A Hypocrite In General & In Particular

There are no part time hypocrites but you are a hypocrite in general and in particular until the day if ever you see the light and repent to pay attention to make effort to correct yourself.
Even those who think they are good do not realize the Buddha is referring to them when he said the person of no integrity is a person of no integrity in his friendship, in the way he wills (he always wills for the stress of others with his stylish speech & behavior that stresses others), the way he gives advice, the way he speaks (with style), the way he acts (with style), the views he holds & the way he gives a gift.
As the Buddha said, there is no way a person of no integrity (a hypocrite) can tell the non hypocrite from a hypocrite but the person who is not a hypocrite (me) can know who is and is not a hypocrite in every instance.
A person is a hypocrite in GENERAL if he speaks with a style because:
a) His style that differs from others but is extremely consistent or a trademark in him cannot be freshly composed for each occasion but must be rehashed old hat impersonally standardized by rote as cleverly faked live. If you are faking live, rehashing from the past, you are a hypocrite.
b) Because you cannot stress, make restless or distract your listener without speaking with style, without stretching your syllables, changing speed and loudness in your individual way, whenever you speak with style you either consciously or unconsciously (in denial) want to stress, make restless and distract your listener that belies whatever fine words or truth that you may say and therefore you are a hypocrite.
c) Because style is meaningless, does not add one ounce of meaning to what he says, he cannot mean what is meaningless when he speaks with style and therefore a person who speaks with style can never fully mean what he says because his ever present style is meaningless.
d) Because his style is meant to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate and he seldom if ever tells his listener that he wants to deceive, impress, please or intimidate or dominate him, he is a hypocrite. For instance when a person speak enthusiastically about his new car, he does say I want you to be impressed by my car, I want you to be jealous or envious.
A person is a hypocrite in PARTICULAR if he says THINGS that he does not mean to deceive, impress, please, intimidate or dominate.
For instance an employee will learn to ask his boss about his golf game not because he is interested in golf but just to please his boss and get on his good books.
When you threaten someone (eg I will report you) without intention to do so, you are saying something false to intimidate him and you are a hypocrite.
When you thank me that imply you are appreciative for emails that you did not appreciate because you deleted without reading, you do not mean your thanks and therefore are a hypocrite.
When you are sarcastic, you mean the opposite of what you say and therefore you a hypocrite. For instance when you say “You are so smart” when you mean you are such an idiot, you are a hypocrite.
When you joke or try to be funny you cannot mean what you say and therefore you are a hypocrite. Because people joke all the time, try to say things in a ‘humorous’ way they severely underestimate their hypocrisy.
Whenever a person tells a lie (and ordinary people severely underestimate the amount of lying they are guilty of) or gives an excuse, he is practicing hypocrisy.
THUS WHEN YOU TELL LIES, GIVE EXCUSES, CRACK A JOKE OR ARE SARCASTIC YOU ARE BEING A HYPOCRITE.
WHENEVER THE MATTER OF WHAT YOU SAY IS NOT TRUE OR THE BASIS OF WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY BUT YOUR INTENTION OF SAYING IT IS TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE OR DOMINATE, YOU ARE THEN BEING A HYPOCRITE IN THAT PARTICULAR INSTANCE.
WHENEVER THE STYLE (EG ANGRY, LUSTFUL, CHARMING, SAD) OR WAY OF YOUR SPEECH IS INTENDED TO DECEIVE (SOUND ANGRY BUT NOT REALLY ANGRY), IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE OR DOMINATE, YOU ARE BEING A HYPOCRITE IN GENERAL.
HYPOCRISY IN GENERAL PERTAINS TO THE WAY OR STYLE OF SPEECH WHILST HYPOCRISY IN PARTICULAR PERTAINS TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE SPEECH.
ALL ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO ALL HAVE STYLES ARE HYPOCRITES IN GENERAL AND THEY ARE ALSO HYPOCRITES IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE IT CAN BE OBJECTIVELY PROVEN THAT THEY ARE HYPOCRITES IN PARTICULAR INSTANCES OF WHAT THEY SAY.
Here again below I am preaching from the Teaching of the Buddha as few if any Buddhist leaders let alone Buddhists have done:
Cula-Punnama Sutta
The Shorter Discourse on the Full-moon Night
"Monks, could a person of no integrity know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity'?"
"No, lord."
"Good, monks.'
"Could a person of no integrity know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity'?"
"No, lord."
"Good, there's no way.'
"A person of no integrity is a person of no integrity in his friendship, in the way he wills, the way he gives advice, the way he speaks, the way he acts, the views he holds & the way he gives a gift.
"And how is a person of no integrity endowed with qualities of no integrity? He is lacking in conviction, conscience, concern [for the results of unskillful actions]; he is unlearned, lazy, of muddled mindfulness & poor discernment.”
"He has as his companions, people who are lacking in conviction, conscience, lacking in concern, lazy, of muddled mindfulness & poor discernment.
"He wills for his own & the affliction of others.
"He gives advice for his own or the affliction of others.
"He tells lies, engages in divisive tale-bearing, harsh speech, idle chatter.
"He takes life, steals, engages in illicit sex.
"He holds a view like this: 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no result of good or bad actions. There is no this world or next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no contemplatives who, practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after realized it for themselves.'
"He gives a gift inattentively, not with his own hand, disrespectfully, as if throwing it away, with the view that nothing will come of it.
"Now, monks, could a person of integrity know of a person of no integrity?"
"Yes, lord."
"Good, monks.'
"Could a person of integrity know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity'?"
"Yes, lord."
"Good, monks.'
"A person of integrity is a person of integrity in his friendship, the way he wills, gives advice, speaks & acts, the views he holds, & the way he gives a gift.
"A person of integrity is endowed with conviction, conscience, concern; he is learned, with aroused persistence, unmuddled mindfulness & good discernment."
"He has, as his friends & companions, those contemplatives endowed with conviction, conscience, concern; who are learned, unmuddled mindfulness & good discernment.
"He wills neither for his own nor the affliction of others.
"He gives advice neither for his own nor the affliction of others.
"He refrains from lies, divisive tale-bearing, harsh speech, idle chatter.
"He refrains from taking life, stealing, illicit sex.
"He holds a view like this: 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are contemplatives who, practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after realized it for themselves.'
"He gives a gift attentively, with his own hand, respectfully, not as if throwing it away, with the view that something will come of it.
"This person of integrity, after death, reappears in the destination of people of integrity. And what is the destination? Greatness among devas or among human beings."
GOING UNDERCOVER:
PEOPLE ARE NOT AFRAID TO SPEAK AGAINST ME BUT FEARFUL TO SPEAK AGAINST JESUS BECAUSE THEY KNOW WHO HE IS AND ARE FEARFUL FOR THEIR LIVES BUT THEY ARE NOT AFRAID OF ME BECAUSE THEY THINK I AM A NOBODY. BUT JUST AS KINGS CAN PUT ON ORDINARY CLOTHES AND GO OUT INTO THE STREETS TO HEAR WHAT HIS SUBJECTS ARE TRULY SAYING ABOUT HIM, IT MAY BE THAT I AM JUST A MISTER SO AND SO OR IT MAY BE THAT I AM SOMEONE EXTRAORDINARY THAT YOU SPEAK AGAINST AT YOUR OWN RISK. REMEMBER JESUS SAID THAT WHAT YOU DID TO THE LEAST OF ME YOU DID IT TO ME. EVEN IF I AM THE LEAST OF GOD YOU ARE DOING TO GOD WHAT YOU ARE DOING TO ME.
THE BUDDHA SAYS I AM A RARE PERSON: A person who preaches the Teaching and Discipline declared by the Thus Gone One is rare in the world. BY HIS CRITERIA I AM A NOBLE PERSON BECAUSE I HAVE ABANDONED STRESS (BY NOT CONSTANTLY ADDING EXTRA FORCE TO WHAT I SAY OR DO) AND RESTLESSNESS (BY PRACTICING CONSTANCY IN SPEED AND LOUDNESS), I EFFORTLESSLY NEITHER LIKE NOR DISLIKE (BY NOT ALLOWING MY MENTAL FORCE TO UNDULATE OR RISE UNABATED IN SPEED AND STRENGTH), I GAIN CONCENTRATION EASILY, SLEEP WELL, WAKE EASILY AND DREAM NO EVIL DREAMS. THEREFORE WHEN YOU SPEAK AGAINST ME, YOU ARE SPEAKING AGAINST SOMEONE WHO IS CONSIDERIED NOBLE BY THE BUDDHA WITH COMENSURATELY GRAVER CONSEQUENCES THAN SPEAKING AGAINST ORDINARY PEOPLE.
THE BUDDHA SAID HE HIMSELF HAD BEEN THE ALL POWERFUL ONE FOR SEVEN EONS. ONLY HE COULD BECOME SELF ENLIGHTENED. EVEN HIS DEPUTIES HAD TO BE GUIDED TO ENLIGHTENMENT BY HIM. JESUS SAID THAT ALL THE FATHER HAS IS HIS. IT MAY BE THAT WHEN THE FATHER DECIDES TO PUT AN END TO ALL EXISTING TO BECOME A BUDDHA, JESUS WILL BECOME THE FATHER JUST AS FATHERS PASS THEIR THRONES TO THEIR SONS. THEREFORE GOD OR THE FATHER MAY BE MUCH CLOSER TO THE BUDDHA THAN YOU WERE EVER TO GOD AND IT IS PRESUMPTUOUS TO DISMISS THE BUDDHA WHO SAID HE IS EVEN HIGHER THAN GOD. HOW DO YOU KNOW GOD DISAGREES WITH THE BUDDHA’S ASSERTION?

Why All Ordinary People Are Hypocrites:

It may be because I speak arrogantly in deprecation that I state that all ordinary people are hypocrites or it may be a cardinal truth about this world that it, including those who tout themselves as good and wise cannot see and therefore cannot accept.
All ordinary people can be proven to those who are discerning to be in general and specifically (in specific instances) to be hypocrites.
All ordinary people must be hypocrites because whatever they do or say have accompanying unnecessary individual styles that have similarities with some others that have no true meaning except it is for show to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate others. Further, a lot of the substance of what they say can be objectively proven to have no true meaning except it is for show to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate others.
This style that afflicts all beings in this world (including all animals) is nothing more than their individually varying ways that have similarities with some others of constantly stretching of syllables and units of motion, constant changes in speed and strength of force that they identify with as signifying their individuality or self, that they refuse to or cannot see is the basis of the unnecessary stress, restlessness and distraction that they persecute themselves and all others who come into contact with them.
Further the individually distinct stable styles with which ordinary people render whatever they say, do, think and perceive without need for thinking cannot be produced live specifically for the occasion, but must be regurgitated from memory & recall, they are robots constantly rehashing what they say or do for the occasion at hand and this is hypocrisy because you cannot mean what you say when it is rehashed standardized from memory for the occasion at hand. If whatever you say or do is rehashed by rote to fit the situation at hand, how can you be a genuine person but you are a hypocrite rehashing standardized reactions by rote to fit the occasion?
It is not because I say you have a style that you have a style but style can be objectively defined and demonstrated.
It is not because I say that you stretch your syllables, changed speed or loudness that it is so but it can be demonstrated objectively by someone who understands and discerns, precisely every instance with which you stretched syllables, changed speed and loudness.
IF THE CONSTANT STYLE WITH WHICH YOU SAY THINGS IS ALWAYS WITHOUT MEANING EXCEPT FOR SHOW TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE OTHERS, A LARGE PART OF WHAT YOU SAY ARE SIMILARLY MEANINGLESS EXCEPT FOR SHOW TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE OTHERS, HOW CAN YOU MEAN HOW YOU SAY, MEAN WHAT YOU SAID THAT IS FOR SHOW AND THEREFORE YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE WHO SEVERELY UNDERESTIMATE THE EXTENT OF HIS HYPOCRISY?
I HAVE NO FEAR, NO DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY WHEN I DETERMINE SOMEONE, NO MATTER HOW LOFTY OR EXALTED HE IS IN SOCIETY TO BE A HYPOCRITE BECAUSE I CAN SEE CLEARLY IMPARTIALLY WHAT HYPOCRISY IS.
IT MAY BE TRUE YOU ARE NOT A HYPOCRITE OR WHATEVER HYPOCRISY YOU HAVE IS HARMLESS OR TO BENEFIT OTHERS BUT IF YOU ARE DELUDING YOURSELF THEN ONLY TIME WILL TELL YOU THE FRUITS OF YOUR IMMACULATE SELF DECEPTION THAT YOU ARE GENUINE WHEN YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE LIKE THE REST.
AS THE BUDDHA SAID, SUCH AND SUCH IS VIRTUE, SUCH AND SUCH IS CONCENTRATION, SUCH AND SUCH IS WISDOM, MEANING EVERYTHING IS NOT SUBJECTIVELY BUT CAN BE CLEARLY DEFINED OBJECTIVELY THAT APPLIES TO EVERYONE UNIVERSALLY, THEREFORE SUCH AND SUCH IS HYPOCRISY (AND IF I HAVE DEFINED IT AS NO MAN HAS DONE AND IT IS THE TRUTH, THEN WHOEVER IS THE COUNSELOR JESUS DESCRIBED MUST ALSO SAY SO AND IF I HAVE DONE SO, I HAVE SUPERSEDED HIM). AND IF YOU ARE A HYPCRITE AND YOU THINK YOU ARE NOT, YOU HAVE FALSE PERCEPTION AND LOGIC THAT WILL CULMINATE ACUTE OR CHRONICALLY IN MAD PERCEPTION AND LOGIC. IF THAT IS SUFFERING EVEN TO TORMENTING LEVELS, THEN IT IS YOUR LOT.
GREAT IS THE GAIN IN CONCENTRATION WHEN IT IS PERFECTED BY VIRTUE, GREAT IS THE GAIN IN WISDOM WHEN IT IS PERFECTED BY CONCENTRATION MEANS THAT YOU CANNOT HAVE GREAT WISDOM WITHOUT GREAT CONCENTRATION (MEDITATION IS A MEANS OF CONCENTRATION), YOU CANNOT HAVE GREAT CONCENTRATION WITHOUT VIRTUE. AND SO IT ALL STARTS FROM VIRTUE WHICH IS THE ABSENCE OF HYPOCRISY, NOT TELLING LIES, NOT KILLING EVEN INSECTS, NOT STEALING, NOT INDULGING IN INTOXICANTS AND ILLEGAL SEX.
CONVINCING YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT:
Jesus: And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness (goodness) and judgment: concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no more; concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.
If you truly, totally mean all that you said, nothing more or less that is said must be specific and intended for the occasion and it must be said live, not by rehash for that occasion and what you say must correspond with what you are thinking or have in mind on that occasion, not the opposite or more or less than you have in mind.
The individually characteristic way a person always stretches his syllables, changes speed and loudness, how he smiles or grins or scowls when he speaks cannot be meant for the occasion because it is present on all occasions, is not essential for the what is said (because what is said remains intact if style was removed) but instead the style is meant indirectly, indiscriminately to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate others. How many people will admit they mean to deceive, impress, please, dominate and intimidate with the ways they speak? Because they usually deny it or cannot see themselves trying to deceive, impress, please, intimidate & dominate, it cannot be consciously meant but style must be meant in a repressed or unconscious way.
Even if you cannot see it is so, if you are merely an overrated disk jockey not occasionally but always, merely selecting the right tunes to play for the occasion, then you cannot mean what you say but you are faking it, trying to deceive others you are a real live person when you are sophisticated biological tape recorder and playback system.
Whoever you are, you cannot mean what you say if you asked “Who is Ava Gardner?” when you already know who she is and you know I know she was an actress but instead you did not say what you meant which is to doubt what I said she said that love is nothing but pain because you are trying to condescendingly remind me she is an actress not expert on love. This is an example of the substance of what is said being not what is meant that can also embraces the identical consistent style that is always present (eg one person always says ‘thenk kew” whilst another always say “thhaaannkss”).
When you mean what you say then everything in it must be meant, there can be nothing in what is conveyed that is not meant. How can you mean your style that is always present unvarying on every occasion you speak but instead the accompanying style is not mean specifically for the occasion but meant across board to falsely deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate?
When you only say what you mean, then what you say must fully conform to what you are thinking, not contrast or have additions or subtractions. How can you only say what you mean when what you say have an additional style that is meant across board, indiscriminately on every occasion to deceive, impress, please, dominate or intimidate (eg speak angrily to intimidate) others?
THEREFORE IF YOU TRULY MEAN WHAT YOU SAY, YOU TRULY ONLY SAY WHAT YOU MEAN, YOU CANNOT HAVE ANY ACCOMPANYING STYLE THAT IS AN INDISCRIMINATE EVER PRESENT ACCOMPANIMENT THAT CANNOT BE MEAN SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT OCCASION BUT MEANT INDISCRIMINATELY FOR DECEPTION, TO IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE. FURTHER IF WHAT YOU SAID IS IN TRUTH PRERECORDED AND RETRIEVED TO BE APPLIED YOU THINK IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE OCCASION AT HAND, THEN YOU CANNOT TRULY MEAN IT BUT IT IS AN IMPERSONAL RESPONSE OR FAKED PERSONAL RESPONSE.
If it is true (that I can demonstrate to anyone who cares to consult me) that all ordinary people have constant styles in whatever they say or do and this style is totally unnecessary except to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate others and this style stresses, makes restless and distracts themselves and others, in addition this constant consistent style cannot be produced lived but must be painstakingly recorded to be regurgitated impersonally or standardized by rote for any given occasion, a lot of the substance of what they say or do are meaningless, only intended to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate, what else is there that any counselor can say that will convince you of sin?
Because the stylish way people say things and a bulk of what they say is intended only to deceive others, impress, please, intimidate and dominate, have no stand alone meaning or reason, they in addition mindlessly operate by regurgitation from mental jukeboxes, they are hypocrites trying to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate others in a way that that they have disguised so well they now believe and perceive themselves as genuine.
Apart from what people say or do, how the do or say it, which I have comprehensively covered generally and specifically with the many examples I have given, what is there to enable a person to be hypocritical?
IF THERE IS NOTHING APART FROM WHAT I HAVE DWELT ON THROUGH WHICH A BEING CAN BE HYPOCRITICAL THEN THE COUNSELOR JESUS SPOKE OF MUST ALSO ADDRESS IN SOME FORM WHAT I SAY. IF I HAVE DONE SO, I HAVE SUPERSEDED HIM AND HE WILL LOOK FOOLISH IF HE TRIED TO TEACH YOU ALL THINGS AND CONVINCE YOU OF SIN. I CANNOT LOOK FOOLISH IN TRYING TO CONVINCE OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT WITH WHAT I SAY BECAUSE I DID NOT COPY ANYONE, I KNOW WHAT I SAY HAS NEVER BEEN SAID BY OTHERS AND EVEN IF THEY WANTED ORDINARY PEOPLE CANNOT SAY THE THINGS I SAY.
IF SPEECH STYLE HAS NO MEANING EXCEPT TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE, SPEAKING BY REHASHING IS FAKED LIVE SPEECH THAT FOOLS THE PERSON AND LISTENERS THAT IT IS LIVE & SAYING THINGS WHOSE SUBSTANCE CANNOT LOGICALLY BE MEANT ARE NOT THE BASIS OF HYPOCRISY, DOES NOT CONVINCE YOU OF THE EXISTENCE OF HYPOCRISY, CAN YOU DEFINE COMPREHENSIVELY WHAT IS HYPOCRISY OR DO YOU FAITHFULLY AWAIT THE COUNSELOR WHO WILL SPEAK AND CONVINCE YOU OF HYPOCRISY WHERE I HAVE FAILED?
IT IS UNLIKELY IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE FOR ORDINARY PEOPLE TO SPEAK OF THE THINGS I HAVE SAID BECAUSE WHAT I SAY IS FROWNED UPON BY SOCIETY, ORDINARY PEOPLE ARE TOO ANXIOUS TO IMPRESS AND PLEASE OTHERS (TO MAINTAIN THEMSELVES IN OTHERS’ GOOD BOOKS) AND WHAT I SAY NEVER OCCUR TO THEM.
I KNOW WHAT I SAY IS TRUE BECAUSE I HAVE EXPERIENCED A PREVIOUSLY UNIMAGINABLE EFFORTLESS FREEDOM FROM STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION BY PUTTING TO A STOP ALL STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS WHILST I CAN DETECT STRETCHING, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS IN ALL INCLUDING THOSE WHO CALL THEMSELVES GOOD AND WISE, EVEN WHEN THEY ARE TALKING SOFTLY AND SLOWLY AND I CAN DETECT THAT THEY ARE ALL SUFFERING SERIOUSLY FROM STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION.
IF YOU THINK YOU CAN IF YOU WANT TO OR YOU SPEAK WITH CONSTANT SPEED AND LOUDNESS WITHOUT STRETCHING SYLLABLES, WHY NOT CONSULT ME AND LET ME SHOW THAT YOU HEAR WITHOUT HEARING, YOU ARE PROOF OF WHAT JESUS SAID THAT SEEING THEY DO NOT SEE THAT THEY ARE CONSTANTLY STRETCHING SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS THAT ARE THE ONLY CAUSES OF THE STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION THAT HARMS THEMSELVES AND OTHERS.
JESUS’ DESCRIPTION OF THE COUNSELOR MAY BE LIKE GIVING YOU THE NUMBERS OF THE FIRST PRIZE IN A LOTTERY. ANY LOTTERY TICKET THAT COMES ALONG WITH THE NUMBERS THAT MATCHES MUST BE THE COUNSELOR. THE READER’S TASK IS TO DETERMINE IF A LOTTERY HAS THE WINNING COMBINATION OF NUMBERS.
Why Style Is Meaningless & Not Letting Your Yes Be Yes Only:
THE REASON STYLE IS MEANINGLESS IS BECAUSE IT CAN BE COMPLETELY REMOVED WITHOUT LOSS OF MEANING TO WHATEVER IS SAID, NO MATTER WHETHER WHAT IS SAID IS TRUE OR FALSE.
WHATEVER ANYONE CAN SAY MAY BE TRUE OR FALSE, LOGICALLY VIABLE OR UNTENABLE BUT NO MATTER WHETHER IT IS TRUE OR FALSE, ITS MEANING REMAINS COMPLETELY INTACT IF ITS ACCOMPANYING STYLE IS ELIMINATED.
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT BY STRETCHING THE LENGTH OF ITS SYLLABLES THE MEANING OF THAT WORD IS ENHANCED? SIMILARLY, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT BY CONSTANTLY CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS WITHIN AND BETWEEN SYLLABLES A WORD’S MEANING IS ENHANCED?
IF YOU AGREE THAT STRETCHING ITS SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS DO NOT ENHANCE A WORD’S MEANING THEN STYLE IS MEANINGLESS BUT STYLE IS INDISCRIMINATELY INTENDED TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE OTHERS.
HOW CAN SOMETHING THAT IS PRESENT ALL THE TIME IN EVERYTHING YOU SAY BE MEANINGFUL? SOMETHING MEANINGFUL CAN ONLY BE PRESENT WHEN THERE IS A REASON FOR IT TO BE PRESENT. HOW CAN THERE BE REASON FOR STRETCHING, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS TO BE PRESENT ALL THE TIME YOU SPEAK EXCEPT THAT IT IS MEANINGLESS, INTENDED FOR SHOW TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, INTIMIDATE & DOMINATE OTHERS.
THE SIN OF STYLE FAR OUTWEIGHS ANY TRUTH TOLD:
Whatever truth there is in the substance of what is said is far outweighed or dwarfed by the sin and hypocrisy of any attending style. The pained emotional admission that you did it that not only induces emotional stress, restlessness and distraction in you and the other party but conditions you and him evermore to stress, restlessness and inability to concentrate far outweighs the truth of your admission.
NO REASON IS REQUIRED, ONLY FORCE IS ALWAYS REQUIRED TO STRETCH SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED OR LOUDNESS THAT ARE THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF SPOKEN STYLE. IN FACT THE PRESENCE OF REASON OR ATTENTION IS INIMICAL OR DETRIMENTAL TO THE PRODUCTION OF STYLE OR STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS BECAUSE THE PRESENCE OF REASON OR ATTENTION WILL LEAD TO A REALIZATION OR CONCLUSION THAT THEY ARE A SENSELESS WASTE OF ENERGY THAT CREATES STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION. THUS STRETCHING, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS ARE SENSELESS PROCESSES THAT ALWAYS REQUIRE THE USE OF MENTAL FORCE THAT ARE ACTUALLY BETTER EXECUTED WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF ATTENTION OR REASON (WHICH IS WHY STYLISH PEOPLE ARE MOSTLY IF NOT TOTALLY UNAWARE THEY ARE STRETCHING SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS) AND THEY DO NOT RESULT IN ANY CHANGES OF MEANING OF WHAT IS SAID AND THEREFORE STYLE CAN BE TOTALLY ELIMINATED WITHOUT ANY LOSS OF MEANING TO WHAT IS BEING SAID. BECAUSE THE STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS ARE MEANINGLESS OR REASONLESS PROCESSES (ONLY FORCEFUL PROCESSES) THAT PRODUCE NO EFFECT ON MEANING AND THEY CONSUME MANY TIMES MORE ENERGY THAN THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT IS SAID, THE STYLE COMPONENT OF THE SUBSTANCE AND STYLE COMBO IS ALWAYS THE DOMINANT FACTION. IN ALL SUBSTANCE AND STYE COMBO, THE STYLE COMPONENT IS ALWAYS THE BIG BROTHER THAT CONSUMES MANY TIMES MORE ENERGY TO PRODUCE PRODIGIOUS UNNECESSARY OR MAD STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACION. EVEN IF WHAT IS SAID IS TRUE, THE MEANINGLESS STYLE COMPONENT THAT IS ALWAYS THE BIG BROTHER TO THE PUNY SUBSTANCE RENDERS IT PREPONDERANTLY HYPOCRITICAL RATHER THAN PREPONDERANTLY MEANINGFUL AND INSIGNIFICANTLY HYPOCRITICAL.
IT IS A BIG MISTAKE TO THINK THAT PROVIDED THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT IS BEING SAID IS TRUE, THE PRESENCE OF THE STYLE COMPONENT MATTERS LITTLE OR NOTHING BECAUSE THE PRESENCE OF ANY STYLE THAT IS ALWAYS MEANINGLESS NEGATES WHATEVER TRUTH THERE IS PRESENT IN WHAT IS SAID. THE REASON IS BECAUSE NO MATTER WHETHER THE SUBSTANCE IS TRUE OR FALSE, THE PRESENT STYLE OR FORCEFUL STRETCHING, CHANGES IN SPEED AND LOUDNESS IF IDENTICAL AS IT SHOULD BE, WILL IMPART THE SAME STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION ON THE PERPETRATOR HIMSELF AND HIS LISTENER.
IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE WHETHER WHAT IS SAID IS TRUE OR FALSE BECAUSE THE MEANINGLESS OR HYPOCRITICAL STYLE IN BOTH CASES WILL CONSUME THE SAME ENERGY TO PRODUCE THE SAME STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION IN THE PERPETRATOR AND HIS HAPLESS VICTIMS AND THEREFORE THE PERSON IS JUST AS MUCH A HYPOCRITE ON THE OCCASIONS WHEN HE SPEAKS WITH STYLE WHAT IS TRUE IN SUBSTANCE AS WHEN HE SPEAKS WITH STYLE WHAT IS FALSE IN SUBSTANCE. IN OTHER WORDS, IT DOES NOT MATTER WHETHER WHAT THE PERSON SAYS IS TRUE OR FALSE, SO LONG AS HIS MEANINGLESS STYLE IS PRESENT UNALTERED IN BOTH CASES, HE IS JUST AS MUCH A HYPOCRITE WHEN HE SPEAKS THE TRUTH AS WHEN HE SPEAKS WHAT IS FALSE, HE STRESSES HIMSELF AND OTHERS JUST AS MUCH WHEN HE SPEAKS WITH STYLE WHAT IS TRUE AS WHEN HE SPEAKS WITH STYLE WHAT IS FALSE.
IF YOU BELIEVE THAT STRETCHING SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS THAT IS WHAT STYLE ESSENTIALLY IS ABOUT, ENHANCES THE MEANING OF WHATEVER YOU SAY, YOU MAY BE RIGHT OR YOU HAVE FALSE LOGIC AND PERCEPTION TO MISTAKE EMOTIONS ENGENDERED BY STYLE AS MEANINGFUL THAT WILL TURN MAD.
BECAUSE STYLE CAN BE ELIMINATED WITHOUT LOSING ANY MEANING, ANYONE WHO SPEAKS WITH STYLE IS SPEAKING WITH SOMETHING EXTRA THAT IS MEANINGLESS (ONLY FOR SHOW) AND HE THEREFORE CANNOT COMPLETELY MEAN WHAT HE IS SAYING (BECAUSE AN IMPORTANT PART OF WHAT HE IS SAYING, HIS STYLE IS FALSE OR MEANINGLESS) AND HE IS ALWAYS A HYPOCRITE EVEN IF THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT HE SAYS IS ON CERTAIN OCCASIONS TRUE. IN OTHER WORDS, AT BEST WHAT A STYLISH PERSON SAYS IS RELATIVELY TRUE, NEVER ABSOLUTELY TRUE.
IN ADDITION TO NO LOSS OF MEANING WITH THE REMOVAL OF STYLE, SPEECH THAT ALWAYS HAS SUBSTANCE AND STYLE CANNOT BE TRULY MEANT BECAUSE IT IS REPRODUCED BY REHASH APPROXIMATELY INTENDED FOR THE OCCASION FROM A MENTAL JUKEBOX RATHER THAN FRESH FULLY INTENDED FOR THE OCCASION.
BECAUSE STYLE IS MEANINGLESS, SPEAKING WITH STYLE CANNOT BE LETTING YOUR YES BE YES ONLY BUT IT IS SPEAKING WITH MORE, SPEAKING WITH YOUR TOTALLY UNNECESSARY MEANINGLESS OR INSANE STYLE THAT COMES FROM EVIL NOT GOOD.
ANYONE WHO IS CAPABLE OF SPEAKING ANGRILY, EXCITEDLY, EAGERLY, MOCKINGLY, JOKINGLY, DRILY, SARCASTICALLY HAS STYLE BECAUSE SOMETHING SAID IS ONLY ANGRY, EXCITING, JOVIAL, ETC BECAUSE OF THE WAY OR STYLE WITH WHICH IT IS SAID.
Whenever anyone speaks angrily eg “I didn’t do it!!!”, the style is the angry way he speaks which is aimed either consciously or unconsciously to impress or convince the listener of his true or false innocence. The meaning of what he said, that he did not do it does not lose one ounce of meaning if he spoke calmly clearly that he did not do it.
The passionately way with which you express “I love you” does not add one iota of meaning to what you are saying but it only serves to impress the foolish gullible girl and it creates emotional stress for yourself and her.
If you can discern there is force in the way you say things; that added force that is actually always present but may elude your attention at lower levels, is the style that is never constant but constantly changing in speed and strength.
WHATEVER ANYONE WANTS TO SAY CAN BE SHORN OF ITS STYLE AND NO MEANING IS LOST BECAUSE STYLE IS ONLY MEANT TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE.
NOT ONLY IS STYLE MEANINGLESS BECAUSE IT DOES NOT ADD MEANING TO WHAT IS SAID, ALL STYLE (EG STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS) CONSUMES ENERGY TO PRODUCE STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION FOR THE STYLISH PERSON THAT IS ALSO IMPARTED ON ALL LISTENERS.
THEREFORE THE PERSON WHO SPEAKS WITH STYLE CANNOT MEAN THE STYLE THAT ACCOMPANIES WHAT HE SAYS AND MUST BE A HYPOCRITE EVEN IF THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT HE SAYS ON OCCASIONS IS TRUE OR LOGICALLY VIABLE.
Speaking With Style Is The Essence Of Hypocrisy:
Apart from accompanying facial and hand expressions, speaking with style is little more than the individual’s way of stretching syllables, changing speed and loudness within and between syllables.
The word ‘apple’ conveys meaning in that it denotes a certain fruit to those who can read English. Does stretching its syllables enhance or affect the meaning of the word ‘apple’?
If you agree that stretching its syllables in no way affect the meaning of the word ‘apple’ then you are conveying to others something that is meaningless when you stretch syllables, change speed and loudness when you say ‘apple’ with style.
If you convey something (your style) that is meaningless when you speak, how can you mean everything you say when an important part of what you convey, your style is meaningless and therefore you are pretentious or a hypocrite?
SPEAKING WITH STYLE IS AN ESSENTIAL PART OF HYPOCRISY (NOT MEANING WHAT YOU SAY) OR PRETENTIOUSNESS.
Why do people speak with style? Why do some Malaysian students speak with an American or British or Australian accent which is nothing more than the different nationalistic fashion or style of stretching syllables, changing speed and loudness within and between syllables? The reason is to impress others with their status, to tell others they are more high class or ‘groovy’.
Thus there is no meaning in style and style is intended blindly across board to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate others.
Not only is there no meaning in style, style consumes prodigious mental and physical energy compared to the puny substance of what is said to create insoluble cumulative stress, restlessness and distraction for the stylish fool and all who hears, conditions him and all his listeners to style, stress, restlessness and distraction that becomes increasingly entrenched and harder to exit.
THEREFORE IF YOU HAVE STYLE, IF YOU STRETCH YOUR SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS THAT IS THE BANE OF ALL ORDINARY PEOPLE (INCLUDING THE POPE) YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE.
A Hypocrite On Four Counts:
The purpose of style is to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate others. Therefore a person who speaks with style can never just mean what he says because he also means to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate.
If you mean to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate others with your accompanying style, how can you truly and fully mean what you say? If you cannot fully mean what you say you are then by definition a hypocrite.
When you speak with style you do not just mean what you say because you also mean to deceive, impress, please, intimidate or dominate and you do not say what you mean because you do not say to the listener that you also mean in speaking to deceive, impress, please, intimidate or dominate him.
Because people who speak with style can never truly or fully mean what they say, they must all be assailed by doubt that leads to uncertainty that because it is conditioning, can spread to other areas that becomes increasingly bizarre, from doubt about what they say progressing to doubt about themselves and thence to everything in life that becomes increasingly intense, easy to arouse and hard to shake off.
At best style detracts from the substance of what is said, at worst it overrides the substance of what is said. For instance, if you angrily deny you did something, the angry style you said it detracts from the truth of what you say, if you boast about your car, the truth about your car is secondary to your desire to impress or wow the listener.
When a salesperson speaks in a fabricated friendly way to impress he likes you and is benevolent, it is to deceive you to trust him and make a purchase.
When someone speaks in an aggressive way, his aim is to intimidate or dominate you with the way he speaks that is more important than the substance of whatever he is saying.
People often say things that they know from experience you like to hear not because they truly want to say them but to please you and therefore if your intention to say them is to please another person, how can you truly mean what you say?
A person who speaks with style is a hypocrite on four counts:
a) His individually consistent style cannot be produced live specifically composed from scratch or anew for the situation at hand but must be committed to very reliable memory to be rehashed standardized from a mental jukebox. Anyone who is always rehashing to meet the demands of the situation rather than personally composing live for a given situation is a hypocrite. It is impossible by chance to end up with the same style that differs from others but instead you always render the same style by committing it to even subconscious memory and rehashing it by rote.
b) He cannot mean his style that he is conveying because style is meaningless and this makes him a hypocrite because he cannot mean what is meaningless, his style. He is constantly rendering stretching of syllables, changes in speed and loudness that is meaningless, does not add meaning to what he wants to say and therefore he cannot mean his style that he is transmitting that is only for show and therefore he is a hypocrite.
c) He means to deceive, impress, please, intimidate or dominate with his accompanying style that is apart from and often contradicts the meaning of what he is saying and therefore he does not mean what he is saying but he means to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate you making him a hypocrite.
d) Meaning to stress others. Without style, without constantly forcefully stretching syllables, changing speed and loudness you cannot stress others, distract and make them restless.
Therefore whether intended or not, when you speak with style you mean to stress, distract and make restless others and this is ill will, meaning or intending more than the substance of what you say that comes from evil not good.
A person who intends or means to stress others is a hypocrite because his fine words belie his intention to stress.
THUS WHENEVER A PERSON SPEAKS WITH STYLE AN IMPORTANT IF NOT OVERRIDING PURPOSE IS TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE OR DOMINATE OTHERS AND IF THESE ARE IMPORTANT EVEN OVERRIDING PURPOSE THAT YOU NEVER STATE TO THE LISTENER, HOW CAN YOU TRULY OR FULLY HAVE SAID WHAT YOU MEAN? IF YOU DID NOT FULLY SAY WHAT YOU MEAN, SAY YOU MEAN TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE, AREN’T YOU A HYPOCRITE?
BY CONTRAST A PERSON WHO SPEAKS WITHOUT STYLE CAN NEVER MEAN TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE OR DOMINATE OTHERS BECAUSE THERE IS NO STYLE PRESENT THAT DOES SO AND HE CAN AND HE ALWAYS MEANS WHAT HE SAYS, SAYS WHAT HE MEANS OR HAS IN MIND. BECAUSE THERE IS NO ACCOMPANYING STYLE THAT IS MEANINGLESS HE NEVER CONVEYS SOMETHING (STYLE) THAT IS MEANINGLESS ONLY FOR SHOW). BECAUSE HE HAS NO STYLE THAT NEEDS MEMORIZING, HE CAN SPEAK LIVE COMPOSING SPEECH THAT IS SPECIFICALLY INTENDED FOR EACH SITUATION.
JESUS SAID LET YOUR YES BE YES ONLY ANYTHING MORE COMES FROM EVIL. IF YOU LET YOUR YES BE YES ONLY, YOU ONLY MEAN WHAT YOU SAY AND NOTHING MORE. ANYTHING MORE, THE STYLE THAT IS MEANT TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE COMES FROM EVIL NOT GOOD. THUS ANYONE WHO SPEAKS WITH STYLE IS NOT LETTING HIS YES BE YES ONLY AS JESUS COMMANDS YOU.
IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE STYLE IS EVIL, STYLE OR CONSTANT STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS CREATES STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION THAT IS NOT ONLY SUFFERING BUT INCREASINGLY CONDITION YOU TO THEM THAT WILL END IN LOSS OF CONTROL AND MAD STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND INABILITY TO CONCENTRATE.
It is impossible by chance to end up with your same style (and even same things you speak) that differs from others every time you speak and therefore what you say and how you say that differs from others but is consistent to you must be produced by rote or regurgitation and you are a robot. Anyone who speaks like a tape recorder is a hypocrite.
IF WHAT I SAY HAS CONVINCED YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT WHERE PREVIOUSLY YOU WERE NOT, WOULDN’T THE COUNSELOR JESUS DESCRIBED LOOK SILLY IF HE WERE TO NOW SPEAK TO YOU TO TEACH YOU ALL THINGS AND CONVINCE YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT THAT YOU ARE ALREADY CONVINCED BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE IT IS SO?
A DEFINITION OF STYLE:
All beings including animals not only have style but it is constant. If you think you have no style, ask me and I will demonstrate how you too have style.
STYLE IS A PERSON’S DISTINCTIVE WAY OF SPEAKING, DOING THINGS, THINKING AND PERCEIVING (SEEING, HEARING, SMELLING, TASTING, TOUCHING) WHOSE UNFAILING CONSISTENCY MANDATES THAT HE MUST EXIST AS A ROBOT BECAUSE HIS CONSISTENT STYLE CANNOT BE PRODUCED LIVE FROM SCRATCH FOR EACH OCCASION BUT IT MUST BE MEMORIZED AND REHASHED BY ROTE; IT (STYLE) IS TOTALLY UNNECESSARY & MEANINGLESS EXCEPT TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE OTHERS AND IT IS ESSENTIALLY USING MENTAL FORCE TO STRETCH AND CONSTANTLY CHANGE SPEED AND STRENGTH OF FORCE IN THE PROCESS CREATING RISING INSOLUBLE STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION FOR THAT PERSON THAT IS ALSO IMPARTED ON OTHERS THAT IS NOT ONLY ALWAYS TORMENTING BUT CONDITIONS HIM EVERMORE TO STYLE, STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION THAT HE CANNOT BELIEVE WILL END IN INSANITY. APART FROM BEING INTRINSICALLY MEANINGLESS, ONLY MEANT FOR SHOW, STYLE RENDERS THE PERSON A HYPOCRITE BECAUSE HE IS RENDERING TO OTHERS SOMETHING THAT IS MEANINGLESS, HE MEANS TO DECEIVE, IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE THAT IS APART FROM WHAT HE IS SAYING AND HE IS AN IMPERSONAL ROBOT SPEAKING BY REHASH SIMILAR IF NOT IDENTICAL TO OCCASIONS IN THE PAST, NOT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE OCCASION.
A Plague Of The Worst Kind:
Science says mankind left Africa barely 50,000 years ago and was nearly wiped out by the super volcano eruption at Lake Toba in Sumatra 10,000 years ago. In just 10,000 years from the time it was nearly wiped out, mankind will deplete the ocean of its fish in another 40 years and generally brought the earth to its knees. Thus the earth cannot afford to host humans except for very brief periods when the Age is coming to a close and if you cannot go to heaven to eternal life, you must wander as Jesus said in eternal habitations as animals to satisfy your likes and dislikes that you will not give up.
Next Time I Won’t Bring You Food:
When I reminded this person that the reason she brings me things to eat is not without selfish purpose, why doesn’t she take food to beggars, she retorted with a huff: Next time I won’t bring you food.
She did not mean the substance of what she said because she subsequently brought food for me that does not negates meritoriously what she previously said, but made her a liar that is not without consequence in punishment apart from conditioning herself to doubt and uncertainty because anyone who does not mean what she says must harbor doubt that leads to uncertainty.
She did not mean the substance of what she said because what she meant was not next time I won’t bring you food but what she mean was I will punish you for saying what you said by withholding food from you. If you think that the next time I won’t bring you food and I will punish you or retaliate for what you said is the same, you may have true logic and perception or you have false logic and perception that will end in mad perception and logic that food is shit and shit is food.
IT IS NOT MERITORIOUS TO CONVENIENTLY FORGOT WHAT YOU SAID AND BRING FOOD TO ME LATER BECAUSE YOU HAVE CONVERTED YOURSELF INTO A LIAR BUT YOU FIRST SAY YOU DID NOT MEAN WHAT YOU SAID EARLIER AND ASK FOR FORGIVENESS THAT WHEN GIVEN IT IS THEN MERITORIOUS TO RESUME BRINGING FOOD.
JUST AS SHE IS UNAWARE SHE IS NOT MEANING WHAT SHE SAID WHEN SHE SPOKE AND ORDINARY PEOPLE ARE LIKELY TO SEE NOTHING WRONG WITH WHAT SHE SAID, IN THE SAME WAY, PEOPLE FAR UNDERESTIMATE THE EXTENT TO WHICH THEY NEVER MEAN WHAT THEY SAY, NEVER SAY WHAT THEY MEAN.

Quoting Jesus and the Buddha:
You have heard the pope quote an emperor. How often have you heard him or past popes quote what Jesus said, let alone explain correctly what Jesus meant.
How often have you heard the Dalai Lama or leaders representing the Buddha preach from the teachings and discipline of the Buddha?
The Buddha: Bhikkhus, the arising of three things are rare in the world. What three?

The arising of the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened is rare the world.

A person who preaches the Teaching and Discipline declared by the Thus Gone One is rare in the world.

A person who has gratitude and returns it, is rare in the world. Bhikkhus, the arising of these three things are rare in the world.
By just quoting what the Buddha said above that no other preachers have done to you, I have not just preached the teaching declared by the Buddha that is true (and therefore I am a truly rare person according to the Buddha) but I have in many instances demonstrated the veracity or objective truth of what the Buddha taught as no man has done.
For instance I have demonstrated that abandoning stress, restlessness and neither liking nor disliking are not wishy-washy, make believe attainments but you abandon stress and restlessness by never forcefully stretching syllables or units of motion and paying attention to not constantly change speed and loudness (strength of force), you neither like not dislike if your mental force of going against self neither rises and falls in undulating or unabated speed and strength.
THUS THE BUDDHA IS CORRECT WHEN HE SAID A PERSON WHO PREACHES THE TEACHING AND DISCIPLINE DECLARED BY HIM IS RARE (JUST AS A PERSON WHO TRULY TAKES FROM WHAT IS JESUS AND MAKES IT KNOWN TO YOU IS RARE OR ALMOST NONEXISTENT) AND BY THE BUDDHA’S WORDS, I AM A TRULY RARE PERSON IN THIS WORLD.
BECAUSE THE GRATITUDE OF PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD ARE TAINTED BY EMOTION, TAINTED BY FALSE STYLE, THEIR GRATITUDE LIKE ALL THEIR ACTIVITIES ARE REHASHED STADARDIZED BY ROTE FROM MEMORY FOR THE OCCASION, THEY CANNOT BE TRULY GENUINE AND THEREFORE THE BUDDHA IS AGAIN CORRECT TO SAY THAT A PERSON WHO HAS GRATITUDE AND RETURNS IT IS RARE. SOME MAY HAVE GRATITUDE BUT THEY DO NOT RETURN IT, THEIR EMOTIONS, SPECIFICALLY PRIDE AND PRETENTIOUSNESS IS AN OBSTACLE FOR THEM TO RETURN IT.
IF WHAT I SAY THAT IS UNPRECEDENTED CONVINCES YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT WOULD IT NOT LOOK FOOLISH OR MEANINGLESS IF THE COUNSELOR WERE TO NOW TRY TO TEACH YOU ALL THINGS AND CONVINCE YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS & JUDGMENT THAT YOU ARE ALREADY CONVINCED? I DO NOT LOOK FOOLISH TRYING TO CONVINCE YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT BECAUSE NO ONE IN THE PAST AND TODAY HAS SAID THE THINGS I SAID. IF WHAT I SAY THAT IS COMPREHENSIVE AND UNPRECEDENTED DOES NOT CONVINCE YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT, IT MAY BE THAT THERE ARE STILL OTHER INCONCEIVABLE THINGS THAT THE COUNSELOR WILL SAY IN RELATION TO WHAT JESUS SAID IN THE NEW TESTAMENT THAT WILL CONVINCE YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT (JESUS SAID REGARDING SIN BECAUSE MEN DO NOT BELIEVE ME) OR IT MAY BE THAT YOU ARE AN INCORRIGIBLE GOAT, TOO STEEPED IN DELUSION TO BE CONVINCED WITH REASON BY ANYONE.
Uncertainty:
Uncertainty is a forceful or emotional conflicted state of the mind that has nothing to do with reality or reason, that is not an unavoidable state of the mind that comes with existence but uncertainty is a state of their minds that ordinary people are unaware they are regularly conditioning themselves to each time they stir and experience uncertainty. Uncertainty has strength and ease of arousal that can be conditioned with regular experience so that it becomes increasingly easier to arouse to more intense levels that become harder to shed and they are headed for mad unappeasable uncertainty.
Speaking Of Fear:
Quote: The figures, published on the eve of the traditional Thanksgiving holiday, added to fears of a downturn.
Comment: It is totally unnecessary to talk of fear in the situation above and whether it is facile or genuinely felt, by speaking of fear you are conditioning yourself to fear, exciting readers to greater or lesser extent that you do not realize will culminate in mad, intense fear.
The wise person says, “Added to likelihood of a downturn”. If you are attached to this world, neither like nor dislike a downturn, what is there to fear but instead in this case, the use of ‘fear’ is to partially unwittingly express a dislike for a downturn.
Nothing Cool Or Uncool:
Quote: This week a consortium financed by Icelandic billionaire Bjorgolfur Gudmundsson bought West Ham football club for a cool £85m.
Comment: There is nothing cool or related to temperature regarding to £85m but it is emotionally used to express ‘wow’. You have false logic and perception to think or perceive that there is anything cool or to do with temperature regarding £85m.
See nothing wrong or understand what it is trying to convey and you may be cultivating false logic and perception that will end in agony.

The Buddha Says I Am A Rare Person

The Buddha: Bhikkhus, the arising of three things are rare in the world. What three?

The arising of the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened is rare the world. (There is only one self enlightened Buddha per age and others were caused to be enlightened by him)

A person who preaches the Teaching and Discipline declared by the Thus Gone One is rare in the world.

A person who has gratitude and returns it, is rare in the world. Bhikkhus, the arising of these three things are rare in the world.

If there are many who preach the Buddha’s teaching and discipline and they factually differ from each other then they cannot all be right but only ONE or NONE are right. Whenever two views or interpretations of a subject differ, only one is correct or they are both wrong.

Because I have preached the Buddha’s teaching and discipline in a way no contemporary or predecessor (as I have similarly done so regarding what Jesus taught) has done, if I am correct then the rest must be wrong and therefore according to the Buddha I am a rare person because I have truly preached the teaching and discipline declared by the Buddha where none has done before.

For instance, I have shown that you abandon restlessness as the Buddha exhorts by practicing constancy in speed and loudness or strength of force in your speech, motion, thinking and perceptions. You abandon stress as the Buddha said is possible by stop using force to stretch your syllables, changing speed and loudness that have equivalents in motion, thought and perceptions.

The Buddha said the noble person neither likes nor dislike. I have demonstrated where no one has done before how this is no mystery or make belief or self-delusion. If your mental force of going against self did not undulate in speed and strength when you perceive something, you do not like it, if your mental force of going against self did not rise unabated in speed and strength you do not dislike it. I have achieved this and I now effortlessly neither like nor dislike whatever impinges on my consciousness and it is an incomparably saner and blissful way to exist than being dogged constantly by likes and dislikes.

The Buddha said that doubt and uncertainty together with self identity views and faith in rites and precepts are lower fetters to states of future woe that together with sensuality and ill will, bind beings to the lower realms whilst ignorance, restlessness (desire for change), attachment to form, the formless and conceit are the five upper fetters that bind beings to existence in the heavenly realms.

Doubt and uncertainty is the opposite of faith that is essential in Christianity as Jesus chided Peter as a man of little faith who entertained doubt and therefore began to sink as he walked on water. I have demonstrated that ordinary people must be beset by doubt and uncertainty that at lower intensities in daily life they fail to recognize they are experiencing doubt in themselves and others. Doubt that leads to uncertainty is something ordinary people constantly create for themselves and others by not telling or doing the truth, by constantly creating cumulative tormenting stress, restlessness and distraction that leads to doubt in their stylish way of speaking, moving, thinking and perceiving. In addition they regularly unnecessarily emotionally question or do not accept what others say or do thereby creating the shadow of doubt in them (eg they ask their friends when it is none of their business and frivolous, are you sure you want to buy that?). Because questioning others is forceful, attended by emotion, it is conditioning so that increasingly they are unable to accept as true what is said or done to them and they do not realize they have a certain appointment with mad doubt and uncertainty either in an acute crisis or in old age senility. Has anyone in the past or present explained doubt and uncertainty as I have? Instead, even those who call themselves good and wise encourage you to doubt or question, tell how can you not doubt and be uncertain in life.

The Buddha said that from ignorance as a requisite comes fabrications, from fabrications comes consciousness, from consciousness comes name and form, from name and form comes the sensory media (sight, sound, touch, taste, smell). I have explained that fabrications are whatever activities a mind is capable (speaking, thinking, moving bodily parts and perceiving) and how these occur without consciousness, does not require consciousness just as you do not need to be aware to breath or digest food, just as a DVD player does not require consciousness to play a movie and consciousness is something that comes afterwards to experience and direct the fabrications. Sense objects can occur without the sensory media precedes the sensory media because there are objects that exist that we are not perceptive of (eg invisible security marks on currency notes, high frequency sounds that dogs but not humans hear). Therefore the Buddha is correct to say that name and form or physical objects or this world comes to existing before sensory media that come to being afterwards to permit contact with the physical world.

Similarly I have taken from what is Jesus and made it known to others in a way no one has done before. For instance Jesus said let your yes be yes only anything more comes from evil. I have shown all ordinary people never let their yes be yes only but they always say and do much more, they stretch their syllables, change speed and loudness that is the more that comes from evil. They never say what they mean, never mean what they say because there is a style accompanying what they say that detracts from what they say, no matter how sincere they like to think they are. Jesus said woe to you who laughs for you shall weep. I have shown that weeping is mandatory because laughing is always subjecting your mind to violent changes in speed and strength of force that warps and degrades it and the person who regularly laughs and smiles is headed for madness.
I have taken from what is Jesus’, his prediction of the coming of a counselor that no one has done so.
It is evidence that the Buddha is as he said, the All Knowing One that he says it is rare for a person to preach what he taught because he knows the nature of the minds of beings trapped in this world that they are incapable of understanding except in a rudimentary way what he taught and it would take a rare person to come that will preach from what he taught. Just as it is as rare as a single Buddha or self awakened one in an eon, all those who were enlightened were caused by him to be enlightened, in the same way it may be as rare as a single person who will preach what the Buddha taught.

THEREFORE BECAUSE EITHER ONE OR NONE OF DIFFERENT WAYS OF PREACHING THE BUDDHA’S TEACHING AND DISCIPLINE IS CORRECT AND I HAVE PREACHED THE BUDDHA’S TEACHING IN A WAY THAT NO ONE ELSE HAS DONE SO, I AM IN THE VIEW OF THE BUDDHA A RARE EVEN UNIQUE PERSON.

THE PREMISE OF MY BEING RARE IS NOT BASED ON EMOTION BUT BASED ON REASON THAT I HAVE LAID OUT CLEARLY. THE BASIS OF YOUR DISPUTING THAT I AM INDEED A RARE PERSON IS LIKELY BASED ON EMOTIONAL RESENTMENT, ANTAGONISM AND WANTING TO CAST DOUBT ON ME THAT YOU DO NOT REALIZE IS EVEN THUS CONDITIONING YOU TO GREATER DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY THAT WILL END IN AGONY, END IN MAD UNASSUAGABLE DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY AND THAT WILL BE TORMENT. IF YOU WANT TO DOUBT ME, MAKE SURE IT IS BASED ON VALID REASONS NOT EMOTIONAL DEFIANCE THAT THEN PROFFERS EXCUSES OR JUSTIFICATIONS AS REASONS.

A Grateful Person Is Rare:
The Buddha: A person who has gratitude and returns it, is rare in the world. Bhikkhus, the arising of these three things are rare in the world.

WHAT YOU HEAR PEOPLE EMOTIONALLY OR EAGERLY EXPRESSING THEIR GRATEFULNESS MAY SOUND GRATIFYING TO THE FOOLISH RECIPIENT BUT THEY ARE NOT ATTENDED BY REASONED CONVICTION BUT ATTENDED BY EMOTIONAL OR FORCEFUL FABRICATED CONVICTION THAT LASTS AS LONG AS THEIR EMOTIONAL GRATEFULNESS LASTS IN THE MINDS. THE MOMENT YOU SAY OR DO SOMETHING DISAGREEABLE TO THEM, THEY WHO WERE PREVIOUSLY SO GRATEFUL WILL BARE THEIR FANGS AT YOU. THEREFORE PEOPLE WHO ARE TRULY GRATEFUL AND RETURN IT ARE VERY RARE AS THE BUDDHA SAID, THE VAST MAJORITY IN THIS WORLD ARE UNGRATEFUL HYPOCRITES WHO ONLY FAKED SO WELL THEY ARE GRATEFUL THEY (EMOTIONALLY) BELIEVE IN DELUSION THEY ARE GRATEFUL BUT THEIR GRATEFULNESS ONLY LASTS AS LONG AS THEIR EMOTION LASTS.

BECAUSE BEINGS IN THIS WORLD ARE ALL SUBSTANCE & STYLE ACTORS, THEIR GRATITUDES ARE ALSO ACTED, OFTEN COMPLETELY FAKED AND NEVER PURE OR TRULY GENUINE, DRIVEN BY FORCE OR EMOTION AND LAST AS LONG AS THE EMOTION OR MEMORY OF THAT GRATITUDE. UPSET IN THEM IN ANYWAY LATER AND THEY SEE NO WRONG IN LASHING OUT AT YOU THAT THEY WERE SO GRATEFUL BEFORE.
Did I Change You Or Did You Change Me?
Did what and how I said or did change you in an extraordinary previously unimaginable way or did what and how you said and did change me?
(If you think you changed me, I did not change you when it is the objective truth that I did so, then you have false perception and logic that will end in mad perception and logic in acute situations and old age)

Was is it me who took from what is Jesus and made it known to you that Jesus was foretelling the coming of a counselor or was it you? All the references indicates the counselor will be a person who will come in the future and the fact that Jesus said he dwells with you, he will not speak on his own authority indicates he will be a person who will physically come and live in the midst of people who are not aware of his presence, who will not receive him because they neither see nor know him.

I definitely changed the consciousness of the world that is reflected in their demeanor and changed behavior after 1977. If you deny the world changed in an extraordinary beneficial way after 1977 when it is a fact, you have false perception that will end in mad perception of what happened did not happen.

Again in recent years people have changed yet again and are still changing even though everyone is still acting. When I set out to change myself in recent years I did not imitate anyone else, there is no one in this world that I can imitate or emulate to bring about the extraordinary changes in me in recent years that enabled me to experience a preciously unimaginable effortless freedom from stress, restlessness and distraction.

THEREFORE WHEN YOU SPEAK AGAINST ME, IF YOU THINK I AM NO BETTER THAN YOU, YOU THINK I AM YOUR PEER IN VIRTUE, CONCENTRATION OF MIND AND WISDOM, YOU MAY BE RIGHT OR YOU MAY BE THE ONE WHO IS OUTRAGEOUS AND ASKING FOR JUDGMENT.
JESUS SAID THOSE WHO SPOKE AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT WILL NOT BE FORGIVEN AND HE CALLED THE COUNSELOR THE HOLY SPIRIT AND SO IF I TURN OUT TO BE THE COUNSELOR WHOM THE WORLD CANNOT RECEIVE, YOU HAVE FOOLISHLY HIT THE JACKPOT. IT IS NOT DIFFICULT TO REASON OUT THAT I AM SOMEONE OF SOME UNCOMMON NOBILITY TO CHANGE THE CONSCIOUSNESS OF THE WORLD NOT ONCE BUT TWICE AND SAY THE MANY THINGS I SAY THAT CANNOT BE FLUKE AND THE BUDDHA THAT YOU OBVIOUSLY SPURNED SAID THAT THOSE WHO SCOFF AT THE NOBLE ONES ARE HEADED FOR PERDITION.
IF YOU CAN PERCEIVE THAT THE WORLD DID CHANGE AFTER 1977 AND IN RECENT YEARS THAT BENEFITED YOU, YOU WILL BE FOOLISH TO DISMISS MY CLAIM TO BE THE TRIGGER WITHOUT SOUND REASON RATHER THAN EMOTIONAL RESENTMENT. IF YOU CONCEDE WHAT I SAY IS EXTRAORDINARY AND HAVE CHANGED YOU IN AN EXTRAORDINARY WAY THEN YOU ARE FOOLISHLY RISKING YOUR NECK SNIPING AT ME.
IF YOU THINK THE CONSCIOUSNESS CHANGES AFTER 1977 AND IN RECENT YEARS ARE OF LITTLE OR NO CONSEQUENCE, YOU ARE UNKNOWINGLY CONSTANTLY STRETCHING YOUR SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS TO CREATE INSOLUBLE STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION THAT PERSECUTES YOURSELF AND ALL OTHERS THAT WILL END IN MAD STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION, THEN IT MAY BE THAT WHAT I DID (CHANGE THE CONSCIOUSNESS STATE), WHAT I SAID (STOP STRETCHING SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS) IS THE STONE THAT BUILDERS REJECTED AND THIS VERY STONE MAY BECOME THE TOP OF THE CORNER STONE AND WHOEVER TRIPS ON IT WILL BE SHATTERED TO PIECES AND WHEN IT FALLS ON THEM IT WILL CRUSH THEM.
MANKIND MAY EVEN MORE VIRULENT:
ACCORDING TO DNA ANALYSIS, MANKIND LEFT AFRICA BARELY 50,000 YEARS AGO AND IN THIS TIME HIS NUMBERS HAS GROWN TO SIX BILLION AND HE HAS BROUGHT THE EARTH TO THE BRINK OF ECOLOGICAL COLLAPSE.
THE TRUTH MAY BE EVEN UGLIER BECAUSE APPARENTLY MANKIND WAS ALMOST WIPED OUT IN A SUPER VOLCANO ERUPTION AT LAKE TOBA IN SUMATRA ABOUT 10,000 YEARS AGO.
THUS IN BARELY 10,000 YEARS SINCE MANKIND WAS ALMOST WIPED OUT IN A SUPER VOLCANO ERUPTION, HE HAS MULTIPLIED EXPONENTIALLY AND PLUNDERED THE EARTH RELENTLESSLY IN AN ACCELERATING FASHION LIKE A SCOURGE SUCH THAT THE EARTH MAY BECOME NONVIABLE VERY SOON.
IF MANKIND HAD NOT BEEN ALMOST WIPED OUT BY A VOLCANIC ERUPTION 10,OOO YEARS AGO, THE EARTH DEMISE AT THE HANDS OF MEN WOULD HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED.
Quote Headline: Cure Me
Comment: Unless it is a plain request to be cured, the person who uttered it, perhaps in disdain is headed for mad logic and perception because logically when you say cure me, you mean you are suffering a sickness and is asking to be cured.
Many do not realize they possess false logic that what they say is motivated by true logic or reason but they never say what they mean, never mean what they say far more than they are aware and as a result they are headed for mad logic and perception.

Faith In The Buddha & Dispassion Is Highest:
The Buddha says below that faith in him and the destruction of all passions or emotions is the highest:
The Buddha says he is higher than even God. Unless you know or can see, it is false logic for you to dispute what he says. He may be right and if he turns out to be right and you dispute that without reason driven by emotion, there is a price in penitence that may be far more painful and everlasting than you dreamt is possible.
Placing faith in the Enlightened One is placing faith in the highest and it brings the highest results. Therefore doubting the Enlightened One is doubting the highest and brings the highest penance.
They that have faith in dispassionateness have placed faith in the highest for highest results. Thus of all qualities, the absence of all passions or emotions (anger, hate, lust, greed, excitement, sadness) is the highest achievement that brings the highest results.
2. Cundãsuttaü- To princess Cundã.
004.02 At one time the Blessed One was living in the squirrels' sanctuary in Rajagaha. Princess Cundi attended by five hundred princesses approached the Blessed One in five hundred chariots, worshipped the Blessed One, sat on a side and princess Cundi said to the Blessed One:
Venerable sir, my brother prince Cunda says: Whether it's a woman or man if he takes refuge in the Blessed One, the Teaching and the Community of bhikkhus, abstains from destroying living things, taking the not given, misbehaviour in sexual conduct, telling lies, and taking intoxicated and brewed drinks, after death he is born in heaven and does not go to loss. I ask the Blessed One: Venerable sir, placing what kind of faith in the Teacher, the Teaching and the Community of bhikkhus, would someone after death be born in heaven and not in loss?
Cundi, of all beings without feet, two feet, four feet or many feet, material or immaterial (there are beings without form or body), perceptive or not, neither perceptive nor non- perceptive, of them the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened is the foremost. Placing faith in the Enlightened One is placing faith in the highest and it brings the highest results.
Cundi, of all things compounded or not compounded, dispassionateness is the foremost. Such as freedom from pride and conceit (forms of emotion), allaying thirsts, destroying settling places, breaking up the rounds of rebirth, destruction of craving, disenchantment, cessation and extinction. Cundi, they that have faith in dispassionateness, have placed faith in the highest for highest results
Cundi, of all communities or gatherings the disciples of the Thus Gone One are foremost, such as the four doublets of eight Great Men, who are reverential, worthy of hospitality, gifts and veneration with clasped hands, the field of merit for the world. Cundi, they that have faith in the Community of bhikkhus, have placed faith in the highest for highest results
Cundi, of virtues, the virtues desired by the noble ones is foremost. Such as the virtues that are unbroken, not fissured, without spots, are pure, consistent, free of slavery, praised by the wise as unaffected and conducive to concentration. Cundi, completeness of the virtues desired by the noble ones is the highest completeness, for that highest completeness there are highest results.
Faith should be placed in the highest, knowing the highest Teaching
Faith in the Enlightened One worthy of incomparable offerings,
Faith in the pleasure of disenchantment of things
Faith in the Community of bhikkhus, the incomparable field of merit
Making offerings to them the highest merit is accrued
Of the most excellent of life span, beauty, fame, pleasantness and power
The wise give to the highest, settled in the highest teaching.
And gaining the highest as god or man enjoy that bliss.
Is there such a wife today?
It is a reflection of the decadence and descent to immorality, not that what the Buddha said below is ‘old fashion’ that there are no women today who behaved as the Buddha taught they should to their husbands.
It is true that few if any husbands conduct in themselves in a manner to be worthy of being treated with reverence by their wives but is there a wife today who will rise when their husbands approach, go to sleep after them & do their duties obediently?
It is because there are no wives who conduct themselves as described by the Buddha, husbands who treat their wives with honor that everyone here is suffering stress and heading for punishment after death.
3. Uggahasuttàü- Uggaha the grand son of Mendaka
004.03. At one time the Blessed One lived in Bhaddiya in the dense forest. Then Uggaha the grand son of Mendaka approached the Blessed One, worshipped, sat on a side and said: Venerable sir, may the Blessed One accept tomorrow's meal from me with three others. The Blessed One accepted in silence. Then Uggaha the grand son of Mendaka knowing that the Blessed One had accepted got up from his seat, worshipped and circumambulated the Blessed One and went away.
The Blessed One at the end of that night, putting on robes in the morning and taking bowl and robes approached the home of Uggaha the grandson of Mendaka and sat on the prepared seats. Then Uggaha the grandson of Mendaka served with his own hands the Blessed One with nourishing eatables and drinks. Knowing that the Blessed One had finished taking the meal and had put away the bowl, he sat on a side and said to the Blessed One: Venerable sir, these girls will be going to their husbands clans. Venerable sir, may the Blessed One advise them for their welfare for a long time.
The Blessed One said to those girls: Therefore, girls, you should train thus. Our mother and father shows our husbands out of compassion for our welfare. We will rise when they approach, will go to sleep after them, will do their duties obediently. We will do their wishes, will talk to them pleasantly
Therfore, girls, you should train thus: We will honour and revere the elders in the husbands' homes, whether mother or father, recluses or Brahmins. At their arrival we will offer them seats and water
Therefore girls, you should train thus: Whatever activities there be in the husband's home if it is to comb silk thread, we will be clever and not lazy and become efficient to do them ourselves and to get it done by others.
Therefore girls, you should train thus: We should know the people in our husband's home, whether servants, messengers or workmen. We should know what they should do, and what they should not do. We should know the sick, the fit and the physically unfit, eatables and nourishments we will divide up to the last.
Therefore girls, you should train thus: Whatever our husbands bring, wealth, grains, silver or gold, we will protect them, and we should do it without anger, without a thievish mind, without an addiction to it and with a protective mentality. Girls, a woman endowed with these five things after death are born in the company of the gods of pleasantness
Do not belittle your husband, who supports you actively and zealously,
Do not disturb the master's mind and make him angry with selfish thoughts
The wise should honour the master and all the elders in the clan
With aroused effort zealously attend on the lower staff too,
Do the wishes of the master and protect all
The woman who sees to the interests of the husband thus,
Is born with the gods of happiness.

Questioning Others:

Who is Ava Gardner?
It is false logic and perception that people are totally unaware and they do not believe will end in mad logic and perception that this person asked me “Who is Ava Gardner?” when I said that Ava Gardner said that love is nothing but pain. The answer to the question “Who is Ava Gardner” is that she is a film star which she already knows and it is false logic and perception that you are questioning her authority to make that statement that love is nothing but pain. She is hinting and indirectly questioning or doubting me. If I did not believe Ava Gardner was right I would not have quoted her and so instead of respecting my view and telling me that she disagreed with what Ava Gardner said merely on the basis that she is no authority on love, she is trying to raise doubt in me that is never harmless but conditions anyone who is foolish to succumb to doubt himself.
Thus, not only has the person false logic and perception to think “who is Ava Gardner” is the appropriate question for the answer she desires, she is creating karma for herself by trying to induce doubt in another person that may send him to future states of woe.
Placebo Effect:
When doctors give identical pills that have no medicine in it, a sizeable number of people report that it is effective. This is the placebo effect.
The placebo effect is a demonstration of false perception that will end in mad perception that people can make themselves believe and experience as effective what is actually ineffective (pill with only sugar).
It is again false perception that everyone is vulnerable to be similarly duped by pills that are in truth duds.
Only those who are emotional, who want to believe things that they are presented with that they have no right to believe (presumptuous), who can be brainwashed can report placebos as effective.
It is not harmless for doctors to prescribe placebos eg vitamins and tell patients it will work to cure their maladies because there is karma trying to make others make belief something that does not work, works.
An unemotional person without any anticipation that something will work, who does not desperately desire a cure, who is fully in touch with his body and mind will not notice any significant changes in his mind and body as a result of the placebo and therefore cannot be duped that what is a placebo is effective.
THUS IT IS ONLY PEOPLE WHO HAVE RESIDENT FALSE PERCEPTION WHO CAN BE CONDITIONED OR DUPED TO PERCEIVE PLACEBOS ARE EFFECTIVE AND THEY DO NOT REALIZE THEY ARE HEADED FOR MAD PERCEPTION.
QUESTION RULES:
ASK ANOTHER PERSON QUESTIONS BY ALL MEANS BUT DO NOT HINT BECAUSE IT IS DISHONEST AND FLIRTING WITH FUTURE MADNESS. FOR INSTANCE DO NOT ASK WHO AVA GARDNER IS WHEN YOU KNOW WHO SHE IS, YOU MEAN YOU DISLIKE WHAT I QUOTED HER SAYING OR YOU THINK SHE IS NOT QUALIFIED TO SAY WHAT SHE SAID.
NEVER QUESTION WHAT SOMEONE SAID TO YOU OR SOMEONE’S DECISION (EG SHE WANTS TO BUY THIS DRESS, YOU ASK HER ARE YOU SURE) BECAUSE IT IS CREATING DOUBT IN HER THAT LEADS TO DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY. INSTEAD STATE WHAT YOU THINK OR SEE IS DIFFERENT EG I THINK IT IS NOT WISE TO BUY THAT DRESS.

THERE IS NEVER JUSTIFICATION TO DOUBT WHAT ANOTHER PERSON SAY BUT THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN YOU MUST ACCEPT WHAT HE SAID, IF NECESSARY YOU MERELY SAY WHAT YOU THINK OR SEE THAT DIFFERS.
Quote Headline: Shady dealings.
Comment: The headline was in respect to the successful auction for $70,000 for a pair of sunglasses worn by actor Steve McQueen in the film Thomas Crown Affair.
People find it cute misleading others who read the headline and imagine it is an illegal deal when the shade is in respect to the sunglasses and the deal is in the successful auction. This is false perception and logic that the person who issues and those who appreciate do not realize will end in truly mad logic and perception for them.
If you like to play with words so that your words can have plural or more than one meaning, you begin to develop a shadow of doubt in what you and others say so that in time you become suspicious, cannot accept things as you are told, you emotionally feel there must be more to it.

A Liking For Thanking Others:
THROUGH SOCIAL CONDITIONING ALL EMOTIONAL PEOPLE HAVE ACQUIRED A LIKING FOR THANKING OTHERS FOR REAL OR IMAGINED, TRIVIAL OR SIGNIFICANT GOOD DEEDS BY OTHERS.

THIS LIKING FOR THANKING OTHERS IS NOTHING MORE THAN THE UNDULATING RISE AND FALL IN SPEED AND STRENGTH OF THEIR MENTAL FORCE OF GOING AGAINST SELF WHEN THEY SAY 'THANKS' AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REASON, NOTHING TO DO WITH EXPRESSING REASONED APPRECIATION OF WHAT SOMEONE ELSE HAS SAID OR DONE.

JUST BECAUSE YOU LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU, YOU EXPERIENCE LIKE WHEN YOU SAY THANKS DOES NOT MAKE IT MERITORIOUS OR BENEFICIAL FOR THE RECIPIENT BUT IF YOU ARE THANKING HIM FOR SOMETHING HE DID NOT DO OR THAT YOU DISLIKED, THEN YOU ARE HURTING HIM, GENERATING CONFLICT IN HIM WHEN HE FINDS OUT THAT WHAT YOU ARE THANKING HIM IS SOMETHING THAT YOU DID NOT APPRECIATE.

THANKING SOMEONE IS NOT JUST ABOUT YOU LIKING IT BUT IT SHOULD BE FIRST AND FOREMOST A VEHICLE TO EXPRESS YOUR APPRECIATION TO WHAT HE HAS SAID OR DONE THAT YOU ARE TRULY GRATEFUL.

IF YOU START THANKING OTHERS FOR EVERY TRIVIAL THING THEY SAY OR DO, YOU EVEN THANK THEM FOR THINGS YOU REJECT OR DID NOT LIKE YOU DEGRADE THE SOLEMN NATURE OF THANKING ANOTHER AND YOUR THANKS CAN BECOME AN INSTRUMENT OF PERSECUTION OR HURTING OTHERS WHEN THEY FIND THAT YOU ARE THANKING THEM FOR SOMETHING THAT YOU ACTUALLY DISLIKED.

FOR ONE WHO DISCERNS, ORDINARY PEOPLE'S THANKS ARE STEREOTYPED OR REGURGITATED BY ROTE REFLEXIVELY FOR SITUATIONS THEY DEEM APPROPRIATE TO THANK OTHERS AND WHAT GRATIFICATION THEY FIND IN THANKING OTHERS THAT THEY MISTAKE AS THEIR GENUINENESS OR HEARTFELT THANKING IS THE LIKING THEY EXPERIENCE WHEN THEY THANK OTHERS.

The Buddha says singing is crying and dancing is insanity:
The Buddha:
Ruõõasuttaü- Crying
108.Bhikkhus, singing is crying in this discipline of the noble ones and dancing is insanity. Bhikkhus, it is childish to laugh too long showing your teeth. Therefore give up singing, dancing and it is suitable that you, delighting in the Teaching should laugh to a certain extent only.
THEREFORE THOSE WHO CALL THEMSELVES BUDDHISTS WHO LIKE TO SING, DANCE AND LAUGH ARE ONLY NOMINAL BUDDHISTS, THEY DO NOT HEED THE BUDDHA'S TEACHING.
THEREFORE IF YOU MUST SING, SING WITHOUT STRETCHING NOTES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS.
NOWADAYS I CANNOT GET MYSELF TO DANCE AND ALL ALONG I WAS NEVER GOOD AT LAUGHING.
The Buddha says I am a rare person:
Bhikkhus, the arising of three things are rare in the world. What three?

The arising of the Thus Gone One, worthy and rightfully enlightened is rare the world.

A person who preaches the Teaching and Discipline declared by the Thus Gone One is rare in the world.

A person who has gratitude and returns it, is rare in the world. Bhikkhus, the arising of these three things are rare in the world.
**

Either the Buddha is talking nonsense, it is no big deal what he taught or what he taught is of cardinal importance towards a deliverance from suffering that may otherwise be as vast as an ocean and as long as an eternity that few could preach or interpret it for others.

There are many who preach what the teaching and discipline but they are only nominal preachers because the Buddha said someone who preaches his teaching is rare.
No one in the past and today apart contemporary elders during the Buddha’s time has shed light on what the Buddha taught as I have done.
For instance I have demonstrated you exit stress by stopping unnecessary forceful stretching of syllables and units of motion, you abandon restlessness as the Buddha said is possible by paying attention to stop changing speed and strength of force in speech and motion. I have explained how why fabrications or activities of the mind are the result of ignorance, how fabrications precede consciousness that comes into being to experience and conduct the fabrications and how the arising of consciousness permits this world of objects to come to being that then necessitates the sensory media to interact and thence the other links of cause and effect.

Again what the Buddha said those who have gratitude are rare. What gratitude people express or experience are rote or regurgitated with a substance and style mix that cannot be unadulterated gratitude, notwithstanding that in truth many, even those who call themselves good have little or no gratitude.

What the Buddha is saying is that the plentiful teachers in the world in the past and today cannot be true teachers of his doctrine because he said it is very rare for someone who preaches his teaching in this world. If you are discerning, you will realize no Buddhist teacher today or in the past except during the Buddha's time has elucidated the Buddha's teaching as I have.


McCartney unwittingly exposing himself:
The former Beatle said: "She is going to take me for £80million, because we now know it's £80million. All she thinks about is dollars." (surely she must think about other things apart from money and this statement is false and malicious).
Paul McCartney can barely restrain himself in the tirade below and even as he berates his former wife he is conditioning himself further to intense restless anger that he will finally lose control to become mad.
Sir Paul is said to have continued: "Everyone knows she is a liar, she even lied in her autobiography. Everybody knows that. (Not everyone knows she is a liar and it is again false and malicious to influence others to believe him)
"She has told so many lies like the one about me being a drunk - just because I go to pubs.
"It's all pack of lies you know, that I am stingy - that's another one.
"And it's all c**p and rubbish. If she doesn't get what she wants she'll pick a fight.
"I am really miserable, bullied actually. It just p***** me off, it is such c**p. I am being described as a b****** and it's not true."
The star has paid £200,000 for 20 hours of tapes of Macca's first wife Linda, which were owned by Mr Cox. Made in the 80s, they reportedly have Linda, who died in 1998, talking of leaving him.
Buddhism & Christianity Are Compatible:
What the Buddha preached and what Jesus taught are compatible.
Anyone who says there is no God in Buddhism is slandering the Buddha because he not only said there is God but He is the Father, All Knowing All Seeing:
Quote: The Great Brahma said, 'I, monk, am Brahma, the Great Brahma, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Maker, Creator, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be.'
There is heaven and hell in Buddhism & Christianity, Jesus spoke of eternal habitations that may correspond to existence as animals that the Buddha spoke of. There is Mara the Evil One in Buddhism as there is Satan the Evil One in Christianity.
The Buddha said that Great Brahma had two sons that may correspond to the Holy Spirit & Jesus in Christianity.
Subrahma and Paramatta Brahma,together with sons of the Powerful One,Sanankumara and Tissa:They too have come to the forest meeting.Great Brahma, who stands over 1,000 Brahma worlds,who arose there spontaneously, effulgent:Prestigious is he, with a terrifying body.And ten brahma sovereigns, each the lord of his own realm -- and in their midst has comeHarita Brahma surrounded by his retinue."
Jesus spoke of this Age, the close of Age and the next Age whilst the Buddha spoke of eons of cosmic contractions and expansions, he said an eon is enough time for a being transmigration to build a pile of skeleton as high as a mountain instead of eternal life in heaven.
The Buddha said he himself had been the all powerful one but he has grown disenchanted with all existing. Jesus said the Father has is his that may suggest that Jesus will become the Father if the Father should decide to relinquish his position.
Another Tsunami?
Apparently there have been extensive beaching of sea cucumbers along the East Coast of Malaysia just it was reported before the Acheh tsunami and so there are fears that another is about to occur in the South China Sea.
It may be that sea cucumbers are trying to escape being buried if there was a tsunami shifted the sediments on the seabed.
Tsunami-link in gamat landing?
KUALA LUMPUR: The Department of Environment and three other agencies have been ordered to investigate the unusual landing of thousands of sea cucumbers (gamat) on the east coast shores of the peninsula last week.
Thousands of sea cucumbers, reputedly used in a variety of traditional cures, were reportedly washed ashore along the coastlines of Kelantan, Terengganu and Pahang.
The occurrence over the past four days has raised concerns about a possible tsunami happening in the South China Sea and lashing out at the shorelines of the east coast states.
Such unusual phenomenon had happened at Port Dickson just before the tsunami tragedy of Dec 26, 2004.
There was also a similar occurrence off the Malacca coast before the tsunamis struck Aceh province.

False Logic Leads To False Perception:

False Logic Leads To False Perception:
False perception is the result of false logic and mad perception is the result of uncorrected false perception.
YOU MUST HAVE FALSE LOGIC TO TELL LIES (OR BELIEVE LIES TOLD TO YOU) BECAUSE LIES ARE NEVER WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED BUT WHAT ARE ARTIFICIALLY FABRICATED AS HAVING HAPPENED AND IT IS FALSE LOGIC OR ILLOGICAL TO WANT OTHERS TO BELIEVE WHAT DID NOT HAPPEN CAN AND DID HAPPEN. BECAUSE LIARS WANT OTHERS TO BELIEVE THEIR LIES ARE TRUE, THEY TRY TO ACT AND IMAGINE TO THEMSELVES AS CONVINCINGLY AS THEY DARE THAT THEIR LIES ARE TRUE AND THIS IN TIME LEAD TO FALSE PERCEPTION THAT WHAT THEY LIED IS TRUE. WHEN YOU LOSE CONTROL OF YOUR FALSE LOGIC IT DESCENDS INTO MAD OR UNCONTROLLABLE FALSE LOGIC, WHEN CONTROLLED FALSE PERCEPTION THAT YOUR LIES ARE TRUE BECOMES UNCONTROLLED YOU DESCEND INTO MAD PERCEPTION.
ONCE A PERSON HAS ACQUIRED FALSE PERCEPTION IT CAN LEAD TO FALSE LOGIC THAT WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS LOGICAL OR TRUE (EG YOUR FALSE LOGIC MAKES YOU BELIEVE ANOTHER PERSON’S GET RICH QUICK SCHEME IS CREDIBLE).
Deafening Silence:
People generally accept ‘deafening silence’ when it is uttered without seeing anything wrong when it is false. Silence can only be complete or partial, never deafening. Only sounds can be deafening and silence has no sounds.
It reflects unwitting mad perception in those who use this phrase and those who hear without perceiving anything wrong and far from being harmless, it is an indication of indifference and poor discernment that leads to states of woe after death.
IT IS FALSE LOGIC TO THINK THAT SILENCE CAN BE DEAFENING AND IT IS FALSE PERCEPTION TO HEAR AND SAY ‘DEAFENING SILENCE’ WITHOUT PERCEIVING IT AS FALSE.
THE DESTINY OF FALSE LOGIC IS MAD LOGIC OR UNCONTROLLABLE MAD LOGIC (TO HANG ONESELF IS UNCONTROLLABLE MAD LOGIC, TO KEEP WASHING ONE HANDS IS MAD LOGIC), THE DESTINY OF FALSE PERCEPTION IS MAD PERCEPTION (TO BE PARANOID IS MAD PERCEPTION)
The Sin Of Questioning Others:
All forms of questioning even of mundane matters (eg are you sure you want to buy this dress) that is always forceful in emotional people of what another said or did is sinful and harmful because is addictive or conditions the mind of both the questioner and questioned to doubt or not believe what is said or done. As a result of questioning what is said or done, they become uncertain.
Repeated questioning (often without awareness of the person) of what is said and done causes people who question and are question become increasingly irrationally questioning to more intense levels until they cannot believe whatever is said or done, no matter how many times and ways they have been assured it is true. They become engulfed in uncertainty that seems without a way out.
Thus the fruit of questioning others is that you condition yourself and the other person to doubt that will become increasingly more widespread, more easily aroused and harder to dispel leading to emotional uncertainty and if you believe what the Buddha said, doubt and uncertainty is a lower fetter to future states of woe.

If what is said to me below is the truth, I would not have to question the person but because I can work out where others may not that what he said is untenable, I will either to question or confront him or state what I believe is true that is different from he wants me to believe is true.
Quote: I do occasionally receive many unsolicited mails from unknown sources and I have been deleting them. I do not communicate by email much.
His reply above did not answer my question whether he received my latest email. He is hinting not saying that he is deleting my emails along with emails from unknown sources and so he may have deleted my email accidentally. This is unlikely if not impossible because the source of emails, in particular mine, is displayed and therefore he is intentionally deleting my emails.
IF PEOPLE ALWAYS SPEAK THE TRUTH (AS IS THE CASE IN HEAVEN) THEN NOBODY WILL HAVE TO QUESTION OR DOUBT ANOTHER.
BECAUSE PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD FEED EACH OTHERS LIES OFTEN WITH FABRICATED GENTLENESS AND SINCERITY THAT FOOLS PEOPLE OF POOR DISCERNMENT, THEY HAVE RESORTED TO QUESTIONING EACH OTHER THEREBY CONDITIONING THEMSELVES AND THOSE QUESTIONED WITH DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY THAT WILL CONDEMN BOTH TO FUTURE STATES OF WOE.
BUT THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE. FOR THE DISCERNING PERSON, RATHER THAN QUESTIONING THE OTHER PERSON, HE STATES WHAT HE BELIEVES INSTEAD THEREBY NOT QUESTIONING HIM BUT LETTING HIM KNOW WHAT YOU THINK THAT DIFFERS FROM HIM.

QUESTIONING OTHERS IS ALWAYS SINFUL AND HARMFUL BECAUSE IT CREATES CONDITIONING DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY BUT IT IS AN OPTION FORCED ON UNSKILFUL PEOPLE BY THE REALITY THAT PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD TELL LIES THAT THEY WANT OTHERS TO BELIEVE. JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE TELL LIES DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU MUST QUESTION THEM TO CONDITION YOURSELF TO DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY. JUST BECAUSE YOU DO NOT QUESTION THEM DOES NOT MEAN YOU MUST ACCEPT WHAT THEY SAY AS TRUE. RATHER THAN BEING SUCKED IN, THE WISE PERSON CAN MINDFULLY CHOOSE TO STATE WHAT HE THINKS THAT IS DIFFERENT AND THEREFORE NOT ACCEPT FALSITY WITHOUT DOUBTING THE OTHER PERSON.
Why He Is A Hypocrite:
Quote: I do occasionally receive many unsolicited mails from unknown sources and I have been deleting them. I do not communicate by email much.Thanks for sending me the emails, but perhaps you need not send them to me from now on.
Comments:
Why thank me for emails that he never told me he deleted without reading but merely hinted he did so?

He wants me to (falsely) believe he is thanking me and therefore grateful for Emails that he obviously spurned. He wants me to believe what is false that he is thankful when he is not so that I will experience mental conflict.

How can he be truly grateful and therefore thankful for emails that he deleted without reading or appreciating but instead he is liar?

(If he is deleting the emails I sent, he must dislike them. If he thinks he can thank someone for things given that he disliked without generating conflict in himself, he may be right or he have immaculate self-deceit or advanced false logic and perception. It is not that there is no conflict but he has forcefully repressed them, he says your ‘thank you’ so slickly so often it is now numb. Liking is itself false and stressful because it has nothing to do with reason but it is the undulating rise and fall of speed and strength of the foolish person’s force of self preservation on the perception of something and to thank for someone for the opposite, dislike is even more sick)

He knew my position all along from what I wrote.

Even today he has NOT told me directly where he stood.

He has merely hinted by saying in the past he disagreed with me, he smiled (lying with your face to please or impress others) because you liked (his mental force undulated up and down in strength and speed that has nothing to do with reason) someone and he usually delete emails from unknown sources, hinting that he did not know the source of my emails.

So who is more responsible, more truthful, he or me?

Who has opened his heart to the other he called friend and who has closed his heart to the other that he calls 'friend'?

I would not alter a word of what I say for anybody in this world, just because they don't like it.

What did Jesus say was the destination of hypocrites?

Even now he is not speaking the truth. What is there to be perhaps about? Either he wants me to send or not, ‘perhaps’ reflects uncertainty as a result of falsity and it is according to the Buddha that he also spurns, one of three lower fetters to future states of woe.

IT MAY BE ALMOST AS HARD FOR MEN TO CHANGE THEIR ATTITUDES THAN IT IS FOR A LEOPARD TO CHANGE ITS SPOTS. ALL THAT I SAY ARE MATTERS FOR DISCERNMENT NOT FAITH AND IF YOU HAVE NOT UNDERSTOOD THEM BY NOW, YOU MAY NEVER DO SO. ANYONE WHO REJECTS WHAT I SAY HAS POOR DISCERNMENT AND THERE MAY BE NO QUICK OR EASY CURE FOR POOR DISCERNMENT. YOU WANT TO CONVERT ME TO YOUR BRAND OF CHRISTIANITY? ARE YOU MAD OR A PERVERT?

YOU CAN ONLY TRULY THANK SOMEONE IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE FOUND BENEFICIAL. YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE TO THANK SOMEONE FOR SOMETHING THAT YOU DISCARD WITHOUT APPRECIATING, INSTEAD YOUR ‘THANKS’ IS A STANDARDIZED ROTE MINDLESS EXPRESSION THAT INDICATE YOU ARE A ROBOT AND THE FACT THAT YOU SEE NOTHING WRONG, YOU EVEN THINK YOU ARE VIRTUOUS INDICATE YOU HAVE ADVANCED FALSE LOGIC THAT HAS BECOME FALSE PERCEPTION.

WHEN JESUS SAID, ‘I THANK THEE FATHER’, DO YOU THINK HE IS THANKING HIS FATHER FOR SOMETHING HIS FATHER GAVE HIM THAT HE SPURNED?

Controlled Madness:

WHEN YOU TRULY THANK A PERSON YOU ARE EXPRESSING APPRECIATION FOR WHAT HE HAS SAID OR DONE THAT HAS BENEFITED YOU.

WHEN YOU THANK ME FOR SENDING EMAILS THAT YOU DELETE WITHOUT READING, YOU ARE EXPRESSING APPRECIATION (THANKS) FOR EMAILS THAT YOU DID NOT APPRECIATE. IF THIS IS NOT CONFLICT, NOT MADNESS THAT MUST BE FORCEFULLY CONTROLLED BY WILLING YOURSELF NOT TO SEE THE ABSURDITY, BY WILLING YOURSELF THAT IT IS TRUE, YOU INDEED APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DID NOT APPRECIATE, WHAT IS IT?

WHATEVER IS SUBJECT TO CONTROL IS SUBJECT TO LOSS OF CONTROL AND WHEN YOU LOSE CONTROL (AS YOU WILL WITH OLD AGE AND IN ACUTE SITUATIONS LIKE A PANIC) YOU BECOME UNCONTROLLABLY OR TOTALLY MAD. THE FACT THAT YOU SEE NOTHING WRONG SHOWS YOU HAVE ADVANCED FALSE PERCEPTION THAT LEADS TO MAD PERCEPTION. WHEN YOU FEEL ANTS BITING YOU, YOU ARE PARANOID, THAT IS MAD PERCEPTION. THE FACT THAT YOU THINK YOU ARE GOOD TO YOURSELF AND ME SHOWS YOU HAVE SERIOUS MAD LOGIC THAT WILL END IN MAD LOGIC. WHEN YOU HANG YOURSELF THAT IS MAD LOGIC. SINCE YOU ARE SUCH A SMART GUY AND WONDERFUL CHRISTIAN, WHY DID YOU NOT WORK THIS OUT YOURSELF?

NEVER EXPRESS THANKS FOR THINGS THAT YOU DID NOT APPRECIATE UNLESS YOU WANT TO FLIRT WITH FUTURE MADNESS. THE FACT THAT YOU ARE UNAWARE OF THE CONFLICT, YOU INDISCRIMINATE THANK OTHERS FOR EVERYTHING THEY SAID OR DID REFLECTS YOU ARE WELL ON THE WAY TO MADNESS, YOUR THANKS IS NOT GENUINE BUT FACILE (HOLLOW), ROTE FROM MEMORY AND YOU ARE A ROBOT WHO HAS GROWN NUMB AND CYNICAL TO THE CONFLICT YOU GENERATE IN YOURSELF AND OTHERS.

NO MATTER HOW YOU INSIST YOUR INDISCRIMINATE THANKS ARE GOOD FOR YOURSELF AND OTHERS, YOU ARE PRACTICING CONTROLLED MADNESS THAT WILL END IN TEARS FOR HURTING YOURSELF BUT DEBTS FOR HURTING OTHERS FOR WANTING THEM TO APPRECIATE WHAT YOU DO NOT APPRECIATE.
***
WHENEVER SOMEONE THANK ME, I FEEL GOOD, FEEL THAT I HAVE DONE OR SAID SOMETHING GOOD THAT HE IS THANKING ME.

SO DON'T CHEAPEN THE THANKING EXPERIENCE FOR ME AND OTHERS BY THATNKING ME WHEN I HAVE DONE NOTHING, SENT EMAILS THAT YOU DELETE.

YOU WANT ME TO FEEL GOOD FOR SENDING YOU EMAILS THAT YOU DELETE?

Convincing You Of Sin, Righteousness & Judgment:

BECAUSE SIN AND RIGHTEOUSNESS CAN ONLY BE MEDIATED THROUGH THE SUBSTANCE OR STYLE OF SPEECH AND BODILY CONDUCT AND BODILY CONDUCT AND I HAVE DEMONSTRATED ALL THE WAYS THAT SIN CAN OCCUR THROUGH SPEECH AND BODILY CONDUCT, NAMELY THE CONSTANT STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES OR UNITS OF MOTION, CHANGES IN SPEED AND STRENGTH OF FORCE THAT INDUCES STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION IN ALL OTHERS, I HAVE DEMONSTRATED ALL THE INCIDENCES OF SIN IN WHAT PEOPLE SAY (EG SARCASMS) AND DO (SMILING IS LYING NOT MERITORIOUS), WHOEVER IS THE COUNSELOR JESUS SPOKE MUST ALSO DWELL ON WHAT I SAID TO CONVINCE YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT.
Jesus said, “And when he comes, he (the counselor) will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness (goodness) and judgment: concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no more; concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.

What this implies is that men did not believe him and he did not convince the world of sin, righteousness and judgment and it remains for the counselor to do so and nobody prior the coming of the counselor will convince the world of sin, righteousness and judgment.

If I have largely if not entirely convinced you of sin, righteousness and judgment in a way no man before has done, wouldn’t the counselor look foolishly if he was to speak to convince you of sin, righteousness and judgment that you have already been convinced by me?
If it is possible for someone other than the counselor to convince you of sin, righteousness and judgment then it would render what Jesus said as false. For Jesus to be justified to say what he said, it must be impossible for anyone except the counselor to do so.

Sin and righteousness can only be a matter of bodily, verbal and mental conduct; there are no other modalities with which one can defile others. You can only commit sin with mental, verbal and bodily conduct by what you think, say or do or how you think, say or do. There is no other way.

The substance of sin: I must have demonstrated most if not all the possible forms in which the substance of what people say or do can defile others, including explaining why many things said and done that are generally accepted as true and good are actually false and bad not just for others but the perpetrator himself.

The way of sin: I have described all the possible ways with which the way people say or do things can defile others, namely forceful constant stretching of syllables/units of motion, changes in speed and strength of force that induces stress, restlessness and distraction in themselves and others. Apart from stretching, changing speed and strength of force, there are no other physically possible ways to defile others with the way a person speaks and does things.

Judgment: I have demonstrated that judgment is inescapable because it is impossible to sin without a person also suffering and conditioning himself to stress, restlessness, distraction & emotions that will ultimately turn mad & why sinful conduct always lead to mad perception, logic and doubt. For instance, anyone who is angry not only persecutes his victim but he himself suffers whilst also conditioning himself to become more proficient in anger that tends to become more intense and longer lasting to end with mad anger that can be triggered by the slightest provocation to intense levels that are harder to shake off.

APART FROM THE SUBSTANCE AND THE STYLE OF WHAT PEOPLE SAY OR DO, THERE ARE NO OTHER WAYS WITH WHICH ONE CAN DEFILE OTHERS OR SIN. IF I HAVE SPELT OUT ALL INSTANCES WHERE SIN IN THE SUBSTANCE AND STYLE OF WHAT PEOPLE SAY OR DO CAN OCCUR, THEN THERE IS NOTHING LEFT FOR ANYONE ELSE TO DESCRIBE IN ORDER TO CONVINCE YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT. THUS THE COUNSELOR IS ONLY LEFT WITH REITERATING ALL THAT I HAVE SAID.

THERE IS VIRTUALLY IF NOT TOTALLY NOTHING LEFT IN THE SPEECH AND BODILY CONDUCT THROUGH WHICH A PERSON CAN SIN OR BE RIGHTEOUS THAT I HAVE NOT MENTIONED AND SO WHOEVER IS THE COUNSELOR DESCRIBED MUST SAY WHAT I SAY TO CONVINCE YOU OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT.
THERE WILL BE THOSE WHO REMAIN UNCONVINCED BY ALL THAT I HAVE SAID ABOUT SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT, THEY FEEL WHAT I SAY CANNOT BE CORRECT AND BY IMPLICATION SOMETHING ELSE ALTHOUGH THEY CANNOT TELL WHAT IT IS, THAT WILL BE SAID BY THE TRUE COUNSELOR THAT THEY WERE NOT AWARE BY THEMSELVES IN THE FIRST PLACE WILL CONVINCE THEM OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT OT THEY MAY THINK WHAT I SAY IS TOO MUCH, IT CANNOT BE THAT BAD THAT VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING PEOPLE SAY OR DO, EVEN THE CHURCH IS WRONG. THEY MAY BE RIGHT OR THEY MAY BE WRONG, THEY MAY HAVE FALSE PERCEPTION THAT WILL END IN MAD PERCEPTION THAT THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT THINGS THAT ANOTHER COUNSELOR WILL SAY THAT WILL CONVINCE THEM OF SIN, RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUDGMENT. THEY MAY BE WAITING FOR THE TRAIN THAT NEVER WAS AND NEVER CAME.

Jesus said the world (under the spell of emotion, emotional prejudice & doubt that are inimical to true reason) does not know the counselor but you (by setting aside defiling emotions) can add one plus one to know him. You can know something only through logic, through calm clear thinking, never emotion.