2ndchance

Activities to Cultivate Positive Emotions to achieve Samadhi concentration awareness

Recommended Posts

Jesus, spirituality is a total disaster.
It's better when people don't talk about it, then everyone can imagine they know what they are doing and making progress.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

Indeed. Thus the Bodhisattva postpones entering nirvana out of love for all suffering beings in the world. The Theravada figure of the arhat is more individualistic, and would see no problem in leaving the world alone.

 

That is the exact opposite of what I said.

 

One guy said that but that is not what the traditions teach.. Being a Buddha benefits everything. Such postponing would not be the benefit of others and would show ego..

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

8 hours ago, freeform said:

(Without even mentioning the different teachers I’ve trained with - whose validity you can only guess at...) The Pali Canon, the oldest and most complete teachings of the historical Buddha state that cultivating love and compassion etc will not lead one to enlightenment. Quite explicit.

 

When I quoted that part, I suggested the importance of reading through that entire Wikipedia article. It's important to do that, and read carefully. Basically, to sum it up, that's probably not what it said...nor is it the complete opinion on the subject from the Pali canon. If you read through the whole article and wonder about parts of it, I'm willing to discuss those parts here (it's on topic for the thread).

Whenever I suggest to read something fully, it's not done flippantly, and it's not merely a "suggestion" (as in something that might be worth doing, but it's up to you if you feel like it). It should instead be considered a prerequisite for continuing in an intelligent discussion, where we actually figure out the truth. And when I hyperlink something, that means everything within the hyperlink is essential to understanding what I'm saying...it's not to be considered optional to look at the hyperlink, or considered enough to merely glance at a part of the link, without fully comprehending everything in it. Those who don't look and comprehend simply won't understand what we're discussing, and will be lost and confused.

 

8 hours ago, freeform said:

The other side of the equation - well we’re not exactly sure (as none of us are experts - and we have no scriptures to quote), but it seems that maybe in Mahayana Buddhism it’s assumed that cultivating love and compassion will bring you enlightenment... It’s just not an equally weighted opposition... (and it still doesn’t say that Divine Love is the fundamental truth of reality)

 

Please read this article on Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche, and read it fully. If some words are unclear, or if some names are given that you don't know about, please research those things until you have a very good understanding of them, and then continue reading the article so that you fully comprehend it. After that, please go back to my posts here and fully reread every hyperlink. I linked you to those things for a reason: because many of them back up this view, and they do so from other Tibetan Buddhists who are unaffiliated with CNR, and also sometimes from scriptures.

It's something CNR teaches, and which was backed up by those other hyperlinked sources, that buddha nature has the qualities of unlimited love and compassion. That when a person is enlightened, those qualities manifest...and that when an unenlightened person cultivates those qualities, they cultivate enlightenment. While I'm not someone who personally knows many scriptures, I also don't think a highly respected Buddhist abbot would just be making things up, and based on the hyperlinks I gave you, we can be assured that he didn't.

 

8 hours ago, freeform said:

Not to mention that there may well be a political reason for this change in  interpretations of Buddha’s teachings. Afterall - generous donations to the temple are also seen as paths to enlightenment...

 

Since this Tibetan Buddhist view apparently coincides with the pre-Buddhist Indian view, I don't see that as being the case.

 

8 hours ago, freeform said:

On the other hand, Dwai’s argument - that in Hindu traditions Divine Love is the foundation of existence... that seems to be spot on. Clearly many venerated Hindu figures have claimed it so. It’s also been my experience of a Hindu guru. Pretty sound argument.

 

Yes, I agree.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

Thus the Bodhisattva postpones entering nirvana out of love for all suffering beings in the world.

