Loving Kindness

The Buddha spoke of loving kindness and said it is the way to one eon or Age or eternity in heaven.
Hence love and kindness must be two different but related things.
Loving is the passive feeling (not emotion) of pleasantness you engender in the presence or contact of another by your appearance and manner that is free from ill will or hostility or force radiation that can be perceived by all others.
Kindness is what you say or do, how you say or do to others that is true and beneficial, does not cause them stress, restlessness or distraction.
Thus love is the feeling of pleasantness your presence creates in the other person and that can only come about if you do not radiate force, your appearance (poses), speech and deeds do not convey force or forceful changes namely prolonging, unnecessary changing direction, speed and strength of force. Kindness is the saying and doing of things that are true or genuine that creates pleasant feelings in the other person.
Puggala Sutta: Persons (excerpt)
"Here, bhikkhus, a certain person abides with his heart imbued with loving-kindness extending over one quarter, likewise the second quarter, likewise the third quarter, likewise the fourth quarter, and so above, below, around, and everywhere, and to all as to himself; he abides with his heart abundant, exalted, measureless in loving-kindness, without hostility or ill-will, extending over the all-encompassing world.
"He finds gratification in that, finds it desirable and looks to it for his well-being; steady and resolute thereon, he abides much in it, and if he dies without losing it(Jesus said he who endures till the end will be saved), he reappears among the gods of a High Divinity's retinue.
"Now the gods of a High Divinity's retinue have a life-span of one aeon. An ordinary person [who has not attained the Noble Eightfold Path] stays there for his life-span; but after he has used up the whole life-span enjoyed by those gods, he leaves it all, and [according to what his past deeds may have been] he may go down even to hell, or to an animal womb, or to the ghost realm. But one who has given ear to the Perfect One stays there [in that heaven] for his life-span, and after that he has used up the whole life span enjoyed by those gods, he eventually attains complete extinction of lust, hate and delusion in that same kind of heavenly existence.
"It is this that distinguishes, that differentiates, the wise hearer who is ennobled [by attainment of the Noble Path] from the unwise ordinary man, when, that is to say, there is a destination for reappearance [after death, but an Arahant has made an end of birth].
The Buddha said it is loving kindness to all as to oneself that is the key (and nothing else) to existence for one eon or Age in heaven. There are higher characteristics of a being like discernment (ability to see things clearly as they are), wisdom (knowing what is the correct things to say or do), the ability to be conscious but not thinking (cessation of thinking), neither perceiving nor not perceiving, concentration (the effortless passive unification and focussing of the mind) and equanimity (relinquishment, neither liking nor disliking) and although these are higher than loving kindness and accords that being more blissful and extended existence in the heavens they are not required for a being to become an angel for one eternity or Age in heaven.
As simple as this criteria of loving kindness to all (Jesus said you should love your enemies), it is almost impossible to achieve in beings trapped here because their perceiving, thinking, speaking and doing has a constant style that demands the constant use of force to prolong, change speed, direction and strength of force that harms others as they harm themselves with stress, restlessness and distraction. What beings here call their loving kindness is a FALSE loving kindness in style or how they say or do things that is for show and basically involves their use of their force of self preservation to momentarily modulate their force of going against self to speak and do things in an apparently for show soft gentle way that nevertheless has objectively detectable prolonging, changes in speed and strength of force that still stresses, make restless and distracts.
LOVING KINDNESS IS THE MOST BASIC OF THE HIGHER QUALITIES A BEING CAN POSSESS NAMELY DISCERNMENT, WISDOM, CESSATION OF THINKING, NEITHER PERCEIVING NOR NOT PERCEIVING, CONCENTRATION AND EQUANIMITY AND IT IS THE ONLY REQUISITE FOR GOING TO HEAVEN FOR ONE EON. AS SIMPLE AS TO LOVE AND TO BE KIND TO ALL IS, IT IS BEYOND THE REACH OF MOST BEINGS HERE BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL IMBUED WITH AN INDIVIDUAL STYLE THAT NECESSITATES THEY CONSTANTLY USE FORCE THAT IS NEVER LOVING OR KIND BUT PERSECUTES THEMSELVES AND OTHERS WITH STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION THAT THEY CONVENIENTLY IGNORE AND REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE.
GOING TO HEAVEN MAY BE AS SIMPLE AS MERELY CULTIVATING LOVING KINDNESS BUT IT MAY THE HARDEST IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE THING FOR BEINGS TRAPPED IN THE LOWER REALMS BECAUSE THEY ARE DRIVEN BY FORCE AND DELUSIONS THAT ARE NEAR IMPOSSIBLE TO PLACATE.
Why are aging, sickness & death celestial messengers?
The Buddha has referred to aging, sickness and death as celestial messengers.
Why are aging, sickness and death celestial messengers?
Aging, sickness and death are celestial messengers because they are not necessary conditions of existing as deluded beings in this world might accept as natural and blameless when they are indications that existence at least in this world is far from blameless, fraught with danger and suffering and existence first in this world and even in the heavenly realms should be abandoned for no further suffering.
This world is a creation not standalone or immutable as ordinary people may not realize they subconsciously accept as fait accompli. As Jesus demonstrated, death is not inevitable; a dead person can be restored to life and even complete health, God willing. Thus aging, disease and death (with its grotesque, rotting, smelly final falling apart of the body that humans especially females hold so dear is a messenger to abandon this attachment to your body and life here).
Aging and disease does not exist in heaven although death still occurs in the sense that there is a passing away from heaven after the alloted span that may range from thousands of years to even 60,000 eons or Ages. Only nirvana or the unchanging or changeless offers no further death.
THUS IF YOU ARE HEEDLESS, YOU DO NOT DENY YOURSELF AS JESUS COMMANDS YOU BUT YOU ARE TOTALLY ABSORBED IN THE PURSUITS OF THIS WORLD, YOU ACCEPT AGING, SICKNESS AND DEATH THAT ARE CELESTIAL MESSENGERS DESIGNED OR CREATED INTO THIS WORLD OF EXISTING THAT ALL IS NOT WELL AS BLAMELESS PART AND PARCEL OF EXISTING AND THUS NOT HEEDING THESE CELESTIAL MESSENGERS YOU UNDERTAKE ALL SORTS OF SINS AND END IN HELL AND GET PUNISHED SEVERELY.
IF YOU ARE HEEDFUL, YOU BECOME AWARE OF AGING, DISEASE AND DEATH AND REALIZE THAT EXISTENCE IN THIS WORLD IS UNSATISFACTORY, EVEN TOTALLY BLAMEWORTHY, BECOME DISENCHANTED AND DO NOT PARTAKE IN THE SINS OF THIS WORLD AND DO NOT END UP IN HELL.
Not Well, I Will Have To Think About It:
Well and fine are interchangeable hence when people say, “Well, I will have to think about it or well, tell me how you arrive at the conclusion” they are saying everything is well or fine.
But when they say well or fine they mean the opposite, the 'well' denotes hesitation or reservations apart from being unnecessary because if all is well or fine why not just say, “I will have to think about it”?
Thus the well and fine are meaningless or they are false, they denote the opposite, what the person wants to say is it is not fine or well, he will have to think about it.
Therefore here as in many places people without thinking think they mean what they say when they mean the opposite of what they said or what they say is false. They did not invent this method of speaking but they copied it from others and they are therefore also robots who always rehash what they say from their mental jukeboxes that they copied from others without questioning or examining the logic for correctness.
Why Ordinary People Are Hypocrites:
If you never say or do what you mean or mean what you say or do, you are a hypocrite.
Although people may not like it or they are resentful, which is nothing more than the stirring in speed and strength of their forces of going against self out of control of their forces of self preservation on reading it that has nothing to do with reason or truth, it may be or is the truth that it is NOT SELDOM but they NEVER say or do what they mean and NEVER mean what they say or do, even supposedly good ones. Why is that?
They are hypocrites in general and in specific.
They are hypocrites in general because whatever they say or do has a characteristic consistent style that must mean they are rehashing what is stale and non specific to meet the specific requirement of a situation and if you are rehashing what you say or do, you cannot be genuine anymore than a robot can be genuine but it does and say what it has been programmed.
