence comes automatically with understanding (together with seeing no real reason for opposition). Once you understand that you would have done exactly the same thing, it's unnatural to hate someone. It would be like hating or hurting yourself. I don't believe in benevolence as a virtue. I believe in it as a natural state.

What are you wearing right now?

Just a bridle.

Cats are mammals ... I think so... which means I have nipples... so ... the logic is?

Are you coming on to me? ...because there is just no way that you'll be able to convert me to a simiasexual.