Truth Is Never Domineering Or Intolerant But Uncompromising

Truth Is Never Domineering Or Intolerant But Uncompromising:
Truth is never domineering (subjugating) or intolerant (wanting to exterminate or do away with others) because there is no force in truth that is needed to dominate and exterminate but there is only pure reason in truth that cannot and will not be compromised because it will then no longer be the truth. It is falsity that is always driven by force that is necessary to overcome self resistance (because not to resist self harming falsity is mad) that is always domineering and intolerant and yet quite happy to compromise itself in the name of expediency.
Quote: Asserting one's correctness to the exclusion of the other view implies the need of supremacy or dominance of views. This leads to fragmentation - an obvious reason for strife and hardships and sufferings in this world.
Whilst I have no doubt and uncertainty as to the correctness of my views because my putting into practice my views has endowed me with an incomparable release from suffering that was previously unimaginable, I am not aware that I have contemplated to myself, let alone communicate to others the supremacy or dominance of my views which is an accusation the person is rashly making (not without risk of judgment that is far more grave than he ever dreamt possible) by projecting his own emotional need to dominate others on me.
Nevertheless, even though I have no need to dominate others with my views, ‘asserting one’s correctness to the exclusion of the other view’ is NOT in itself necessarily ALWAYS wrong or domineering because if it is based on reason devoid of irrational emotion and it (the view) describes reality accurately, it is merely a statement of what is true that has nothing to do with domineering or supremacy. You have mad perception if you think a view that describes reality correctly has something to do with being domineering. It is only when the assertion of one’s correctness is emotional or backed by force, the view that one is asserting can be proven to be objectively false that it is then wrong and reflects a need for supremacy or dominance of others’ views.
It is not so much the assertion of the correctness of one’s view that leads to fragmentation and strife but it is precisely because there are many differing conflicting competing views on any given subject that cannot be all right but only one or none of those views are correct (because they differ and therefore must negate each other) that gives rise to fragmentation and strife and therefore anyone who preaches to me to treat dissenting views as equals is upholding this status quo, upholding falsity and strife, not me.
Because on any subject there can be only one truth that describes it, anything that differs is therefore wrong, differing views must therefore not be upheld but calmly clearly thinking rejected. Unless there is no one single truth that describes the situation, then it is not everything goes or your differing view is as good as mine. The Buddha has said in many ways that there is an unity in truth, there is a single correct or right view for any given subject and this accords with what Jesus said that ‘they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us’. Because a single view that is correct that describes any subject is possible and exists, there is no excuse to encourage others to fake (never truly believe) that they appreciate all differing views on any given subject.
If my point of view that speaking without stretching syllables, changing speed and loudness is the ONLY way permanently out of stress, restlessness and distraction is correct, then it is not a case that I have a need for supremacy but because it is correct, it describes reality correctly, ANY point of view that differs must be wrong and will lead to strife and hardship because they detract from the truth and maintains others in stress, restlessness and distraction because so long as the person in contradiction to my view remains in stretching of syllables, changing speed and loudness he remains trapped in stress, restlessness and distraction that will turn mad. Many do not realize they have this mad logic that their views that differ from mine is equally valid when it is a case that anyone who espouse the view no matter how close that one plus one is 1.999 must give way to me whose view is that one plus one is two by virtue of the truth that it is so. Because they are convinced by their false logic, they feel it is their right not just to not accept my view but it is their right to castigate me instead of being overbearing, risking judgment for attacking another. Many have perfected the fine art of killing others softly that they think they are right, doing you a service putting you down when they are wickedly killing you with shit they want you to accept as food.
If everyone was united in heart and mind in a single right view that is based on truth as exist in heaven that is implied in Jesus’ statement that ‘they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us’, where can there be strife, from whence arguments thence fisticuffs ensue? It is precisely because of the existence of differing FALSE views that cannot be reconciled that are passionately held by their proponents that there is no end to strife on earth. There can be no peace so long as there exist differing emotionally charged (false) views. No amount of contrived or faked condescending tolerance or respect for another’s differing view will alleviate but beneath the façade of cordiality resentment that may reach murderous intensities seethe.