 

Quote

 

"A commonly repeated misconception in Western literature is that bodhisattvas delay their own liberation. This confusion is based on a misreading of several different scriptural concepts and narratives. One of these is the Tibetan teaching on three types of motivation for generating bodhicitta. According to Patrul Rinpoche's 19th century Words of My Perfect Teacher (Kun bzang bla ma'i gzhal lung), a bodhisattva might be motivated in one of three ways. They are:

King-like bodhicitta - To aspire to become a Buddha first in order to then help sentient beings.
Boatman-like bodhicitta - To aspire to become a Buddha at the same time as other sentient beings.
Shepherd-like bodhicitta - To aspire to become a Buddha only after all other sentient beings have done so.
These three are not types of people, but rather types of motivation. According to Patrul Rinpoche, the third quality of intention is most noble though the mode by which buddhahood actually occurs is the first; that is, it is only possible to teach others the path to enlightenment once one has attained enlightenment oneself.[27] " - source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhisattva#Early_and_Theravāda_Buddhism

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, freeform said:

1 - I’m very much against the type of thinking that says one lineage is basically the same as another... It doesn’t matter if they seem similar to you. They are different. We must treat them differently. Context is key.

 

I agree with this point, it is better to treat the lineages differently.  There can be some similarities, the core values and principles in many spiritual paths are similar, but that does not make different lineages the same.  Mixing everything up is unproductive imo, it can also mislead seekers into confusion instead of clarity.  Context is very important.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

Is there a difference between attaining enlightenment and entering nirvana? 

 

Depends on ones definition of enlightenment :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jonesboy said:

Depends on ones definition of enlightenment :)

 

My own definition isn't relevant for now. I'm trying to understand the Mahayana view of a bodhisattva is as it is here propounded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

My own definition isn't relevant for now. I'm trying to understand the Mahayana view of a bodhisattva is as it is here propounded.

 

Here is my favorite Buddhist sutra. It should help as it goes over the various stages for disciples, master, arhats, bodhisattvas and talks about attaining Tathágata-hood.

 

http://buddhasutra.com/files/lankavatara_sutra.htm

 

The Tathágata’s Nirvana is where it is recognized that there is nothing but what is seen of the mind itself; is where, recognizing the nature of the self-mind, one no longer cherishes the dualisms of discrimination; is where there is no more thirst nor grasping; is where there is no more attachment to external things. Nirvana is where the thinking-mind with all its discriminations, attachments, aversions and egoism is forever put away; is where logical measures, as they are seen to be inert, are no longer seized upon; is where even the notion of truth is treated with indifference because of its causing bewilderment; is where, getting rid of the four propositions, there is insight into the abode of Reality. Nirvana is where the twofold passions have subsided and the twofold hindrances are cleared away and the twofold ego-less-ness is patiently accepted; is where, by the attainment of the "turning-about" in the deepest seat of consciousness, self-realization of Noble Wisdom is fully entered into, that is the Nirvana of the Tathágatas.

 

Nirvana is where the Bodhisattva stages are passed one after another; is where the sustaining power of the Buddhas upholds the Bodhisattvas in the bliss of the Samádhis; is where compassion for others transcends all thoughts of self; is where the Tathágata stage is finally realized.

 

Nirvana is the realm of the Dharmata-Buddha; it is where the manifestation of Noble Wisdom that is Buddhahood expresses itself in Perfect Love for all; it is where the manifestation of Perfect Love that is Tathágata-hood expresses itself in Noble Wisdom for the enlightenment of all- -there, indeed, is Nirvana!

 

.

Edited by Jonesboy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aetherous said:

That when a person is enlightened, those qualities manifest...and that when an unenlightened person cultivates those qualities, they cultivate enlightenment.

 

Firstly you assume that I haven’t read your links. I have. You can relax. And maybe show some patience and humility instead of being condescending.

 

2 hours ago, Aetherous said:

buddha nature has the qualities of unlimited love and compassion. That when a person is enlightened, those qualities manifest...

 

I have repeated over and over in different ways - Yes compassion and loving kindness and the other virtues arise as a result of enlightenment.

 

That is clearly the case. In most traditions.

 

In Daoism cultivating your Xing will give rise to virtue (very different mechanism than just aping them) and this can lead you to Sagehood - a very big attainment - but not enlightenment and not immortality.

 

I believe the Pali canon text you linked is saying the same thing... gaining “rebirth in the world of Brahmā” is a form of awakening... but not enlightenment. 

 

The Tibetan texts you linked do talk about emulating the virtues - like pretending to be a parent to create a loving feeling...