They cannot mean their style which is meaningless because it is merely the use of force to prolong, change speed, direction and strength of force that is only for show.
Because they mean to impress, please, intimidate or dominate with their accompanying style, if they do or say what they mean they must state each time they speak or do something that they mean to impress, please, dominate or intimidate. Because they never say that, they even deny to themselves and others, they say they are merely expressing their individuality or they ‘like it that way’ they do not say or do what they mean.
Further the accompanying unnecessary use force to prolong, change speed and loudness that is intended to impress stresses, make restless and distracts, so in order to say what they mean, they must state to you that they mean to stress, make restless and distracted you. Because they are not even aware they do so let alone admit or state so, they cannot say what mean to say or do.
How are all ordinary people hypocrites in specific?
They tell lies in particular instances.
They are sarcastic often without realizing they are sarcastic. When you are sarcastic you say the opposite of what you mean. For instance you say he is a genius when you mean he is an idiot.
They often joke and try to give things a spin to make it humorous or casual. A joke is never the truth and the truth is never a joke and so those people who like to tell and appreciate jokes, who like to give everything a spin to make it funny cannot be saying what they mean or meaning what they say except in their delusion they can and do.
To tell a lie or speak falsely is itself a sin, to think it is funny, it is a joke that is good for yourself and others is even worse, compounding your sin.
I am not being deprecatory or in danger of falsity in saying that ordinary people who all have styles that can be objectively demonstrate in whatever they say or do, NEVER not often do not mean what they say or do or say or do what they mean.
I am a noble person by the Buddha’s criteria:
Because I have abandoned sensual desire, ill will, sleepiness and laziness, restlessness, anxiety and uncertainty, I am endowed with virtue (not killing even insects, telling lies, stealing, taking intoxicants), concentration, discernment, knowledge and vision of release beyond training I am a noble person according to the criteria of the Buddha.
"When someone has gone forth into homelessness -- no matter from what clan -- and he has abandoned five factors and is endowed with five, what is given to him bears great fruit.
"He has abandoned sensual desire, ill will, torpor & lethargy, restlessness & anxiety, uncertainty. These are the five factors he has abandoned. He is endowed with the aggregate of virtue, concentration, discernment, release, knowledge & vision of release of one beyond training. These are the five factors with which he is endowed.
Another generalization that is not necessarily true:
Friends who were present said that the anguish of Kate on announcing the disappearance of her daughter was so dramatic it could not possibly be faked. Even professional actors on screen could not fake it with such realism it was said.
This may not necessarily be true and here again there is an unconscious generalization in which there may be specifics of the situation that renders it false or inapplicable.
In a film even though the actors are professionals at faking, the child dying is not really dying and not really the daughter whereas in this case, even if Madeleine was not really kidnapped, she is dead and the anguish may be genuine because her daughter is dead.
Similarly many said the distress of the girl in the mysterious disappearance in the outback of Falconio is so real it cannot be faked when it may be real but not because of the ordeal but because she spent the night in pitch darkness alone fearing creatures like snakes that may lurking and she may be anxious that she may be found out as faking the disappearance.
Even my senile mother was a far more accomplished actress than I realized. I noticed vitamin capsules stuffed in crevices around the house and so one day I confronted her by asking her to open her mouth after she had taken her capsule. She was quite delighted to show her empty mouth but then I asked her to raise her tongue and there it was hidden under her tongue. Even I cannot do that. She was faking she took the capsule with some water and after I left she took it out and threw it away because she believed old people should not take supplements.
Again she deceived me when I gave her a sleeping tablet because she was disturbing the peace ranting to herself at night. She feigned putting the tablet and swallowing with a gulp of water but then I notice her hand reaching for a towel as if to wipe but she slipped it under it. Suspecting, I lifted the towel and sure enough the pill was there. What happened was she held the pill between the crevice between her fingers and went through the motion as if putting it in her mouth and swallowing it that even I cannot do if I wanted and secretly slipped it under the towel that she disguised by faking she was wiping her fingers.
Inciting others to become falsely perceiving:
It may be that the McCanns are innocent, they were not being framed by the police but the police are incompetent and have wrongly suspected them in their child’s disappearance but by speaking with forceful conviction a scenario whose realism become increasingly real in his mind when he is only speculating not necessarily without selfish motive (because if what he postulates is true, he is innocent), he does not realize he is setting himself well on the path to future mad perception.
He cannot be certain that there was a kidnapper let alone the kidnapper was hiding behind the door as he opened to inspect the kids but by speaking with such forceful conviction as if it must be, he is conditioning himself to be certain what he cannot certain and that is courting with future mad perception.
The wise person never say the intruder MUST be behind the door, he says there may have been a intruder behind the door and he does not frequently revisit this speculation that will reinforce it as real when he cannot be certain it was what actually happened.
Not only is he flirting with future mad perception by saying he believed the intruder was hiding behind the door, he is inciting and promoting others to similarly flirt with future mad perception by believing there is an intruder behind the door when there may not have been and he thus has debts.

McCanns: How Madeleine was taken
Gerry McCann is certain the kidnapper of daughter Madeleine was hiding only feet away as he checked on his children in their holiday bedroom.
The heart specialist believes the predator may have entered the family villa through patio doors more than an hour before the alarm was raised, leaving the bedroom door ajar.
When Gerry called in, the abductor lay low in either the bathroom or the McCanns' bedroom.
He then escaped with four-year-old Madeleine through a window.


A close family source said: "Gerry is firmly of the view (you use force not reason to be firm and you are forcefully believing what may not be true is true and that is dangerous flirting with false perception) that the abductor was already hiding in the apartment when he went to check on Madeleine.

What happens when people learn new things:
People in this world change as they age and they ‘learn’ (actually copy) new things eg a person who has not played golf learns to play and become increasingly skilful at playing golf. People go to medical school to learn and train to become doctors in their own individual ways that have similarities and differences with their colleagues.
So what happens when people learn new things they have never learnt before?
Whenever ordinary people learn to say or do new things, they less frequently understand why they should say or do the things in a particular way or sequence, they never learn to do or say the new thing live with understanding why it should be so but they usually if not always observe others doing or saying it, get the hang of it or parrot like mirror image copy it into their mental hard disks, keep practicing saying or doing it until it becomes second nature and what new thing they say or do is rehashed from a copy that they keep refining in their mental hard disks. Hence they are robots who perceive the new things they want to say or do from others, keep encoding and perfecting the encoding it into their mental hard disks to reproduce by rote from their hard disk in a way they hope will impress and please others.
What they never do is understand the basis of why they do certain things eg why they put their left hand above the right on the grip because the right hand is controlling or guiding and the left is the drive for the power of the golf swing. They never understand why they should keep their feet apart at the right distance and how weight must be transferred to their left foot which is the anchor or fulcrum around which the swing is centred which is why the ball is placed ahead of the left foot because that is the spot of focussed maximal impact of the head of the club in its swing.
They never swing a golf club live specific for the occasion but they memorize how to swing in general and when they prepare themselves to hit the ball, they are dispelling potential distractions, conjuring up memory of how to hit the ball and then press the start button to automatically execute the swing that is a rehash of a recording in their mental hard disk.
The person who is not a robot, although he exists is never seen in this world, examines and understands the mechanics of a golf swing, understands why he should and should not do certain things to hit a golf ball with his club and when he executes the shot, it is not a facsimile of a recording in his mind but freshly synthesized for that particular shot based on an understanding of why he should place his hands on the grip in a particular sequence, why the ball should be in front of his left foot, why his feet should be apart, why he should balance his body with the weight leaning on his left side of his body namely left shoulder and left foot.
In the past when I hit golf balls in a robotic fashion, I did not quite understand why I was doing certain things so it was hit and miss, sometimes on some days the swing seems to click and you hit the ball very well and on other days everything seems not quite right. Nowadays, although I have abandoned golf, when I pick up a club alone by myself, I understand why I grip in a certain way, why I shift my body weight to the left side (left shoulder, hip and leg), why I keep the left arm straight and how the right hand is the guide not the drive for the swing and why the ball should be more towards the left foot. Thus understanding there is harmony in my swing and it feels right or smooth. However I have no interest in golf anymore and this is merely a point of passing interest. I do not suffer from stress and restlessness anymore so that I need to let off steam hitting balls nor do I need to impress anyone with my golfing prowess or elegance.