THEREFORE IT IS NOT MY ALLEGED ASSERTION OF THE CORRECTNESS OF MY VIEW THAT LEADS TO FRAGMENTATION, BUT IT IS THE EXISTENCE OF MANY DIFFERING VIEWS THAT ARE EMOTIONALLY DEFENDED WITHOUT REGARD TO REASON ON ANY ONE SUBJECT THAT CANNOT BE ALL CORRECT BUT THEY MUST ALL REFUTE EACH OTHER BECAUSE THEY ARE DIFFERENT THAT LEADS TO FRAGMENTATION, AN OBVIOUS REASON FOR STRIFE AND THE SPEAKER IS A MUDDLED PERSON IN DANGER OF FUTURE MADNESS. INSTEAD IF EVERYONE WAS UNITED IN THE TRUTH OF MY VIEW EG STOP STRETCHING SYLLABLES, STOP CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS THEY WILL ATTAIN A PEACE OF MIND THEY NEVER REALIZED EXISTED AND THUS UNITED IN CALM CLEAR THINKING, FAR FROM LEADING TO FRAGMENTATION, IT WILL END ALL STRIFE PERMANENTLY.
BECAUSE ALL VIEWS THAT DIFFER MUST REFUTE EACH OTHER, ONLY ONE OR NONE OF THE DIFFERING VIEWS CAN BE TRUE AND IF IT IS POSSIBLE TO UNITE IN ONE COMMON VIEW THAT IS TRUE AS IS STATED CLEARLY IN MANY PLACES BY THE BUDDHA AND IMPLIED IN WHAT JESUS SAID THAT ‘they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us’, THEN WHOEVER ADVOCATES TOLERANCE AND APPRECIATION OF OTHERS DIFFERING VIEWS THAT CAN NEVER BE GENUINE BUT CONTRIVED IS NOT MERITORIOUS AS HE FOOLISHLY THINKS BUT HE IS ADVOCATING DISUNITY AND STRIFE NOT ACCORD.
IF WHAT I SAY IS THE TRUTH THAT NOBODY CAN & WILL SAY IN THE PAST AND EVEN TODAY AND IT IS THE ONLY WAY OUT OF SUFFERING THAT WAS INCONCEIVABLE IN THE PAST, EG STOP STRETCHING SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS IN SPEECH AND YOU SPURN IT AS A MERE POINT OF VIEW NOT JUST THAT YOU REJECT BUT YOU ACCUSE ME OF BEING DOMINEERING & INTOLERANT, YOU MAY GROSSLY UNDERESTIMATE YOUR WICKEDNESS AND BE ASKING FOR SERIOUS TROUBLE.
IT IS NOT A QUESTION OF DOMINANCE OR INTOLERANCE BUT IT IS A MATTER OF TRUTH THAT ANYONE WHO SAYS ANYTHING OTHER THAN ONE PLUS ONE IS TWO MUST GIVE WAY TO THE PERSON WHO SAYS THAT ONE PLUS ONE IS TWO. IN THAT SENSE TRUTH HAS NO PEERS AND FALSITY MUST IN THE END DEFER TO TRUTH.
SHOULD YOU THINK THAT THERE ARE MANY SITUATIONS IN LIFE WHERE TRUTH IS NOT SO CLEAR CUT, YOU MAY BE RIGHT OR YOU MAY HAVE WRONG VIEW BECAUSE EVERYTHING IN THIS WORLD, HOWEVER COMPLEX IT MAY SEEM, MAY BE KNOWABLE AND UNDERSTANDABLE. MYSTERY IS ENTIRELY A PRODUCT OF FALSITY AND PRETENSE.
IT MAY BE THE TRUTH THAT IF YOU WERE TO LET YOUR YES BE YES ONLY, IF YOU DID NOT STRETCHED YOUR SYLLABLES, CHANGED SPEED AND LOUDNESS FALSELY WHEN YOU SPEAK, ALL MYSTERY WILL VANISH AND YOU WILL SEE EVERYTHING CLEARLY WITHOUT ANY DOUBT OR UNCERTAINTY.
If by saying ‘asserting one's correctness to the exclusion of the other view implies the need of supremacy or dominance of views’ you are questioning whether there is any absolute single truth that binds everyone in this world or saying truth is diverse (eg there is Hindu, Buddhist, Christian or scientific truth) or truth is relative depending on an individual’s interpretation, likes or dislikes, you are deluded and foolishly, without realization pitting yourself against the Buddha and Jesus.