 

The Ngöndro text as far as I understand it is a basic preparatory text. To me it’s an introduction to the tradition at a brutal and barbaric time in history - when explicitly asking someone to stop killing, raping and pillaging was actually necessary. Very much an ‘outer door’ teaching. That’s my own conjecture, true - but at any rate - it clearly isn’t a method to enter enlightenment.

 

2 hours ago, Aetherous said:

when an unenlightened person cultivates those qualities, they cultivate enlightenment.

 

You haven't shown any decent support for that statement.

 

I have not seen CNR’s explicit views on this - feel free to post them, I didn’t see them.

 

He may well be a highly attained teacher, but I can’t tell without seeing him in person. Official titles are of reasonably minor importance to me.

 

I’ve met countless high ranking abbots for whom wealth and power is clearly the main concern in life.

 

But presence in person can’t be faked (when one has eyes to see).

 

I had the good sense to run far when I briefly met Sogyal Rinpoche in London many years ago.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@ Jonesboy

 

Thanks, apparently that is how the presence of Perfect Love for All in nirvana is described in Mahayana Buddhism. Doesn't help my understanding of the bodhisattva a bit. But that's not your fault. ;)

Edited by wandelaar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@ Aetherous

 

You are right - the Wikipedia says that I am wrong. Now I'm  not a buddhologist, so I looked up "bodhisattva" in The Shambhala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen, and there it says:

 

Quote

In Mahayana Buddhism a bodhisattva is a being who seeks buddhahood through the systematic practice of the perfect virtues (...) but renounces complete entry into nirvana until all beings are saved.

 

So what to believe?

 

Edited by wandelaar
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, freeform said:

Firstly you assume that I haven’t read your links. I have.

 

It's clear to me based on your responses that you still haven't read the links, or at least haven't understood them. I'm not just saying this out of our disagreement...you really apparently haven't seen many of the crucial things in those links. If you had, you wouldn't be saying many of the things that you are. Instead, we could have had a fruitful discussion. If you end up going back and actually reading those links, you'll see what I'm talking about.

 

About my faults here... I don't try to seem perfect when I'm not. If someone is clearly trolling me (as you are again doing in this thread, after just a week or two ago doing it in another thread), I get angry about it and treat them accordingly. The undisciplined and disrespectful are taught discipline and respect. I come from a military and combat background, where discipline is taught directly and forcefully, and obedience is expected...so, sorry if that seems ineffective for you. Yes, telling you to actually read is condescending...but it's also important to the discussion here, since that would have kept it from devolving into a meaningless and spiteful back and forth.

 

And yes, I should cultivate better, but hey I'm just human and a typical guy...not pretending to be someone with any attainment or importance.

 

Quote

I have repeated over and over in different ways - Yes compassion and loving kindness and the other virtues arise as a result of enlightenment.

 

And I've repeated too many times (once should have sufficed) that in Tibetan Buddhism, in Mahayana, it's also a means to enlightenment, and those qualities are of the buddha nature itself. I've given a lot of difference evidence for this, and have no need to repeat it again after this post. Genuine seekers and practitioners will find this information on their own, if they have an interest in these subjects.

 

Quote

You haven't shown any decent support for that statement.

 

Of course I have.

 

Quote

I have not seen CNR’s explicit views on this - feel free to post them, I didn’t see them.

 

I told you what he said. If you doubt me, that's understandable...you're free to go view all of his public video talks, and join the TTE program (which is where I think it's located) to hear it from him yourself. Maybe he even says it in his books (they're on Amazon), which are inexpensive.

 

Quote

I had the good sense to run far when I briefly met Sogyal Rinpoche in London many years ago.

 

It's good to be able to discern when someone isn't legitimate.

Anyway, freeform, I had nothing against you in the past, but I've seen that your style of communicating is just something I won't benefit from engaging (it won't benefit me, you, or anyone watching...it just drags us down and accomplishes nothing). I think when we have a discussion, it starts out beneficial for everyone to see because we can make some basic points, and that can lead to genuine people learning something...but it quickly becomes trolling and a waste of everyone's time.