If you are not a robot, you remember what you learnt eg about hitting a golf ball and understand why you stand and hit it in a particular way and you may access that memory to guide you to make a shot but there is no copy of how to hit the ball in your mental jukebox that you activate to execute the shot. If you are a robot, you have recorded a copy of how to hit the ball and when you want to do so, you search, find and press the play button and your mental jukebox will automatically execute rigidly without modifications possible except if you rerecord or reprogram it.
IF YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND UNDERSTAND WHY YOU DO CERTAIN THINGS IN A CERTAIN WAY YOU CAN ACCOMPLISH IT WITH GREATER EVEN UNERRING CONSISTENCY. IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE DOING, YOU ARE MERELY DOING WHAT YOU ARE TOLD OR APING OTHERS THEN IT BECOMES HIT AND MISS, ON SOME DAYS EVERYTHING CLICKS AND YOU HIT THE BALL ‘SWEETLY’ ON OTHER DAYS YOU JUST CANNOT DO SO BECAUSE YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO.
Heading For Certain Madness:
Why is it that the person who asked me, “Why are you so rude?” is headed for certain madness, even if it is true I am so rude? If I am not rude but she did not like me because I did not say or do things that pleased and impressed her, she has slandered me by complaining to others about me and that is additional grave karma.
(If they can hate Jesus without reason, what makes you think they cannot also hate me for no reason and thus wrongfully accuse me of being rude for no reason or just because my behaviour does not conform to theirs or is not to their liking or they can perceive I am not suffering whilst they are suffering and resentful or jealous?)
Whenever a person asks another, “Why are you so rude?” and she means what she is asking, she is asking him to give her the reasons for his rudeness.
It is impossible that she meant to ask me to give her the reasons why I am so rude but what she probably if not certainly meant was, “I cannot understand why you are so rude”.
If you perceive that “why are so rude” is the same as “I cannot understand why you are so rude” then you have advanced false perception and logic that will end in uncontrollable or mad false perception and logic.

Therefore she could not have meant what she said and she did not say what she meant. If you do so, you are flirting with future madness when you uncontrollably always say what you don't mean and don't mean what you always say.

Even if she said she cannot understand why I am so rude, it is totally out of context because we were not engaged in a discussion about my rudeness but what went before was a routine impersonal service provider client transaction.
It would not be inappropriate or out of context but merely a change of topic on her part if she were to say that she finds me so rude but it is inappropriate and out of context to suddenly say, 'why are you so rude' because we were not engaged in a conversation in which I have acknowledged my rudeness so that it would be appropriate or understandable for her to ask me (in that context) why are you so rude or she cannot understand why I am so rude.
What is there to understand or not understand why I am so rude? If you truly believe you cannot understand why I am so rude you must be lying or mad because it is not difficult but quite plain why people should be rude. She need not tell me that but if she will only trouble herself a little she should surely come up with some answers as to why I should be so rude. She is obviously not mad at least not yet and therefore the purpose in her telling me she cannot understand why I am so rude is to tick me off indirectly, it was a missile to carry a warhead and that warhead is that I am rude. Again if you think that 'you cannot understand why I am so rude' is the same as 'you are rude' you have advanced false perception that will end in mad perception.
IF YOU TRULY PERCEIVE THAT YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHY I AM SO RUDE WHEN IT IS EASY TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU WILL ONLY TROUBLE YOURSELF TO THINK, THEN YOU ARE ENGAGING IN SELF DECEPTION THAT WILL END IN MADNESS.
IF YOU THINK IT IS NECESSARY TO TELL ME UNSOLICITED THAT YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHY I AM SO RUDE WHEN IT IS UNNECESSARY OR THERE ARE ULTERIOR MOTIVE OTHER THAN WHAT IS PLAIN, THEN YOU ARE ENGAGED IN WHAT IS UNNECESSARY OR MEANINGLESS THAT WILL END IN MADNESS.

WHY DOES SHE WANT TO CONFIDE IN ME UNSOLICITED, OUT OF CONTEXT THAT SHE CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHY I AM SO RUDE? DOES SHE THINK I WILL BE ABLE TO HELP HER UNDERSTAND WHY I AM SO RUDE OR IS THERE A MOTIVE THAT BELIES THE MEANING OF WHAT IS SAID? SURELY SHE MUST HAVE A MOTIVE FOR SAYING I OTHERWISE SHE IS MAD. BECAUSE SHE IS NOT MAD (YET) HER MOTIVE MUST BE THAT SHE IS MERELY USING THE STATEMENT AS A MISSILE TO CONVEY A WARHEAD THAT IS TO TICK ME OFF OR SCOLD ME IN AN INDIRECT WAY SUCH THAT IF CONFRONTED SHE CAN DENY SHE WAS ATTACKING ME, SHE CAN ARGUE THAT SH IS MERELY ASKING ME A QUESTION 'WHY ARE YOU SO RUDE', IT IS I WHO IS OVERSENSITIVE IN PERCEIVING HER INNOCUOUS QUESTION IS NASTY.
THIS IS THE RATIONALE BEHIND SARCASM, TELLING OTHERS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU MEAN, EG YOU ARE SO SMART WHEN YOU MEAN YOU ARE A BIGHEAD SO THAT IF THE PERSON TAKES ISSUE YOU CAN ALWAYS DENY AND SAY HE IS SEEING SLIGHTS WHERE THERE ARE NONE (ADDING INSULT TO INJURY).
WHEN SHE ASKED ME, 'WHY ARE YOU SO RUDE?' SHE CANNOT MEAN TO ASK ME TO GIVE HER THE REASONS WHY I AM SO RUDE BUT SHE PROBABLY IF NOT CERTAINLY MEANT SHE CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHY I AM SO RUDE AND APART FROM BEING OUT OF CONTEXT WITH THE CONVERSATION RATHER THAN A CHANGE IN TOPIC OF CONVERSATION, WHY SHOULD SHE TELL ME SHE CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHY I AM SO RUDE? IF SHE TRULY BELIEVES IT IS BEYOND HER COMPREHENSION WHY I SHOULD BE RUDE SHE IS MAD BECAUSE IF SHE WILL ONLY GIVE THE MATTER A LITTLE THOUGHT SHE WILL HAVE A GOOD IDEA WHY I SHOULD BE SO RUDE WITHOUT TROUBLING TO ASK ME THE QUESTION. THUS HER MOTIVE IN ASKING ME, WHY ARE SO RUDE' IS TICK ME OFF IN AN INDIRECT WAY, 'YOU ARE SO RUDE' WITHOUT ASSUMING RESPONSIBILITY THAT SHE CAN DENY AND EVEN ARGUE THAT I AM SEEING SLIGHTS WHERE THERE ARE NONE.
Thus the fool may be thrilled or delighted and congratulate herself how fine she has developed the art of killing others softly or strangling others with a hand in a velvet lined glove so that she may deny responsibility if confronted, but she is engaged in immaculate self and other deceit that she does not realize will end in her ultimate mad perception that shit is food and food is shit.
Thus, even if I am truly rude as she accuses me, by her deceitfulness she is doomed to insanity. In the same way, even if the McCanns are innocent, by their conduct in looking after their kids and their emotional attacking the police they are doomed to grave suffering themselves.
A Loving Feeling Is Very Rare Experience:
As simple as experiencing pleasantness in the company of another is, it may be a very rare experience in this world.
Often tension and not loving kindness that may or may not be apparent to the people involved characterises or describes the coming together of two person, even lovers.
What people mistake as loving kindness sometimes is the thrill or excitement or stirring in speed and strength of their mental force in a way to be attracted to the other person as their loving kindness.
If people are not experiencing tension just by the presence of another or they are turned off or disgusted by the presence of another, they are experiencing thrill or excitement or lust or attraction for the other person and this is not passive tireless, blissful loving kindness but its fake, emotional attraction.