It is wrong view that leads even to hell or the animal womb to say in moments of despair that there is no meaning in life. The reason why there is no meaning in your life and that of beings in this world is because you believe in falsity often without awareness you do and your life here is based on an endless ephemeral litany of likes and dislikes that is nothing more than undulating or escalating rises in speed and strength of your mental force in reaction to events. Once you shed your likes and dislikes to embrace constancy in speed and strength of force in whatever you perceive, think, say or do, your life is imbued with a calm clearly thinking meaning wherein everything falls into place or can be understood logically.
If there is no absolute truth that applies to everyone, Jesus is unjustified to say on many occasions “I tell you the truth” because what truth is Jesus speaking of if it does not apply to all, to you that he addresses and not everyone is bound by the truth he tells?
The Buddha has said there is right and wrong views, implying there is truth that is discrete from falsity. He said truth is the highest of tastes, implying there is objective truth that is the highest of tastes.

Conviction (that there is life after death, rewards and punishment for good and bad conduct) is a person's highest wealth.
Dhamma (code for virtuous conduct), when well-practiced, brings bliss.
Truth is the highest of savors.
Living with discernment, one's life is called best.

"Such and such is virtue; concentration; and wisdom. Great becomes the fruit, great is the gain of concentration when fully developed by virtuous conduct; great becomes the fruit& gain of wisdom when it is fully developed by concentration. Utterly freed from lust, becoming, and ignorance is the mind that is fully developed in wisdom."

By implication of what the Buddha said above, virtue, concentration and wisdom are not arbitrary but they can be clearly uncompromisingly defined and there are fruits to true virtue, concentration and wisdom. You can define virtue, concentration and wisdom whichever way you want but if it does not correspond with the Buddha's definition, it is wrong view that leads even to hell or the animal womb. True virtue gives rise to true concentration which gives rise to true wisdom or knowledge gained from seeing everything clearly as they are, not as you like or dislike it.
THEREFORE BY IMPLICATION OF WHAT JESUS AND BUDDHA SAID, THERE IS UNIVERSAL AND OBJECTIVE TRUTH THAT APPLIES TO ALL BEINGS THAT IS NOT NEGOTIABLE (WHATEVER DOES NOT CONCUR WITH THEIR VIEWS IS FALSE AND NOT TO BE TREATED AS EQUALS) AND IF MY VIEWS HAPPEN TO COINCIDE WITH THIS UNIVERSAL TRUTH, YOU ARE IN EFFECT REPUDIATING OR DENYING THIS UNIVERSAL TRUTH. YOUR HOPE IS THAT MY VIEWS ARE WRONG BECAUSE IF THEY ARE RIGHT, YOU ARE WRONG TO PUT ME DOWN WITH GRAVE KARMA.
If what I say is the truth then it cannot be due to a need for (emotional) supremacy because there is no force in truth, truth does not need force’s backing and it is therefore never domineering or intolerant but truth is always uncompromising because once compromised it is no longer the truth.
It may be an abiding delusion that is calculated to maintain them in doubt and uncertainty to accept falsity that although there are situations where 1+1 = 2 there are nevertheless many situations in life where it is not so simple, where things are indeterminate, where diverse differing possibilities could equally apply.
The truth may be that however complicated, mysterious or seemingly beyond comprehension something may be, it has a true nature that may be known even if you do not know it and it is always simple, single and understandable, never puzzling in the manner of 1+1must equal 2.
Because one plus one always equals two and nothing else, whoever has the view that one plus one equals anything else eg 3, 1.999 or 2.0001 must give way to the view of whoever says one plus one is two because only he is correct, not because he is asserting his correctness to the (arbitrary) exclusion of the other views but it is mandatory that the others must give way. It has nothing to do with dominance or intolerance and if you think it has, you have mad logic and perception that will become uncontrollable and you are headed for madness.
As phenomena grow clearto the brahmin -- ardent, absorbed -- his doubts all vanishwhen he discerns what has a cause.