I have to put you on ignore now, which is something I pretty much never do here. I don't think I've ever had ANYONE on ignore. Saying this is not to say you're worse than anyone else here, at all...but it is to say that this type of discussion we've been having is just not going to continue. Aside from this seeming rude, my best goes to you.

Edited by Aetherous
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

@ Jonesboy

 

Thanks, apparently that is how the presence of Perfect Love for All in nirvana is described in Mahayana Buddhism. Doesn't help my understanding of the bodhisattva a bit. But that's not your fault. ;)

That is why I provided the link to the sutra 😉

 

What are you having trouble with? Maybe I can help.

Edited by Jonesboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

@ Aetherous

 

You are right - the Wikipedia says that I am wrong. Now I'm  not a buddhologist, so I looked up "bodhisattva" in The Shambhala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen, and there it says:

 

 

So what to believe?

 

 

Buddhism has all different types of teachings, for different levels of practitioners and perhaps for different stages of results...also different sects and branches, some of which are quite different from each other.

I was going to send you a private message about understanding Buddhist ideas and terminology an hour ago, but it had an error in sending and I chose not to rewrite it at the time...but I'll write the basic idea again here...

My personal opinion on how someone should learn Buddhism...it basically involves two things.

1) Have a legitimate teacher. This person may or may not be enlightened...who could discern the truth of that? But they should be a legitimate figure in a legitimate branch of Buddhism. This will mean that they've studied all of the texts, had prior legitimate teachers teaching them, and they gained experiential understanding of the texts and word of mouth teachings for themselves. As such, they're able to clarify things to you that would otherwise be completely obscure.

For instance, let's say you're new to Buddhist concepts, and you read two sentences from the root text of the Uttaratantra Shastra. Due to not having preliminary knowledge understood, it just reads almost like gibberish. If you're confident in yourself, you can think you understand some of it...but once you were taught with clarity by the legitimate teacher, you might realize that you had no idea and were just making things up in an attempt to make sense of things. After being taught legitimately, the two sentences are crystal clear.


So it's important to have a teacher, in Buddhism. This is not the type of path where a person can read books, or read online articles or dictionaries, and think that knowledge suffices.

As I said above, there are different forms of Buddhism. When you have a teacher, they're going to teach you one form of it...maybe it's what you individually need, or maybe it's just what they tend to teach everyone. But it will be the case that other forms of Buddhism might have seemingly contradictory teachings.

So perhaps some Buddhists really do think that bodhisattvas hold off on their complete enlightenment and wait until all sentient beings are liberated, before attaining it. This may be due to a misinterpretation, or due to a legitimate teaching they have. But other Buddhists don't think that.

All that matters is what you're taught, and more importantly, if it's sensible and useful to you.

2) The second part of understanding Buddhism, in my opinion, is having experiential knowledge. In my experience, Buddhist teachings are nearly incomprehensible if we don't practice, but the meaning becomes crystal clear when we do practice. Practice depends on what your teacher tells you to do.

So there is book knowledge and teacher knowledge...but the other side of the coin is experiential knowledge.

Imagine if you had never tasted chocolate...but you decided to become a chocolate expert. You read all of the books about chocolate; how it's prepared, how it tastes, the different varieties. You gained all of the information that people said about it, had a photographic memory, and were able to speak fairly accurately on the subject of chocolate.

But one day you actually taste the chocolate. Now you understand what they mean when they were saying it has notes of bitterness. You previously imagined the bitter to be like swedish bitters, but really it's something else. Now you know chocolate. You try different cocoa bean varieties, and are finally able to discern what they mean when they say one tastes more sweet. Now you can say things about it, too, rather than just repeat what others said, guessing what they meant.

This is kind of long winded...but yeah, basically...a teacher can elucidate the texts for you, and that's essential, and your own experience can really make things clear in a different way. Those are the two ways people should learn about Buddhism...not by looking things up intellectually from disparate sources.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@ Aetherous

 

I have read quite some books on Buddhism and Zen, and I listened to Buddhist lectures for some time, but my general impression of Buddhism is the same as with Taoism. The basics are great, but the later scholastic and ritualistic developments are (lets keep it decent) not my cup of thee. So I am not motivated to invest years of my life to becoming a disciple of any one Buddhist guy or school. As to practice, the basic Buddhist practice as far as I'm concerned is meditation (I do just sitting) combined with some basic moral rules of common decency. And further contemplation of the transience of all things and the non-existence of the ego.