AS SIMPLE AS LOVE AS A PLEASANT FEELING IS, IT MAY BE VANISHINGLY RARE IN THIS WORLD.
DON'T UNDERESTIMATE THE PRECIOUSNESS OF LOVE BEING JUST A PASSIVE PLEASANT FEELING BECAUSE IT MAY BE VIRTUALLY UNKNOWN BY PEOPLE UNDER THE RULE OF FORCE OR LIKE OR DISLIKE OR EMOTIONS IN THIS WORLD.
Kate McCann as hot lips:
Friends of the McCanns have painted Kate as a perfect parent and how the husband is very involved but the story below belies the image that they have never admitted.
Kate McCann 'renowned for alcoholic binges' at university
Last updated at 11:00am on 23rd September 2007
Kate McCann was nicknamed 'Hot Lips Healy' during her carefree student days at Dundee University.
Kate Healy, as she was then, was 'renowned for alcoholic binges and dance till you drop nocturnal activities', according to her year book of 1992.
However friends say Kate, was one of the most popular students in the medical department and have spoke of their shock at the allegations made by the Portuguese police.
One former classmate, now a doctor, said: "Kate was great fun, always up for a laugh and a party (this is not a virtue but addictive conditioning sin). She was certainly more interested in going to the pub than she was in her studies. Although she seemed to pass her exams with ease."

Her light-hearted attitude to her studies is illustrated, friends say, by the yearbook entry written by her colleagues at Dundee.
It reads: "Kate 'Scouser' Healy-chops 'ferried' over from Merseyside five years ago and rapidly became the most prominent member of the H.G. Girlies.
"Renowned for frequently indulging in alcoholic binges and 'dance till you drop' nocturnal activities, she immediately led the rest of her fellow colleagues astray.
"Hot Lips Healy maintained a consistent Friday night appearance in the Union throughout the whole of first year."
Love, discernment and wisdom:
Love is simply the absence of unnecessary intimidatory force changes in a person’s fabrications namely his perceiving, thinking, speaking and doing that is reflected in his appearance, postures, speech and motion that automatically generates a passive feeling of pleasantness in himself and all those who come into contact with him. Just because all those who come into contact with him experiences a pleasant feeling does not mean they must all love or like it but there are many who hate the pleasant feeling of love and hate the sight of the person even though his appearance generates a pleasant feeling in them. Just because a person’s appearance and behaviour generates a pleasant feeling of love in you does not mean you must unnecessarily trouble yourself and him to like him and if you do so you are harming yourself and the liked person by stirring force in your mind and transmitting force to him.
Discernment is merely superior perceiving (seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching) to perceive things clearly as they are, not as you (emotionally or forcefully) like or dislike them to be. Thus if you have discernment, you will see clearly as it is that there are constant stretching of syllables, constant changes in speed and loudness in the speech of everyone here, even the vocalizations of animals.
Wisdom is merely superior reasoning or logic (one of the only four forms of fabricating that includes perceiving, speaking and doing) that enables one to arrive at the right conclusions about a situation and therefore say or do the right thing in that situation.
Discernment or the ability to see things clearly is crucial in providing the accurate raw data or perceptions upon which the mind can work on to get the right conclusion and therefore act wisely. It is impossible for a person with poor discernment to be very wise because his perceptions are poor so how can he get the crucial right data to formulate right conclusions.
Again loving kindness is crucial in the development of discernment or seeing things clearly as they are because only a mind free from the constant harassment of force and experiencing pleasantness can see clearly. But just because you are very loving kind does not necessary mean you must also be very discerning and wise. Just because you are very discerning does not mean you must be very wise, able to integrate what you discern well to get wise conclusions and act in speech and deed according to the wise conclusions.
YOU CANNOT BE VERY DISCERNING IF YOU ARE NOT VERY LOVING KIND, YOU CANNOT BE VERY WISE IF YOU ARE NOT VERY DISCERNING (SEE THINGS CLEARLY AS THEY ARE) BUT JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE VERY LOVING KIND DOES NOT MEAN YOU MUST BE VERY DISCERNING AND JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE VERY DISCERNING DOES NOT MEAN YOU MUST BE VERY WISE. LOVING KINDNESS PRECEDES DISCERNMENT THAT IN TURN PRECEDES WISDOM.
Just because you are discerning, you can see stretching of syllables, changes of speed and loudness in your speech and that of everyone else does not mean you will be wise to make the conclusion that these are the only sources that can be eliminated to the stress, restlessness and distraction that beset all ordinary people.
Just because you are discerning, you can see stretching of syllables, changes of speed and loudness in your speech and that of everyone else does not mean you will be wise to make the conclusion that these ingredients are the only basis for the different styles of everyone here. What people call their styles in speech is little more than the way that differs from others but is consistent in them with which they always stretch their syllables, change speed and loudness.
Just because you are very wise does not mean you will and can effortlessly suspend thinking when it is not necessary. Wisdom is a necessary prerequisite to the stopping of all thinking even though conscious but suspension of thinking does not automatically follow wisdom.
Just because you can suspend thinking when conscious does not mean you can develop neither perceiving nor not perceiving although suspension of thinking is a prerequisite to neither perceive nor not perceive.
Just because you can neither perceive nor not perceive does not mean you will be perfectly equanimous and disenchanted but neither perceiving nor not perceiving is a crucial prerequisite to equanimity and disenchantment with existence.
It is not discernment but wisdom or good reasoning that enables a person to arrive at the conclusion that Kate McCann’s seemingly compelling hysterics when announcing Madeleine's disappearance is not necessarily because Madeleine is genuinely kidnapped but it may be because she is grieving for her devastating accidental death and the reason why professional actors are less convincing on screen is because they are grieving for tragedy that did not occur, the child whose loss they grieve are not the actor’s child and it is not truly lost.
THUS THERE MAY BE A HIERARCHY OF LOFTY QUALITIES OF A BEING WITH LOVING KINDNESS AT THE BASE, ACCORDING A BEING ONE EON AS A FORMED BEING IN HEAVEN AND NEITHER PERCEIVING NOR NOT PERCEIVING ACCORDING EVEN 60,000 EONS IN FORMLESS BLISS AS A BRAHMA. HOW HIGH YOU PENETRATE UP THE HEAVENLY REALMS DEPENDS ON HOW HIGH YOU DEVELOP THE DESIRABLE QUALITIES OF DISCERNMENT, WISDOM, SUSPENSION OF THINKING, NEITHER PERCEIVING NOR NOT PERCEIVING.
The seven factors of awakening:
Whoever you are, whether Christian, Muslim or Buddhist, whether a lowly being here or in heaven, the truth may be that you are asleep and ignorant not in bliss but in relative or absolute suffering and in danger of future suffering far graver and extended that you can imagine.
The suffering of beings here may be compared to a tangled ball of threads wherein they can see no head or tail or a way out of their tormenting entanglement and in this case the only way out of the suffering is to search, however hard for the head or end of the thread at the surface that will enable you to unravel the tangled mass and escape woe.
In the same way, if you are suffering and in danger of grave future suffering there is only one way out and that is according to what the Buddha described, namely the seven factors of awakening that must occur in sequence of one factor leading to the next, never from the last leading to the first but the first leading to the second, third, etc.
According to the Buddha, all beings are trapped in existence, asleep and suffering either in an absolute sense (in the lower realms) or relative sense (in the higher realms) and the only recourse is to awaken oneself and there is only one way to awaken oneself.
Thus if you are suffering from stress, restlessness and distraction and you find them disagreeable, you must pay attention to the right things (arousing mindfulness as the first factor) namely how you speak and do things.
After you have become mindful about how you speak or do things, you must arouse analysis of qualities or examination of how you speak as the second factor of awakening to detect the presence of stretching, changes of speed and loudness that initially you can only detect poorly haphazardly only when it is blatant but increasingly through persistence as the third aroused factor of awakening, you can detect consistently even in subtle amounts.