What the Buddha says above is that as the Brahmin’s vision grows clear, he discerns that everything has a cause that can be determined. Because everything has a cause that can be determined, the person whose view has determined that cause is the right view and whatever views that have not determined the cause is wrong view.
Recommending Madness For Others:
In other words, listening to his advice, I must not assert the correctness of my views to the exclusion of the other view because it implies my need for supremacy or the dominance of my view that will lead to fragmentation - an obvious reason for strife and hardships and sufferings in this world. I must therefore learn to DENY or lie to myself the correctness of my view or feel NOT OK or diffident or hesitant about my views to accommodate views that differ and are therefore in conflict to mine. If I were to experience emotional conflict or disturbance that leads to insanity as a result, he is advocating a path that leads to insanity for me and he himself is headed for insanity, of irreconcilable conflict for believing in what leads to the impossible. If the person who preached deference for others’ differing opinions is merely stressfully condescending when he expresses appreciation of others’ opinions, he experiences emotional disturbance when he appreciates others’ differing opinion, he is practicing controlled emotional conflict that he does not realize will ultimately slip from control and he is headed for ultimate uncontrollable intense mental conflict.
The Buddha said that the destination of wrong view is hell or the animal womb and it implies the absolute correctness of his view that you either take it or leave it; it is not subject to negotiation. If you accuse him of intolerance of dissenting views, you may be right or asking for judgment wrongly accusing him. You can make a bet that he is wrong, your views will not lead to hell because you are a Christian and exempt, your views are secular in nature and for fun, you don’t take your views too seriously but if that too is wrong view then according to the Buddha hell or the animal womb awaits you, something that what Jesus said that you will be judged for every careless word you say and even the man who calls his brother you fool is in danger of the fire of hell dovetails well.
Jesus said few of the many not most or all who are invited are chosen, which means to say a big majority of people you see all around whose views you advocate I learn to treat as equal are the views of those who are headed for eternal punishment. You are foolish to ask another to treat as equal the views of those who are doomed by their conduct to eternal punishment.
The Buddha said that it was rightly said by Sanankumaran, a great Brahma that one endowed with knowledge and conduct is chief among gods and men. If all men and gods are not equal but there are those who are endowed with conduct and knowledge then it is to be expected that their views too should be chief amongst men and gods.
THREE CHOICES WHEN FACED WITH ADVICE:
WHENEVER ADVICE OR CRITICISM IS DIRECTED AT YOU, YOU CAN EITHER ACCEPT OR REJECT IT, IT IS WITHIN YOUR RIGHT. BUT IF YOU CHOOSE TO ATTACK ME BY SAYING NOT ONLY THAT AM I WRONG WHEN I MAY BE CORRECT BUT I AM DOMINEERING AND WICKED TO SAY WHAT I SAY, YOU ARE RISKING GRAVE JUDGMENT BECAUSE ATTACKING IS MOTIVATED BY ILL WILL NEVER GOODWILL.
Excuses Are The Seeds Of Future Mad Logic:
Suppose you are driving, waiting at a junction to join a major road that is not too busy but you impatiently, un-righteously entered the main road, impeding the oncoming car because as a result of lifelong practice to intense levels, your impatience is now rapidly aroused to hard to resist levels, you saw that the driver looked like the type you can bully with impunity and then feeling some remorse, you start rationalize to yourself that you did so because you ‘miscalculated’, you did not see him coming because you were distracted, if you waited too long the traffic might build up, you were in a hurry, etc. Because the true reason is because you are impatient, you are a bully who would not dare do the same if the other person looked like a punk, what you say to yourself are excuses justifying your folly, you are conditioning yourself to false logic that with lifelong practice to even intense levels of denial, just like your impatience will become increasingly monstrous and you have an appointment with mad logic wherein shit is food and you eat shit and food is shit and you refuse to eat food.
THEREFORE THINK CAREFULLY WHAT ARE THE TRUE REASONS BEHIND WHAT YOU SAY OR DO, IF YOU ARE HABITUALLY JUSTIFYING YOUR ACTIONS AND SPEECH WITH EXCUSES, REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE TRUE REASONS FOR WHAT YOU SAY OR DO (ILL WILL OR HOSTILITY) YOU HAVE AN APPOINTMENT WITH MADNESS.