 

As to the meaning of bodhisattva you're right that Buddhism is a broad and layered phenomenon, so one could probably defend many positions on the meaning of the term by cherry picking the appropriate quotes.

 

Edited by wandelaar
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aetherous said:

The undisciplined and disrespectful are taught discipline and respect. I come from a military and combat background, where discipline is taught directly and forcefully, and obedience is expected...

 

Explains the pompous self entitlement 👍🏼

 

1 hour ago, Aetherous said:

Tibetan Buddhism, in Mahayana, it's also a means to enlightenment, and those qualities are of the buddha nature itself. I've given a lot of difference evidence for this

 

I’ve still not seen evidence that imitating the virtues is a means to enlightenment from your quotes or from your links.

 

Did anyone else see it?

 

Despite what Aetherious thinks, I’m interested in seeing all views, whether I agree with them or not. I don’t feel the need to hide away from anyone. If I disagree I will state my reasons as clearly as I can.

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rideforever said:

Jesus, spirituality is a total disaster.

 

At least it got you invoking Jesus! :) 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, freeform said:

I’ve still not seen evidence that imitating the virtues is a means to enlightenment from your quotes or from your links.

 

Did anyone else see it?

Haven’t read the quotes or followed the links but In Mahayana Buddhism there is the Path of the Cause and the Path of the Result.

 

The Path of the Cause takes as its base and starting point the ordinary deluded mind which trains in aspirational and actional bodhichitta, developing virtues and generating merit which provides the cause and lays the path to eventual enlightenment. 

 

The Path of the Result takes the inherently enlightened nature as its base and works on stabilising its embodied expression.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2019 at 6:11 PM, 2ndchance said:

What do you guys do to cultivate positive emotions besides meditating? Let's share!

 

One thing I can think of is to write a gratitude journal everyday. Also, being grateful CONSCIOUSLY to the Dao and the Universe every second seems to work.

 

 

If you want to cultivate peace, cultivate trust first. Feel the bond between you and the energy animating your form. Relax into it, drop into it. Your digestive channels will open, and you may feel a sense of peace. It is not forcing peace. It is trusting and bonding with your inner Jesus, Buddha, Qi or Dao.

 

If you want to cultivate gratitude, hold reverence for your vital energy, for all the things it allows you to do day in and day out. Your kidney channels will open, and you may feel a sense of gratitude or tenderness. It is not forcing gratitude. It is like being a delicate flower experiencing a breeze. Let the breeze be like the weeping sensation that you experience in your heart when you realize the beauty of your life. Gratitude can be so gentle and tender that you only know it's there when you experience its absence after the meditation.

 

If you want to cultivate contentment, remedy doubt in your life. If you doubt the presence of the Divine, or doubt the value of your own existence, you will carry unresolved grief in the lungs. When you feel embraced by the energy that holds you, you feel like you are home. Your lung channels will open, and you may feel a sense of satisfaction. It is not forcing contentment. It is like knowing you can receive a hug from a wise old friend every time you need him, and that he is nearby.

 

If you want to cultivate happiness, think of happy things that happened during your day. Maybe you ate some delicious chocolate, had a relaxing cup of tea, received a phone call from a relative. Nothing is too small to cultivate happiness. Your liver channels will open. It is not forcing happiness. It is reviewing the good things that happened during your day using memory.

 

If you want to cultivate joy, forget happiness. Joy is happiness for no reason. You might feel a vibration, a warmth inside. You can't explain the feeling, but it feels like you are expanding from within and want to reach out and hug people. Your heart channels will open. It is not forcing joy. It is being deeply moved inside to go outwards for no reason.

 

These emotions will be personal for everyone. So there is no definition. Gratitude is not gratitude for example. It is not simply a word. It can be an energetic process that opens a door for you to access more energy, it can change your perspective so much that it starts to heal your physiology. Emotions have different signatures and act as keys to unlock certain blockages, so they can be valuable. To reply to the OP, I think emotions can be a spring-board to higher states, but you wouldn't be focusing on them anymore at that point. Have fun experimenting with emotions and finding what they feel like for you !