Once you have persistently analysed by paying attention to how you speak, you will become aware of and be able to put to a stop significant proportions of the formerly mindless forceful stretching, changing speed and loudness to experience an appreciable release from suffering so that rapture or pleasant feeling that is not of the flesh of the mind and body as the fourth factor of awakening is aroused.
Once the being has experienced rapture or pleasantness that is not of the flesh for a sustained period, his mind and body becomes calm or less restless and serenity as the fifth factor of awakening is aroused.
Just as the turbid suspension of muddy water settles if it is allowed to stand or remain still, in the same way, turbidity of the mind settles and the mind becomes concentrated, concentration as the sixth factor is aroused.
It is in the nature of things that a mind that is concentrated, pure, becomes equanimous, neither likes nor dislikes and equanimity as the seventh and final factor of awakening is aroused.
Thus without developing in sequence mindfulness, examination of things, persistence, rapture, serenity and concentration you cannot develop true equanimity and you are a fool if you try to force yourself to neither like nor dislike because this state automatically arises at the end of the development of the seven factors of awakening.
THEREFORE WHOEVER YOU ARE, UNLESS YOU ENJOY SUFFERING STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION, YOU MUST PAY PERSISTENT ATTENTION TO EXAMINE FOR AND MAKE SUSTAINED EFFORT TO ERADICATE THE MINDLESS AUTOMATED STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS THAT IS THE BASIS OF YOUR STYLE. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR A STYLISH PERSON WHO STRETCHES SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS NOT TO SUFFER FROM STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION THAT ALSO CONDITIONS AND DESTROYS HIS MIND AND HE IS HEADED FOR THE CLIFF NOT HEAVEN.
The Buddha:
"[1] On whatever occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress, on that occasion his mindfulness is steady & without lapse, then mindfulness as a factor of awakening becomes aroused. He develops it and goes to the culmination of its development.
"[2] Remaining mindful, he examines & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment. When he remains mindful in this way, examining, & coming to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then analysis of qualities as a factor of awakening becomes aroused.
"[3] In one who examines, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, unflagging persistence is aroused. When unflagging persistence is aroused in one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then persistence as a factor of awakening becomes aroused.
"[4] In one whose persistence is aroused, a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises. When a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises in one whose persistence is aroused, then rapture as a factor of awakening becomes aroused.
"[5] For one who is enraptured, the body grows calm and the mind grows calm. When the body & mind of an enraptured monk grow calm, then serenity as a factor of awakening becomes aroused.
"[6] For one who is at ease -- his body calmed -- the mind becomes concentrated. When the mind of one who is at ease -- his body calmed -- becomes concentrated, then concentration as a factor of awakening becomes aroused.
"[7] He oversees the mind thus concentrated with equanimity. When he oversees the mind thus concentrated with equanimity, equanimity as a factor of awakening becomes aroused.
Like and dislike likened to a golf swing:
Golfers who have lost their right arms can develop quite a competent golf swing by just using their left arm but the swing is usually less controlled or consistent and less powerful because as the golfer tries to drive harder, the absence of control by a right hand makes it very erratic.
In one who is right handed swinging correctly the left arm provides the power for the swing whilst the right arm and hand provides the control of that swing and when the swing of the left arm is under the proper control of the right arm the golfer experiences a liked or attractive swing.
The power of the swing provided by the left hand can be compared to the force of going against self that powers all fabrications in the minds of beings whilst the forceful control provided by the right hand can be compared to the control provided by the force of self preservation in the person’s mind.
IF A GOLF SWING POWERED BY THE LEFT HAND (FORCE OF GOING AGAINST SELF) IS WELL CONTROLLED BY THE RIGHT HAND (FORCE OF SELF PRESERVATION) IT IS EXPERIENCED AS LIKE IN THAT GOLFER.
IF A GOLF SWING POWERED BY THE LEFT HAND (FORCE OF GOING AGAINST SELF) IS POORLY CONTROLLED OR OUT OF CONTROL BY THE RIGHT HAND (FORCE OF SELF PRESERVATION) IT IS EXPERIENCED AS DISLIKE IN THAT GOLFER.
WHENEVER A PERSON’S FORCE OF GOING AGAINST SELF STIRS IN SPEED AND STRENGTH WELL UNDER THE CONTROL OF HIS FORCE OF SELF PRESERVATION ON UNDERTAKING SOMETHING EG ON SEEING A PERSON OR WRITING AN ESSAY, THE PERSON EXPERIENCES LIKING FOR WHAT IS DOING OR THE OBJECT HE IS SEEING.
WHENEVER A PERSON’S FORCE OF GOING AGAINST SELF STIRS IN SPEED AND STRENGTH POORLY OR OUT OF TCONTROL OF HIS FORCE OF SELF PRESERVATION ON UNDERTAKING SOMETHING EG ON SEEING A PERSON OR SWEEPING THE FLOOR, THE PERSON EXPERIENCES DISLIKE FOR WHAT IS DOING OR THE OBJECT HE IS SEEING.
I saw Madeleine in Morocco:
Quote witness: I saw Madeleine in Morocco.
Comment: This statement is careless and fraught with karma apart from being the path to future mad perception.
Unless the person has asked the girl are you Madeleine and she has confirmed she is or there is documentation that she is, then you can only say that you saw a girl that looked like Madeleine in Morocco.
By saying so, you are presumptuous and may mislead those gullible to think so apart from conditioning yourself to perceive what may not be true is true.
Nanny says Kate screamed they have taken her:
Reports say nanny contradicted Kate by saying she did yell they have taken her that may indicate either she is presumptuous or she is unwittingly exposing her complicity by being too eager to want others to believe in a kidnapping.
She believed Kate’s grief is genuine but she too may be fooled that just because it is genuine she is innocent because there may be a genuine basis for her anguish if Kate knew Madeleine was dead, forever gone.
Apparently the prosecutor has told police that unless they find the body, there will be no prosecution, so just because they are not prosecuted does not mean they are innocent.
Kate McCann DID scream 'They've taken her' claims new nanny witness
By DAN NEWLING - Last updated at 00:31am on 25th September 2007
The first eyewitness account of the frantic moments after Madeleine McCann disappeared can be revealed today.
Nanny Charlotte Pennington confirms that Kate McCann did scream: "They've taken her, they've taken her!"
The mother's precise words have become a pivotal issue in the case, with Portuguese police questioning why she would automatically assume Maddie had been abducted.
Mrs McCann's family have countered this by insisting they recall her shouting: "Madeleine's gone."
Kate McCann: 'She was a 'broken woman' in the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance
Miss Pennington, however, one of the first people to set foot in the couple's apartment after the disappearance, says she heard the mother use both phrases.
The 20-year-old Briton, who tended children for the Mark Warner holiday complex in Praia da Luz, firmly believes the McCanns are innocent.
Speaking publicly for the first time yesterday, she described Mrs McCann in the aftermath as "a broken woman" who was shuddering and unable to move.
"We are trained to comfort people in this type of situation but she was just inconsolable," she said.
Miss Pennington is considered a vital witness by Portuguese detectives with whom she spent more than four-and-a-half hours giving a statement
First do no harm:
If you agree that love is about benefiting the other person and making him or her happy then before you talk about loving or making the other person happy you must do the other person no harm and that is impossible if your appearance, postures, speech and motion transmit unnecessary forceful prolonging, changes in speed, direction and strength of force that creates harmful stress, restlessness and distraction in the one you love.
Therefore whatever else love may contain, it must include behaviour that does not harm by causing stress, restlessness and distraction and that mandates you do not use force to prolong, change speed, direction and strength of force in order to project your style that is for show to impress, please, intimidate or dominate.
Whatever else the love experience may be, it must include the passive or force free feeling of pleasantness that comes from contact with a loving person whose appearance, postures, speech and motion does not stir one's mental force, does not causes one stress, restlessness and distraction.
Anyone who says that love defies definition, is indefinable, is mistaking emotion or passion for love and has wrong view that leads not to heaven but hell or the animal womb because whatever is true, can happen is knowable and can be defined such and such is love.
On the other hand if you believe it is possible to both love the other person and impart harmful stress, restlessness and distraction on him then you may be right or you may be entertaining something absurd or that makes no sense that you can nevertheless love the person whilst you are killing him off with stress, restlessness and distraction.
YOU WANT TO TALK BIG ABOUT LOVE BUT FIRST DO NO HARM TO THE OTHER PERSON BY NOT BOMBARDING HIM WITH UNNECESSARY FORCE CHANGES LIKE USING FORCE TO STRETCH SYLLABLES, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS WHICH KILLS HIM WITH STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION MAKING YOUR BIG TALK ABOUT LOVE HYPOCRITICAL AND NONSENSE (MAKES NO SENSE). AFTER YOU HAVE ACHIEVED DOING HIM NO HARM YOU MAY THEN COME TO A REALIZATION THAT LOVE IS ACTUALLY VERY SIMPLE, IT IS THE PLEASANT EVEN EXTREMELY PLEASANT PASSIVE FEELING FREE FROM ALL FORCE ENGENDERED BY THE PRESENCE OF THAT LOVED PERSON AND WHAT HE SAYS OR DOES TO YOU.
THE TRUTH MAY BE THAT LOVING KINDNESS IS JUST THE FIRST STEP OF THE LADDER OF WHOLESOMENESS THAT LEADS TO DISCERNMENT THENCE WISDOM THENCE CESSATION OF THOUGHTS THENCE NEITHER PERCEIVING NOR NOT PERCEIVING, CALMNESS, CONCENTRATION AND EQUANIMITY.
YOU THINK YOUR MIND IS QUITE CONCENTRATED BUT IT MAY BE LIKE A FLICKERING CANDLE COMPARED TO THE INCANDESCENT SUN THAT IS GOD’S MIND.
You cannot be whiter than white:
You cannot be whiter than white. If you believe it is possible to be whiter than white then you may be right or you are deluded believing there is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow that is never there.
Similarly you cannot love another person more than not stressing, making restless and distracting him and that can only happen if your appearance, poses, speech and motion does not transmit the unnecessary use of force to prolong, change speed, direction and strength of force. If you think there is more to love, it is indescribable, out of this world, etc then you may be right or deluded believing there is a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow that is not there.
Eons may come, eons may go:
Eons (lasting billions of years) may come and eons may go but through it all nirvana which exists unchanged & unchanging, free from all suffering and it is possible for a being to unbind himself from the unsatisfactory, suffering even to tormenting intensities world of individual existence to return to the unchanging centre.
In the centre of every rotating disc or wheel there must be a paradoxically un-rotating centre because if the centre rotates it is no longer the centre but part of the rotating disc. Even if the disc is imperfect and wobbles, the centre moves in location with the disc but still never rotates. This infinitesimal or vanishing point that must be at the heart of every rotating disc may be compared with nirvana that the Buddha described that in the midst of ceaseless ultimately meaningless false changing there lies an unchanging changeless true heart.
PARADOXICALLY AT THE HEART OF EVERY EVEN FURIOUSLY ROTATING DISC, THERE MUST BE A HEART THAT DOES NOT ROTATE OTHERWISE IT WOULD NOT BE THE CENTRE BUT JUST A PART OF THAT ROTATING DISC, SIMILARLY WELL HIDDEN, AT THE HEART OF THE REALM OF ENDLESS CHANGE CALLED EXISTING THERE MUST BE AN UNCHANGING HEART CALLED NIBBANA.
Then, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
There is that sphere where there is neither earth nor water nor fire nor wind; neither sphere (realm) of the infinitude of space nor sphere of the infinitude of consciousness nor sphere of nothingness nor sphere of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world nor the next world nor sun nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming nor going nor stasis; neither passing away nor arising: without stance, without foundation, without support (mental object. This, just this is the end of stress.
Nibbana Sutta: Total Unbinding (3)
There is, monks, an unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated. If there were not that unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born -- become -- made -- fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn -- unbecome -- unmade -- unfabricated, emancipation from the born -- become -- made -- fabricated is discerned.

Dvayatanupassana Sutta: The Noble One's Happiness
"See how the world together with the devas (angels) has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is(actually) quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones know as true. Indeed, by the penetration the truth, they are completely stilled and realize deliverance.
"Forms, sounds, tastes, scents, bodily contacts and ideas which are agreeable and charming, all these, while they last, are deemed to be happiness by the world. But when they cease that is agreed by all to be unsatisfactory. By the Noble Ones, the cessation of the existing body is seen as happiness.
"What others call happiness that the Noble Ones declare to be suffering. What others call suffering that the Noble Ones have found to be happiness. See how difficult it is to understand the Dhamma. For those under the veil (of ignorance) it is obscured, for those who cannot see it is utter darkness. But for the good and the wise it is as obvious as the light for those who can see. Even though close to it, the witless who do not know the Dhamma, do not comprehend it.
"By those overcome by attachment to existence, those who drift with the stream of existence this Dhamma is not properly understood. Who other than the Noble Ones are fit to fully understand that state, by perfect knowledge of which they realize final deliverance, free from defilements?
(Style or stretching syllables, changing speed & loudness, liking and disliking, smiling and laughter are called happiness by ordinary people, even those who call themselves good and wise but I call it suffering, stress, restless and distracting. To not have style, not like and dislike, not smile and laugh I call happiness. Hence by the Buddha’s definition, here as in many other places, I am a noble person and if you speak against or disagree with a noble one, you are headed for perdition according to the Buddha because you have wrong view and the destination for wrong view according to the Buddha is not heaven but hell or the animal womb)
IT IS NOT THE COMMISSIONING OF MIRACLES THAT QUALIFIES ONE AS A SAINT AS THE CHURCH TEACHES BUT I THINK JESUS SAID HE WAS AUTHORIZED BY HIS FATHER TO PERFORM MIRACLES NOT WITHOUT REASON BUT FOR A PURPOSE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THIS WORLD IS NOT SACROSANCT OR IMMUTABLE. WHAT QUALIFIES A PERSON AS A SAINT IS HIS BEING VIRTUOUS (NOT STEALING, KILLING, TELLING LIES, INDULGING IN INTOXICANTS AND ILLICIT SEX), DISCERNMENT AND WISDOM.
Who is the greatest in heaven?
Jesus did not say he who performs the most miracles is the greatest in heaven but he said he who would be greatest shall be the servant to the rest. Thus the church is misleading people to seek miracles as a sign of holyness.
The Buddha said there are three miracles, the miracle of pyschic powers, mind reading (clairvoyance) and teaching and of the three, the miracle of teaching is the highest.
What is the difference?

This smiling, seemingly affable man in all likelihood murdered his wife in New Zealand.
So what is the difference in his demeanour compared to the McCanns that makes him almost certainly his wife’s murderer and the McCanns impossible as ‘accidental’ murderers and cover-up liars?
For one who discerns the smiling face above is a mask or lie to impress others how wholesome and friendly he is not. If everything pleases him, he is your greatest friend but if things go wrong he is your greatest fiend not friend.
In the same way the McCanns may not have done it, but you have wrong view if you think they are honest people incapable of deceit.
Baby brings couple luck:
It was said in conjunction with a couple winning the prize of a car and some gold that the birth of a baby brought them luck.
As a result they are likely to perceive the child as lucky that is not without danger as they may make future bets based on what the baby thinks is good and thereby lose a lot of money, whilst they also encourage others to believe that things and children can bring luck or misfortune.
Did God or some reliable authority state your winning the prize is because the baby is lucky? If you have not proof that the child is indeed the source of the fortune, you are dicing with future mad perception to attribute your windfall to him.
Similarly if you perceive the birth of a child brought bad luck you may abuse and victimize her accruing karma whilst reinforcing false perception in you.
The person who lets his yes be yes only accepts his good fortune and accepts his new child and does not jump to the unwarranted conclusion that baby brings luck.
Even worse than me:
When you ask me ‘why are you so rude’, you are implying I am bad but assuming what you conclude is true that I am rude, you are no better because you are also bad to me.
BY ASKING ME ‘WHY ARE YOU SO RUDE’ YOU ARE NOT JUST DISHONEST IN GOING BY AN INDIRECT WAY TO SLAP ME TO SAY I AM RUDE BUT YOU ARE ASKING ME A DIFFICULT IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE QUESTION TO ANSWER. IF YOU THINK THAT IS A SIMPLE AND PERFECTLY POSSIBLE QUESTION TO ANSWER WITH FULL COMPOSURE, WAIT UNTIL YOU ARE ON THE RECEIVING END OF SUCH QUESTIONS. YOU EXPECT ME TO TAKE IT ON A CHIN AND SMILE AND ACT AS IF I APPRECIATE YOUR AS IF CONCERNED QUESTION WHY AM I SO RUDE OR JOVIALLY DISMISS IT AS MISTAKEN?
THEREFORE YOU ARE DELUDED IF YOU THINK YOU ARE BETTER THAN ME BECAUSE YOU ARE WORSE, WHEREAS I MAY HAVE BEEN NASTY TO YOU BY BEING RUDE, YOU ARE NOT JUST NASTY BY ACCUSING ME OF BEING RUDE BUT YOU ARE ALSO ASKING ME A DIFFICULT IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE QUESTION TO ANSWER AND YOU EVEN EXPECT ME TO MAINTAIN MY COMPOSURE. WAIT UNTIL YOU ARE ON THE RECEIVING END OF OTHER PEOPLE’S FOOD MIXED WITH SHIT AND SEE IF YOU CAN REACT WITH COMPOSURE AS YOU EXPECT ME TO BE GRATEFUL TO YOUR VEILED QUESTION.
All rotating discs must have a centre:
Everything that revolves no matter how crude that disc or revolving object is, must revolve around a centre that must not revolve even though it is part of that the disc because if the centre was to revolve it cannot be the true centre but there must be something within it that it revolves around that is then the true centre, not the centre that also revolves.
THEREFORE, JUST AS EVERY ROTATING DISC NO MATTER HOW CRUDE MUST HAVE A CENTRE THAT DOES NOT REVOLVE AMIDST ALL THE ROTATING AROUND IT, EVEN SO IN THIS WORLD OF CONSTANT CHANGE THERE MAY BE OR MUST BE A CENTRE THAT REMAINS UNMOVED, UNCHANGED THAT MAY BE WHAT THE BUDDHA IS DESCRIBING.
JUST AS THE ROTATING SPEED IS MAXIMAL AT THE EDGE AND PROGRESSIVELY SLOWS DOWN UNTIL IT STOPS WHEN THE CENTRE IS FINALLY REACHED, IN THE SAME WAY THE CHANGE IS THE MOST FRANTIC IN THE LOWER REALMS AND MORE SLOW AND ORDERLY TOWARDS THE HIGHER REALMS IN HEAVEN UNTIL IT FINALLY STOPS WITH NIBBANA.
Provoking me:
Although I may have been rude, I was not specifically rude nor did I challenge her nor camouflage my rudeness and pretend it was good for her.
By asking me a question, why I am so rude, you are always challenging me to give an answer, to either admit I am rude and therefore tacitly apologize or to refute or argue.
If the person just tells me I am rude, she is not necessarily challenging me to reply but just giving me a piece of her mind.
It cannot be possibly my rudeness pleased her but it upset her and therefore she is sick if she thinks her question can be driven by concern for me for my rudeness and the apparently sedate way she asked why I am so rude is driven by her goodwill, by a genuine desire to understand what motivates my rudeness.
There are many in this world who have learnt how to ask others questions they know are difficult or sensitive or personal not because they are concerned for you but to see you squirm or embarrassed like ‘why are you not married?’, ‘why you don’t have children’, ‘when are you going to marry?’, etc because they like to make and see others suffer.
When you are pulling the trigger you may not experience any pain apart from the rifle’s recoil and the explosion of the shot but it is the pig that will feel the full impact of the bullet and pay for it with its life. Wait until it is your turn to have the role reversed to become the pig and see if you will be so cavalier about pulling the trigger. You are upset that I unceremoniously told you to get out, wait until you are at the receiving end of others veiled concern for you.
You may say you behaved such because I provoked you by being rude. I certainly did not use foul language like ‘sob’ or four letter words, but by asking me why I am so rude, you have demonstrated objectively not just that you are no better than me but you are worse, you want to poison me and cause me unnecessary trouble as to compose a reply to your unnecessary question because surely if you will trouble yourself a little you can work out for yourself without asking me, why I am so rude.
FACED WITH THIS SITUATION MOST ORDINARY PEOPLE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CORRECTLY DISTRIBUTE BLAME AND THEY ARE LIKELY TO WRONGFULLY FEEL GUILTY AND SO YOU CAN SEE SUCH A PERSON IS WICKED, SOWING DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY, WRONG GUILT IN OTHERS. IT IS BECAUSE I CAN REASON CLEARLY THAT I KNOW THAT I AM NOT TO BLAME, SHE IS ENTIRELY BLAMEWORTHY AND WORSE THAN ME EVEN IF I WAS RUDE TO HER.
Very easy to ask, much harder to answer:
It is very easy to ask questions, even gently as if concerned or friendly, especially if you are the type who like to put others in an awkward position like ‘do you wear underwear or bras, do you take a bath every day, how much money do you make’, ‘do you sleep with your wife’ but wait until you become a target for others’ relentless facile questions accompanied by a smile as if they are your greatest and concerned benefactors and see if in that position you won’t get a heart attack.
Humiliate yourself or make my day:
Rather than being unkind to people, even I may actually sometimes underestimate how venomous the usually hidden intentions of some people are because by nature I am not proud and therefore may fail to fully understand why people who may be proud have an even irrational urge to shame others. Also I do not go around looking for a fight and therefore do not realize there are people including women who actually actively either consciously or unconsciously go around looking for verbal or physical fights.
Thus it is only now that it has dawned on me what may have been the true motivations for this woman to ask me out of the blue, “Why are you so rude?”
She may have been irked or disliked the way I treated her that is basically the usual way I treat other patients but it did not meet her expectations and just as the character played by Clint Eastwood might coolly say to the thug who is tempted to draw his gun, 'make her day', she is challenging me to by foolishly getting sucked in to argue with her because she may have a sharp tongue honed from much previous verbal combats and sizing me up as easy meat, she thinks she can cut me down to size verbally or give me a dressing down and get the cheap thrill of verbally conquest.
Few if any people will admit they are rude and then give the reasons why they are rude in this situation and what is to be expected is that they will get angry and deny they are rude or ask in what ways they have been rude that will give her the excuse to launch into a dressing down discourse of the many ways I have been rude to give her the perverse pleasure of shaming me.
Outwardly her intention appears to be politely to request for me to admit I am rude and then trouble myself to give her the reasons why I am rude thereby humiliating myself because being a proud person herself she presumptuously thinks that everyone who is forced to confess to being rude must be shamed and that is pleasure to her but this unlikely to be her real intention because surely she knows what she is proposing is a pill too bitter for others to swallow and the usual recourse for the other person is to engage her in a argument and that may be what she is relishing because she is confident in her skills at verbal combat just as Mike Tyson is confident he can beat most if not all people to a pulp if they were foolish enough to challenge him to a brawl.
What I did in reply was not what she would usually expect because I told her curtly to 'get out' instead of being drawn to defend myself and thus in a huff and being a very proud person she had to retaliate by first with holding payment for my services and then still simmering with vengefulness she lodged a complaint through her company not immediately but some months later that may reflect hesitation like a tug of war between an urge for revenge and the absurdity of making a mountain out of a molehill.
A person who is not looking for a fight would just bear whatever rudeness and make a quick exit never to return or if she is in such a huff, she may angrily say as a parting note, “I find you very rude!” and therefore by asking me “Why I am so rude” she is expecting an answer and that can only mean hoping for and relishing an argument in which she can point out to me the many ways I am rude and therefore give her satisfaction for humiliating me.
People everywhere are being rude be it driving or in business transactions or even with their loved ones (eg son to mother) and unless you are looking for a fight you don't go around telling them they are rude or asking them for explanations for their rudeness because you must be very stupid if you cannot work the reasons why people might be rude and it serves little useful purpose because they are not going to alter their behaviour just because you tell them they are rude or they tell you why they are rude. Instead you tell others they are rude if you want to scold them, you want to make them angry or shamed and to vent your anger at their not behaving according to your taste. And when you are asking them to tell you why they are rude, unless you are a great fool, you must realize you are issuing a challenge to them to defend themselves. If she thinks I am street fighter, I have a sharp tongue, she would think twice before provoking me thus and it is because she thinks I am easy meat, someone she can verbally beat to a pulp that she elected to challenge me to defend my conduct.
UNLESS YOU ARE VERY STUPID, THE REASON YOU ASK SOMEONE WHY HE IS SO RUDE IS TO EXTRACT AN ANSWER AND THAT MEANS POTENTIALLY IF NOT CERTAINLY VERBAL COMBAT AND AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU, IF YOU HAVE A SHARP TONGUE, TO DRESS HIM DOWN COMPLETELY ON THE MANY WAYS YOU THINK HE IS RUDE.
It is relatively easy or much easier for her to maintain her cool because she is the person who is attacking who only need to compose and issue the questions and then point out shameful rude things the other person is alleged to have done but it is much harder for the other person to remain calm because he is under fire and should he lose his cool in the midst of argument to become really rude (as is likely), then he would not only have been made to suffer by getting thus angry but his rudeness under fire would have vindicated her.
It is a generalization or unconscious mental rule that has some truth women have sharper tongues, talk more and engage in gossip and backbiting more. What people with sharp tongues that like to use to attack others that it is now largely involuntary, driven by an urge that they find hard to resist not realize it is possible for their tongues to be cut or for them to contract a fungating cancer of the tongue wherein they have a foul putrid mass that prevents them from closing their mouth, talk and swallow not just for one day but even years as they slowly starve to death as a social pariah.
IT IS ONLY NOW THAT IT HAS DAWNED ON ME WHAT MIGHT HAVE TRANSPIRED ON THAT DAY. SHE MAY BE A VERBAL STREETFIGHTER LOOKING FOR A VERBAL FIGHT. SHE DID NOT LIKE THE WAY AND WHAT I SAID TO HER THAT IS THE USUAL WAY I CONDUCT MYSELF AND SHE WAS LOOKING FOR AN EXCUSE TO GET ME TO ENGAGE HER IN AN ARGUMENT IN WHICH SHE WAS CONFIDENT SHE WOULD WIN AND GIVE HER THE THRILL OF CONQUEST BY SHAMING ME WITH A LIST OF ALL THE WAYS WHY SHE THINKS I AM RUDE. HER PURPOSE IN ASKING ME THAT QUESTION IS NOT FOR ME TO CONTRITELY GIVE HER THE REASONS WHY I AM RUDE BUT SO THAT I WOULD BE SUCKED IN AS IS THE USUAL COURSE EVENT LIKE SOMEONE WOULD ASK, 'WHY DO YOU THINK I AM RUDE' AND THEN SHE CAN OPEN FIRE TO SCOLD ME BY GIVING ME HER LIST OF GRIEVANCES.
Her conduct is truly wicked because not only has she created unnecessary emotional suffering for herself and others by thus complaining instead of just accepting the alleged rudeness of others as a fact of life, she is trying to sow the seed of doubt and guilt in me that perhaps I was indeed rude to her. As I have said, the way I treated her is the usual way I treat others and I certainly did not use four letter words, utter obscenities or made lewd jokes to her so she may asking for too much in thinking I am rude to her. Perhaps she expects I should show eagerness or delight or dramatic concern in the way I talk to her. A lesser person whose memory of the episode is vague would be shaken to entertain doubt that perhaps she has a point, maybe I was rude. Thus she would have unfairly sown emotional doubt and guilt that is not only suffering but addictive and that person may never exit that emotional doubt and uncertainty and guilt that she has un-righteously sown and that is wicked and karma accruing.
I CANNOT BE RUDE:
A person’s way of speaking can only be harsh and therefore rude if it contains constant forceful stretching, changes of speed and loudness and because I do not do so, you have advanced false perception if you think the way I speak can be rude.
What a person say can only be rude if it is insulting, sarcastic, contains foul words, off colour or lewd jokes and because I do not indulge in such practices you must be very hard to please if you consider what I say rude.
Just because I did not oblige you with a discourse of why you should be experiencing giddiness which you may not understand even if I tried does not mean I am rude or do not care. If your giddiness though distressing is not life threatening and the correct explanation will not make any difference, I have no obligation to waste my energy trying to explain to you and I am not rude or not caring for not doing so but instead you expect too much of others.
IT IS A DELUSION IF MOST PEOPLE THINK THEY DO NOT WANT TO HURT OTHERS, WHATEVER HURT THEY DO TO OTHERS IS UNINTENTIONAL BECAUSE OFTEN THEY INTENTIONALLY WANT TO HURT OTHERS, ENJOY SEEING OTHERS SUFFER AND OFTEN THEY ARE MISGUIDED, THEY THINK THAT THE SOFT GENTLE MELODIC WAY THEY SPEAK, THEIR SMILES AND EXPRESSED LIKING IS GOOD FOR OTHERS WHEN THEY HURT OTHERS.
Wanting controlled tension not easefulness:
If people think they love easefulness they are engaged in immaculate self deceit because they loath true easefulness and cherish controlled tension.
If you watch people caught in traffic jams or waiting for the traffic lights to turn, they may arch their backs back and rest their heads on their raised joined palms or fold their arms stiffly across their chests, rest their arms on the sill or tap their fingers on the wheel. Rather than easeful they are stoking and controlling their innate restlessness and tension. A truly restful posture would be to let the arms rest by their sides without clenching or motion but the reason why people never adopt such truly easeful positions is because there is a lot of force or innate tension that prevents them, not because resting their heads on their hands is easeful but it itself stirs tension that then cause to shift to another controlled tense position like wrapping their arm over the window sill or tapping the steering wheel.
THUS IT IS A MYTH THAT PEOPLE LIKE TRUE LOVE OR THE FEELING OF PLEASANTNESS OR EASEFULNESS BUT THERE IS CONSIDERABLE RESIDENT CONSTANT TENSION THAT PREVENTS THEM ADOPTING BODY POSTURES THAT ARE TRULY NEUTRAL AND EASEFUL AND FROM LIKING THE PLEASANT FEELING BUT THEIR RESIDENT TENSION FORCES THEM TO ADOPT UNNATURAL AND TENSION STIRRING POSTURES LIKE HOLDING THE BACK OFTHEIR HEADS IN THEIR HANDS AND HATE TRUE PLEASANTNESS.
Making others happy?
Anyone who is stressed, restless and distracted (cannot concentrate) is not enjoying himself here but suffering.
Therefore, whether you realize it or not, if you demeanour, speech and motion contain forceful stretching, changes in speed and strength of force that causes stress, restlessness and distraction in your loved one you cannot be making her happy except in your abiding delusion you can.
Thus, whatever else you might like to talk big about what love is all about, you must make your loved one happy and that means you must not make her stressed, restless and distracted and that means you must not have forceful stretching, changes of speed and strength of force in your speech and motion that can be imparted on her.
THEREFORE A CRUCIAL IF NOT MAJOR PART OF LOVE IS SAYING AND DOING THINGS WITHOUT FORCEFUL STRETCHING, CHANGES IN SPEED AND LOUDNESS THAT DOES NOT IMPART STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION ON YOUR LOVED ONE SO THAT SHE EXPERIENCES AN EFFORTLESS PLEASANT PASSIVE FEELING IN YOUR PRESENCE.
No straight lines in this world:
However straight a line may appear, it may ultimately be curved, the only difference is that the radius is extremely long and whatever is curved is curved around a centre that is not turning like the curved line is.
Hence whatever motion and indeed activity in this physical world is curved to greater or lesser extent and whatever is curved is rotating around a centre that does not rotate or move and just as ordinary people absorbed in this world are unaware this so, in the same way they are unaware that at the centre of this world of becoming that is constantly falsely changing there is a heart that remains unchanged, unchanging from all beings big and small originate and to which they must return if they are to make a final end to suffering and fruitless vexations.