Although people might think they are great logicians, they may be great at finding excuses for what they say or do, for what has happened, there may be no true reason in them, only false faked forceful (emotional) reason that they regurgitate from memory from their mental jukeboxes. You can go through life without ever having to reason live for a situation arising, without having any capability to reason fresh live for a situation. All you have to do to survive competently in society is learn to imitate the rationale behind doing or saying particular things in particular situations. Sometimes such pre-orchestrated speech (eg rendering entire passages from Shakespeare by rote) or acts are so complex they fool the foolish observer to think it is live and rational when it is entirely blind, without reason by memorizing and regurgitating it by rote from one’s mental jukebox. For instance people do not reason or calculate or work out live that 6x7 is 42 but they memorize that it is such and reproduce it without question. Thus through a combination of self and society indoctrination, they learn to do or say a certain thing or a variety of certain things for a certain occasion. When ‘A’ is said or done to you, you without question say or do ‘W’ or ‘X’ or ‘Z’. You may fool yourself and fellow fools that you are a great logician but you are a great record and playback machine.
For instance, doctors recommend a new anti-cholesterol medication with enthusiasm that is never warranted even if the product is good but it is especially unwarranted when it is based on hearsay of studies they have read whose veracity they cannot ascertain. By recommending that drug enthusiastically (not without selfish motive eg money, you want the patient to try it or you want to impress with your prowess) you are forcefully making yourself and the patient believe it is a marvelous drug when you have no proof, you did not do the study yourself and saw it working yourself.
Why Ordinary People Must Have Seriously Flawed Logic:
In theory that is borne out in practice by one who sees ordinary people’s logic must be seriously flawed.
Why is that so?
BECAUSE ALL ORDINARY PEOPLE (FROM TOP INTELLECTUALS TO MENIALS) HAVE CONSTANT STYLE IN WHATEVER THEY PERCEIVE, THINK, SPEAK AND DO THAT CAN BE DEFINED AS THEIR INDIVIDUAL WAYS OF STRETCHING OF THEIR FUNDAMENTAL UNITS, CHANGES IN SPEED AND STRENGTH OF FORCE THAT IS NOT ONLY TOTALLY UNNECESSARY AND THEREFORE FALSE (FOR SHOW) BUT CHURN UP CONSTANT INSOLUBLE STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION FOR THEMSELVES AND THOSE WHO INTERACT WITH THEM AND THEY ARE UNWARE THEY DO SO, THEY ADMIRE THEIR STYLES AND BELIEVE THEY ARE TRUE, THEY MUST HAVE SERIOUSLY FLAWED OR FALSE, FAKED (ROTE) LOGIC.
IF THEY WATCH THEMSELVES THEY WILL SURELY CATCH THEMSELVES THINKING, SAYING AND DOING SILLY THINGS THAT ARE HARBINGERS OF FUTURE MAD LOGIC. THESE SILLY EPISODES ARE NOT DEPARTURES FROM THEIR NORMAL SANITY BUT OCCASIONS WHEN THEIR USUAL IRRATIONALITY OR FAKED RATIONALITY ESCAPE CONTROL.
Many Not Most Are Invited:
Jesus did not say most are invited but he said many are invited. Therefore there are many who are not invited to go to heaven because they are incorrigible. Jesus said do not throw pearls at dogs lest they turn around to attack you. Just because you love those who persecute you does not mean they are invited to join you in heaven.
Therefore many, not most or all amongst humans are invited and of those invited, few not most or many are accepted.
You are invited but do not presume you are accepted.
Rapping Is Attacking & Dislike:
Quote: DAP raps ROS for being ignorant and biased.
Comment: It may be the truth or the figment of the imagination of the reporter that DAP rapped the ROS. You can only rap someone by attacking him and that is ill will and expressing dislike, which is not harmless but conditions the person to attacking others that will end in hell. The person who is rapped is likely to retaliate or resent with aggression even if he is at fault and therefore in rapping someone you are provoking him to retaliate that reinforces him in suffering with karma attached, never merit as those who rap like to think.
THERE IS NEVER MERIT IN RAPPING BUT YOU ARE EMOTIONALLY ATTACKING SOMEONE WITH SUFFERING INCURRED ON YOURSELF AND THE OTHER PERSON WHILST CONDITIONING YOURSELF SO THAT YOU INCREASINGLY TEND TO RAP OTHERS.
THEREFORE IF YOU THINK NOTHING ABOUT RAPPING OTHERS, YOU FEEL YOU ARE RIGHT, YOU HAVE FALSE LOGIC THAT WILL ULTIMATELY TURN MALIGNANT TO BECOME MAD LOGIC.
ALL PEOPLE WHO LIKE MUST DISLIKE AND ALL WHO DISLIKE MUST HAVE THE URGE TO RAP OTHERS THAT THEY CAN ONLY STRESSFULLY RESTRAIN THAT IS SUBJECT TO LOSS OF CONTROL IF SUFFICIENTLY PROVOKED. IT IS NOT JUST HERE THAT PEOPLE WHO RAP HAVE FAULTY OR FALSE LOGIC BUT THEIR FAULTY LOGIC IS GENERALIZED, ONLY THAT THEY ARE UNAWARE JUST AS THEY ARE UNAWARE THEIR RAPPING DEADLY NOT HARMLESS OR BENEFICIAL. IF THEY CAN ELIMINATE THEIR URGE TO RAP, SOMETHING THAT IS ONLY POSSIBLE IF THEY CEASED TO LIKE OR DISLIKE BY PRACTICING CONSTANCY IN SPEED AND STRENGTH OF FORCE, THEY WILL ACHIEVE A SELF SUFFICIENT CALM CLEAR THINKING NOT TO QUIBBLE WITH ANYONE, THEY WILL SEE THAT THE REMEDIES THAT PEOPLE PROFFER IN TERMS OF MEDICINE, PRACTICES (EG YOGA, SPORTS) AND FOOD FADS ARE AT BEST MARGINAL IN EFFICACY AND CANNOT COMPARE WITH NEITHER LIKE NOR DISLIKE IN TERMS OF BESTOWING HAPPINESS NOW, LATER AND AFTER DEATH.
(Reflecting how pervasive false logic is that people think nothing of, this search result for a song came up with a prominent message: Can you afford $0.09 {www.buylegal.com}. Apart from being insincerely sarcastic or derisive that the person is a miser he is challenging and questioning others to pay a sum that he thinks is a pittance to get a legal copy. It is always a sin to challenge another and force must be used that impacts on your mind and the other person’s mind to challenge. The scimitar of karma hangs over his head. The proper way to say it is: A legal song only costs $0.09. Disdain is dislike and because people like to disdain others, they like to dislike. There may be those who may appreciate what I am getting at but they will conveniently be unable to see themselves disdaining others)
YOU MAY DISMISS WHAT I SPEAK ABOVE BUT NO ORDINARY PERSON, NOT EVEN A POPLE OR DALAI LAMA WILL TEACH YOU WHAT I TEACH ABOVE AND THEREFORE IF YOU SPEAK AGAINST ME, YOU ARE SPEAKING AGAINST A HIGHLY UNUSUAL PERSON RISKING UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT.
Not Speaking On His Own Authority:
If the counselor will appear to be someone who speaks on divine authority then Jesus is speaking frivolously in saying the counselor will not speak on his own authority but whatever he hears he will speak.
It is only if the counselor will appear to be someone who speaks on his own authority that Jesus is saying something meaningful that although he appears to be someone who speaks on his own authority, this is not so.
If what the counselor will say is similar to what others have said before, it does not matter if what he speaks is what he hears. It is only if what he says is novel, is likely to arouse controversy that Jesus have to let you know in advance.
IF LIKING AND DISLIKING IS SOMETHING FUNDAMENTAL, SOMETHING THAT BEINGS IN THIS WORLD EXPERIENCE ALL THE TIME IN INCREASINGLY HELPLESS INCREASINGLY INTENSE REACTION TO EVENTS, THEY ARE NOT ONLY STRESSFUL TO SELF BUT STRESSFUL TO THE RECIPIENTS OF ONE’S LIKES AND DISLIKES, LIKING IS NOTHING MORE THAN THE CONSCIOUSNESS EXPERIENCE OF UNDULATING RISE AND FALL OF THE STRENGTH AND SPEED OF MENTAL FORCE WHILST DISLIKE IS NOTHING MORE THAN THE CONSCIOUSNESS EXPERIENCE OF UNABATED RISE IN SPEED AND STRENGTH OF MENTAL FORCE THAT OCCUR AUTOMATICALLY WITHOUT NEED FOR REASON IN REACTION TO EVENTS, THEN WHOEVER IS THE COUNSELOR JESUS DESCRIBED MUST TEACH YOU ABOUT WHAT LIKING AND DISLIKING IS, GIVE YOU EXAMPLES OF WHAT LIKE AND DISLIKE IS AND TEACH YOU THE WAY PERMANENTLY OUT OF LIKING AND DISLIKING, NAMELY PRACTICING CONSTANCY IN SPEED AND STRENGTH OF FORCE IN ONE’S PERCEIVING, THINKING, SPEAKING AND MOVEMENTS IN ORDER TO TEACH YOU ALL THINGS AND CONVINCE YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT. IF I HAVE ALREADY DONE SO, I WILL HAVE SUPERSEDED HIM OR RENDERED WHAT JESUS SAID AS FALSE.
IF STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION ARE REGULAR AFFLICTIONS OF ORDINARY PEOPLE THAT ARE NEVER BLAMELESS BUT ARE ROOTED ENTIRELY IN THE WAY THEY ALL BEHAVE WITH THEIR DIFFERENT BRANDS OF CONSTANT STRETCHING, CHANGES IN SPEED AND STRENGTH OF FORCE OF THEIR UNITS OF PERCEPTION, THINKING, SPEECH AND MOVEMENTS THAT ALSO PERSECUTE OTHERS BY INCITING STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION IN THEM, THIS STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION THAT THEY REGULARLY GENERATE WILL TURN MALIGNANT WITH TIME, THEN WHOEVER IS THE COUNSELOR JESUS SPOKE OF MUST TEACH YOU THIS IF HE IS TO TEACH YOU ALL THINGS AND CONVINCE YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND DISTRACTION.
IF IT IS POSSIBLE FOR THE CONSCIOUSNESS STATE OF BEINGS IN THIS WORLD TO CHANGE AND IT IS TO THEIR BENEFIT AND I HAVE CAUSED IT TO CHANGE NOT ONCE BUT TWICE AFTER 1977 AND IN RECENT YEARS THEN WHOEVER IS THE COUNSELOR CANNOT DO SO BECAUSE I HAVE CAUSED IT TO CHANGE.
LIKING AND DISLIKING ARE CLEARLY DEFINABLE:
ALTHOUGH ORDINARY PEOPLE ARE LIKING AND DISLIKING ALL (NOT SOME OR MOST OF) THE TIME AND CHAMPION THEM THEY OFTEN ARE NOT EVEN AWARE THEY DO SO AND HOW RAPIDLY THEY CAN FORCEFULLY SWITCH LIKING AND DISLIKING EVEN WITHIN A SENTENCE THEY ARE UTTERING.
LIKING AND DISLIKING ARE NEVER WISHY WASHY BUT THEY ARE CLEARLY DEFINED CONSCIOUSNESS EXPERIENCES THAT CANNOT BE MISTAKEN ONE FOR THE OTHER OR TO BE ABSENT WHEN THEY ARE PRESENT. THUS IF YOU CANNOT COMPETENTLY IDENTIFY THEIR PRESENCE IN YOUR MIND, YOU LACK DISCERNMENT; YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE EXPERIENCING.
UNTIL YOU HAVE LEARNT TO RECOGNIZE LIKE AND DISLIKE IN ALL THEIR GUISES IN DAILY LIFE, UNTIL YOU HAVE PUT AN END TO ALL LIKE AND DISLIKE TO LIBERATE YOUR MIND FROM FORCE TO EXPERIENCE THE INCOMPARABLY CLEARLY THINKING SANE STATE OF NOT LIKING OR DISLIKING, YOU MUST CONTINUE TO SUFFER AND BE IN DANGER OF FUTURE SUFFERING THAT MAY BE FAR MORE TORMENTING AND EVERLASTING THAN YOU EVER IMAGINED WAS POSSIBLE.