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 1/8/2019 at 7:30 PM, wandelaar said:

 

Indeed. Thus the Bodhisattva postpones entering nirvana out of love for all suffering beings in the world. The Theravada figure of the arhat is more individualistic, and would see no problem in leaving the world alone.

You can only ever love another through your own love for self. You love yourself so much you want all that are related to that life to also be in love with themselves, so as to created the ever expanding resonances of that co-harmonized love. As above, so below.

 

Bodhisattva has suffered, and is not postponing nirvana. But speeding it up. It is the intense desire, to want to leave  the world alone more FULLY, more sooon, more intense desire and wanting, for everything to work in perfect harmony and co-creation, and thus more intense and expansive knowing. That doesn't necesarily mean arhat is not all-inclusive, or bodhisattva is less individualistic, I assume.

 

It is the integration of the whole and everMore that is allowed through the individual, each and every one of you.

Edited by Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, rex said:

Haven’t read the quotes or followed the links

 

Disobedience will not be tolerated!!

 

:)

 

10 hours ago, rex said:

The Path of the Cause takes as its base and starting point the ordinary deluded mind

 

10 hours ago, rex said:

The Path of the Result takes the inherently enlightened nature as its base and works on stabilising its embodied expression.

 

Interesting! Does the Path of Cause aim for enlightenment in one lifetime or is the idea to develop enough merit over many lifetimes? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, freeform said:

 

Disobedience will not be tolerated!!

 

:)

 

 

 

Interesting! Does the Path of Cause aim for enlightenment in one lifetime or is the idea to develop enough merit over many lifetimes? 

Pay attention. The enlightenment always is and has expanded as a result of your life. 

Look at what I am saying. Do not think, but hear and feel. The enlightenment, has always already been, it infact, has expanded TREMENDOUSLY, HUUUUUGEE! As a result of your simple life experience. :)

You can always allow your enlightenment as it already exists within you. You are already it! YOU SIR! OR MADAMOISELLE OR MONSIEUR. YOU! You :rolleyes: are already enlightened. EXPLOOOOOODED has your enlightenement. But you try to contain it and mess it up. -_-

What u gonna do about it? Just put lipstick on and keep smiling. :D untill your face rips from your skull, into the full blown realisation of all that you have become. 

And then you don't need to worry about what the face is doing, cause you wont have no face to begin with. NON-PHYSICAL is your enlightenment. 

So take it by its hand, it's ment to guide you through your life, to the ever more and ever better. In mutual marriage, hand in hand, walking jolly into the midst of of ever despairing circumstances and continuesly beaming the light of your marriage with who you really are, through you. For the satisfaction of your ever more becoming of the moreness of all the moreness of all the physicalness of all that is you. Nesses ness. 

Take a whiff of that and fking beat it into your skull, spiral and stirr it around, and out, and release, RELEASE! CAST YE OUT THY DEMON INTO THE FLAMING ABYSS OF THIS SMALL LITTLE HARMLESS PUDDLE THAT COULD NOT EVEN DROWN A FREAKING ANT! God, man! Why you always have to make this so hard on me, man! I mean... Really? :(

Just shoot me already. Straight here into my heart. Straight into the bullseye of my love for you. Come, on me, give me your best shot. Come on, go on. Shoot me. I want you to shoot me in the heart. And here! In my heart, and shoot me. Shoot the love that is for you. Come on!... WHATAYOU WAITING FOOOOOoooorrr! COME ON! SHOOOOOOT ME! I SAID SHOOT ME GOD DAMNHIT. 

Oh wait... You can't, cause you love me. B)

Edited by Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Everything said:

WHATAYOU WAITING FOOOOOoooorrr! COME ON! SHOOOOOOT ME! I SAID SHOOT ME GOD DAMNHIT. 

Oh wait... You can't, cause you love me. B)

 

That - and we have gun laws here :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, freeform said:

 

That - and we have gun laws here :)

Rules are ment to be broken.

I am a rule.

Then I untie my rule, release the knot, and let go of the need to be shot.

Edited by Everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites