Starting to start

Quote Madonna in song: I am starting to start moving out.
Comment: Ordinary people might be fascinated by such a statement and that is liking or the stirring of their mental forces attractively that has nothing to do with reason or understanding.
Starting to start makes no sense, you can only start but if you force yourself enough you might soon start to perceive perhaps it is possible to start to start. Thus people are kidding themselves if they think they do not speak nonsense. They do it far more frequently than they realize.
The motive of saying that is to deceive or confuse or puzzle others and that is never guided by reason but driven by ill will to be mischievous.
(A PERSON WHO IS A ROBOT NEED MENTAL RULES OR ORDERS TO SAY OR DO THINGS. THEY CANNOT DO OR SAY THINGS WITHOUT ORDERS. IN A GIVEN SITUATION IT OCCURS IN THEIR MINDS: DO THIS OR SAY THIS OR DO THIS AND SAY THAT AND THEY OBEY AND CARRY OUT)
A computer does not know anything:
A computer cannot and does not know or understand anything, it merely carries out what it has been instructed to do, it does not understand what it is doing.
And thus if a person is a robot or jukebox operator, he cannot or does not know anything, he merely carries out what he has instructed or society has instructed him to do.
This may be or is the situation with most ordinary people who do not realize that their thinking is merely applying rules and they perceive there are rules in their minds and they are obeying those rules they are reasoning or understanding what they do when they are merely voyeurs and disk jockeys who are sometimes bypassed by their jukeboxes that automatically render the pre-recorded sequence for him without being ordered).
However sophisticated your Vista computer is, if you think it knows and understands you have false perception. In the same way no matter how sophisticated human robots are, if you think they understand and know you may be deluding yourself because even the very intellectual ones fall under the ambit of what Jesus described as seeing they do not see, hearing they do not hear.
An apparent contradiction:
Even though a modern computer can hold a vast library of knowledge in its hard disks that it can retrieve and render upon request by the user, it can conduct powerful and rapid searches and do rapid computations even faster than humans can, the computer itself never knows nor understands the knowledge it holds nor everything it does because there is no life in it and it just does whatever it is instructed to do by software.
In the same way even though a human with apparently sophisticated thinking can hold a vast library of knowledge in his mental hard disk that he can retrieve and render quite appropriately to the occasion upon request by the person himself or others, he can conduct powerful and rapid searches for relevant knowledge and do rapid replies to a current situation, this sophisticated impressive human being may never truly know nor understand the knowledge he holds nor everything he does because he just a voyeur and disk jockey with whatever and however he perceives, thinks, speaks and does rendered by rehash from his jukebox according to rules he and others have helped him set to trigger those activities and often the jukebox automatically does everything for him even without his instruction.
You hear people speak derisively of others as just a show, putting on an act and it is better to talk to a wall or teach a wall than trying to teach someone but even those who deride may fall in the same category because what they are trying to do is not teach someone but rewrite his instructions to conform to his. Just as the other person refuses the arduous task of rewriting his own software to conform with that of the person trying to ‘teach’ him, the person who is lamenting too will often refuse to allow his own mental software to be rewritten by others to conform to them and it is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
If people truly know and understand what they are doing then surely they will know, can see and will be able to demonstrate to me every instance in which they stretched syllables, change speed and loudness and they can instantly switch from stretching to non stretching, changing speed to non changing speed.
Even if I give them ample time to study themselves and then tell me precisely how they have stretched, changed speed and loudness, they will severely underestimate and under demonstrate the occurrences of stretching, changing speed and loudness that they perpetrate all the time.
If you are not a robot then surely you can choose to just for one occasion speak to me without stretching or changing speed or loudness but like a record stuck in a groove, they cannot help themselves stretching, changing speed and loudness just like they always do that differ from others.
THUS WHEN PEOPLE THINK THEY KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THEY MAY BE DECEIVING THEMSELVES, MISTAKING THEIR SOPHISTICATED STORAGE OF INFORMATION AND SEEMINGLY APPROPRIATE RETRIEVAL OF INFORMATION THAT MAY BE THEMSELVES FALSE AS THEIR KNOWING AND UNDERSTANDING.
Live & rote understanding:
Understanding or knowing something can be live or rote (faked live).
In live understanding, once something is understood in one instance it is understood in all instances, in rote or faked understanding, something may be understood as it occurs in some instances but not others or it has to be repeatedly understood laboriously for each instance or it will be understood in some instances but not others.
Again if the ability to understand is live, specific for every occasion then unless the concepts or ideas being communicated are exotic or novel, if they are actually familiar then the person whose understanding is live should immediately understand or grasp what he is being told. If he does not then his usual understanding is rote, his understanding in this new situation must be hammered into him repeatedly never with reason but with force until it sticks or is programmed or instructed in him.
Concepts or ideas like syllables, stretching, changing, speed and loudness are familiar to most people and they understand (at least approximately) what is meant in each case yet there are some contexts in which these occur in which they are even totally blind or refuse to see.
For instance musicians are frequently talking about pitch changes and surely they understand what is speed changes and they often deride some people as ‘tone blind’ yet although they can discern and understand speed changes elsewhere, they cannot recognize or understand the pitch changes they are talking about is nothing more than speed changes within the notes that are prolonged. Surely if you are familiar with speed changes elsewhere and you truly and fully understand speed changes, you should straight away recognize speed changes in your speech and music?
Thus the understanding, seeing and knowing of stretching, speed & loudness changes in ordinary stylish people are selective, fixed or mechanical and appears as if they must be programmed in them in each instance otherwise they will only recognize them in the occurrences to which they have been programmed.
Again if a person’s capacity to understand something new is live specific for the occasion and since true understanding is a function of reason that requires no force or repeated exposures, true understanding occurs immediately after contact and does not require repetition whilst forceful conditioning requires repetition (which is why humans require training workshops). Concepts like syllables, stretching, changing, speed and loudness are familiar to most people and so on being informed that there are constant stretching of syllables, changes in speed and loudness within and between syllables they should immediately with true reason see completely once and for all that this is so. Yet if I were to give ordinary people ample time, even months to examine their speech and then point out to me every instance in which they change speed and to demonstrate to me how distinctively different their speech will be without stretching, changing speed and loudness, they will be ALL unable to do so.
IF YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THINGS IS LIVE, SPECIFIC TO EACH INSTANCE, HOW COME YOU CANNOT IMMEDIATELY UNDERSTAND PERMANENTLY SUCH SIMPLE EVERYDAY CONCEPTS AS STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS? HOW COME YOU CAN SEE AND UNDERSTAND SPEED AND LOUDNESS CHANGES OR DIFFERENCES IN CARS AND STEREO SYSTEMS BUT YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND AND SEE THE SAME CHANGES IN YOUR SPEECH? IF YOU CAN SEE & TRULY UNDERSTAND, HOW COME YOU CANNOT SHOW ME?
THUS PEOPLE’S ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND AND KNOW THINGS, EVEN IN THOSE WHO APPEAR VERY SOPHISTICATED, MAY BE AN ELABORATE DECEPTION, THEY ARE MERELY ROTE UNDERSTANDING CERTAIN THINGS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE SITUATIONS THEY HAVE BEEN PROGRAMMED WITH AND FRESH UNDERSTANDING IN NEW SITUATIONS MUST BE LABORIOUSLY INSTRUCTED OR INSTALLED AS NEW SOFTWARE.
THUS IN ORDER FOR SOMEONE TO SEE AND UNDERSTAND THEIR STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS, THEY MUST BE REPEATEDLY TOLD SO OR ORDERED TO SEE SO THAT THEY WILL SLOWLY INCREASINGLY FORCEFULLY PROGRAM THEMSELVES TO SEE STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS IN THIS PARTICULAR NEW SETTING AND THUS BEING INCREASINGLY ABLE TO SEE, THEY MIGHT INSTITUTE PROGRAMMED CHANGES NAMELY STOP STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS THAT WILL REDUCE THEIR RESIDENT STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION THAT WILL THEN ALLOW THEM TO INCREASINGLY TRULY LIVE SPECIFIC FOR THE OCCASION COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND OR KNOW THINGS.
People always think by rules not live:
The fact that when confronted by something said or done to them that is out of the ordinary they get flustered and don’t know what to say or do so that they even hastily reject or turn away or ignore without thinking reflects ordinary people are faking live thinking and their thinking is driven by force and rule bound and because they have no ready answers that their mental jukeboxes can supply them and tell them what to do, they become flustered and repelled by the rude surprise it is to be expected that they would resort to rejecting or ignoring what is said or done to them.
For instance if a person (even very intellectual ones) were to hear for the first time what I say that there is constant stretching of syllables and changes in speed and loudness in the speech of everyone here and this is the only cause of the stress, restlessness and distraction they must regularly experience, it would take them by surprise, usually unpleasant or disliked that may reach even stunned or blanked reaction and because they have never heard this before, there is no mental jukebox rule to cope with this out of the blue statement, in their embarrassment (an emotion) they are likely to without reasoning or taking into consideration dismiss what I say as rubbish or at least oppose or they may choose to ignore or pretend not to hear.
A person who can reason specifically for any given occasion will not be flustered but if what I said is proposed to him he will use reason to assess the meaning of what I say and try to verify whether what I say is true eg is it true there is stretching of syllables, constant speech and loudness changes, is it true that if he stopped stretching, changing speed and loudness his stress, restlessness and distraction disappears? He will not dismiss out of hand or express reservations without evidence or ignore and may give a tentative answer like ‘what you say may be true, I will have to think about it’.
There is actually diverse evidence both theoretical (by reason) and in practice to say that all ordinary or stylish or emotional people must reason by rules never live specific for each occasion.
The Buddha said you have already shed your blood by having your neck chopped more than the four great oceans and yet you are here. No man who can truly reason instead of fake reason would have allowed his head to be chopped not even once let alone so many times. Of course you believe the Buddha is deluded to say that.
No man who can see the truth will appreciate and practice falsity. All ordinary people appreciate and tell jokes, tell lies or false things or nonsense or conflicting things often without knowing or believing what they say is truth when they can be examined and found to be false. How can a person who is able to see and understands what is true and what is false say without knowing what is false, nonsense or conflicting? If you cannot see the truth and you practice unknowingly falsity (eg by appreciating jokes), how can you truly reason? You need to be able to see well what is true and what is false to separate the chaff from the grains to provide true reason with the substrates to work on. On the other hand if you are muddled, cannot tell what is true or false you must fall on mental rules or reason by rules for you to decide what to conclude.
When people become very emotional, they become incoherent and cannot think properly if at all. A person’s mind is never subject to force part time but force is resident in his mind always and only the intensity of force aroused varies. The inability to think at intense emotion (eg anger or lust or excitement) only represents the extreme end of the scale. Even when emotional people appear calm they are still under the influence of force and their thinking or reasoning is accordingly corrupted.
Force is constantly forcefully stretching syllables, changing speed and loudness when the person speaks or thinks and that indicates the person’s thinking is inseparably contaminated by force and because force is blind and harmful, it means the thinking or reasoning too cannot be true but seriously contaminated or flawed.
No man of true reason will permit his mind to be subject to force that is not only painful but conditioning and will destroy that mind. Because ordinary people are constantly using force to fabricate style, to like and dislike they cannot be men of reason but crazy.
Ordinary people’s minds are beset by stress, restlessness and distraction to greater or lesser degree but never absent. Stress, restlessness and distraction are formidable even insurmountable barriers to accessing true live specific reason.
No person of true reason will practice style not even for a moment let alone constantly in what and how they perceive, think, speak and move. The reason is that style is false, has nothing to do with reason but is merely the use of force to stretch, change speed and loudness for show to impress, please, intimidate and dominate and it is harmful or stressful. Because ordinary people manifest style all the time, they cannot be beings of true reason.
Whenever you try to instruct another person even over simple matters, there is resistance and they don’t get it not because they refuse to accept it because it is false but their minds are forcefully switched off or elsewhere or there is forceful resistance to perceiving and understanding what is said to them. A person of true reason immediately sees and understands what is said to him to know whether it is true or false and you do not need to struggle and repeated tell or hammer into them. The fact that ordinary people need repeated telling, may fail to understand even simple things told them reflects they cannot think properly or specific to each occasion.
If people examine their minds carefully it is not they who are thinking but it is their emotions, likes and dislikes that is making their minds their playground to entertain often frivolous, silly, dingdong thoughts, arguing with themselves, thinking in the one of the many rote patterns, style and content that they have previously thought or reasoned in. Whenever something important that demands their consideration arises, they have to use force to disrupt this mental cacophony to present their minds with the ‘facts’ of the case as their minds see it and rather than reasoning live what the facts (that may be fiction) add up to in this case, they consult their mental jukebox of rules for explanations and having found an explanation or rule they delude themselves they have correctly reasoned specific for this case.
When people read that ordinary people only think by rules, they cannot examine live the facts of the case and work out specifically the meaning of a particular case, they may be stirred to think “Rubbish, what arrogant rubbish, if what I am thinking now is not examining live the facts of the case and working out specifically the meaning of a particular case, what is it!!!???”
What they do not realize is that they are deceiving themselves. Their remark, “Rubbish, what arrogant rubbish” is not based on reason but based on dislike and it is aimed at attacking the other person. It is not the first nor the last time that he will think “Rubbish, what arrogant rubbish”. “If what I am thinking now is not examining live the facts of the case and working out specifically the meaning of a particular case, what is it!!!???” is just a simple refutation or just saying the opposite of what I said and is just a matter of copying what I said, a form of rote thinking to then twist it around and state the opposite. This is no great feat of true specific reason. Thus irked they may search their mental jukeboxes for suitable rule driven ripostes to what I propose and so they may delude themselves that they have reasoned live specific for the occasion but what they have done is rehashed their “Rubbish, what arrogant rubbish”, copied to refute or say the opposite what I said “they cannot examine live the facts of the case and work out specifically the meaning of a particular case” and then driven by hostility consulted their mental jukeboxes for rules they may apply to this case to attack me.
Even a person like Einstein may read what I say “There are constant stretching of syllables, changes in speed and loudness in the speech of all people and this is the only source of the stress, restlessness and distraction that must regularly beset them” with a stunned or blank look (stunning or blanking is all about force, not reason. True reason cannot cause a person to be stunned or blanked). He may then smile (a force reaction to dismiss or refuse to accept) and because he is not a usually attacking person, he may just brush what I say (brush is based on force not reason) out his mind to attend with force on something else, or find an excuse of occupying himself with something else to ignore what he read.
It is not because what I say is false because I can show you that there is constant stretching, changing of speed and loudness of the speech of everyone and how each time I imitate them to do so, I experience stress, restlessness and distraction building up, the reason they get stunned or become blanked is because their mental force is shaken out of its usual rut by what I said that is out of the ordinary for them and because they do not possess live specific for the occasion reason but operate by rules reasoning, they are taken aback, do not know what to make of what I said and the easiest and automatic way out, as they have do so in other situations (eg some people are uncomfortably with intimacy and when someone hugs them, they push them away and retire into their own shell), they withdraw by looking for something else to occupy their minds like mindlessly picking up a book as if to read when it is just to avert their attention from what they are uncomfortable with.
As Jesus said, no man can serve two masters (reason or force), he must love one and hate the other. Because all ordinary people love force otherwise they would not use force to stretch, change speed and loudness, they like to like and dislike, they are slaves to force and not only cannot have true reason, they hate true reason.
Workaholic Wenger gunning to outstrip Fergie:
No live specific to the occasion thinker will issue this statement because it is false and presumptuous and it reflects the person is a rote rules only thinker.
Wenger is the long serving successful manager of Arsenal who are called the gunners and Fergie is the even longer serving successful manager of ‘bitter’ rivals Manchester United.
“Gunning” is just a play of words because Arsenal are the gunners. Just because Wenger is continuing and may serve longer than Fergie does not mean he is gunning to outstrip Fergie. Has he asked Wenger to ascertain his intentions?
Thus what he said is false and presumptuous and he has a axe over his head and is somnolent man of falsity.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR A MAN OF TRUE LIVE SPECIFIC FOR THE OCCASION REASON TO ISSUE SUCH A STATEMENT AND THEREFORE HE MUST BE A HACKNEYED RULES ONLY THINKER.
When faced by a situation or words he has never heard or seen before an unemotional man of true reason is not flustered, not stunned or frozen into inaction but he mindfully collects all the information available regarding the situation, try to combine them together to make a rational conclusion what it is all about or not commit himself. He does not collect information to then consult his mental rules department for a ready explanation.
If you are a rules thinker you will be taken aback by the extraordinary happening, your mental force cannot help being stunned or alarmed or flustered and it is useless searching for a rules explanation because it is extraordinary and thus stirred and needing a response it is unsurprising but to be expected that he might emotionally reject out of hand what is proposed to him or seek to forcefully ignore.
How people can still think when distracted:
Whenever people are quite seriously stressed, restless and distracted they can still reason in a way that is not obviously different from their usual of reasoning.
It is impossible for a person whose mind is wracked by significant stress, restlessness and distraction to concentrate on matters at hand and he cannot therefore reason specifically for the occasion but must be just fake or rote reasoning and the fact they can still reason in a way that is no different from their usual way of reasoning reflects that their usual way of thinking or reasoning is similarly searching and retrieving previously recorded explanations rules reasoning.
Words are spoken thoughts or reason:
A person’s words are derived from his thoughts and reason and are essentially thoughts and reasoning that is ventilated physically.
Because what people say is seldom novel but have antecedents, always have a style that is typical of them and differs from others that require it to be memorized and regurgitate by rote, the thinking and reasoning that must mirror the stylish rote speech must be similarly rote rule bound rehashed to apply to an arising situation.
THUS BECAUSE WHAT PEOPLE SAY ALWAYS HAS A CONSISTENT STYLE AND HAVE BEEN SAID BEFORE THAT INDICATES IT MUST BE ROTE OR REHASHED, AND SPEECH IS MERELY SPOKEN THOUGHTS AND REASONING, THEIR REASONING TOO MUST SIMILARLY BE ROTE RULES ONLY THINKING OR REASONING.
Thinking along certain lines & apparent innovations:
There are instances of novel thinking not along established lines but they are few and far between and only restricted to specific instances in specific individuals not in all people all the time or even some people most of the time. Most so called new thinking are along already established lines of thinking and therefore still forms of copying or chop and recombine thinking perhaps chopping and borrowing one concept from another established field to apply in this field.
Only occasionally in some people is there truly unique never before thinking. If what appears novel or revolutionary thinking in some instances is examined they will be found to be offshoots or modifications of already established ideas, not truly breaking new grounds. Offshoots mean they have precedents and are the truly or falsely logical successor of what went before and is therefore a form of copying or rules or instruction thinking.
‘Thinking along certain lines’ is not truly free thinking but it means thinking guided by what has happened in the past in oneself or learnt or copied from others or retrieving ideas of the past to add or modify and the modifications or additions may not be revolutionary but borrowed from what is known in another field to be applied to this field.
Thus you may think the inception of flying planes in humans is revolutionary and a sign of live thinking but there are precedents in bird, wings and streamlining that is borrowed or copied from birds and the propulsion is borrowed from engines already established driving cars.
Jet engines replacing propellers may appear to be revolutionary but jet engines may have precedents from which it developed.
The use of lasers to cut the microcircuits of a chip is essentially the same as using a diamond tool to cut circuits that went before it and therefore not truly unprecedented.
It may be possible not to think along certain lines but to think in all directions but in rules thinking, thinking is artificially restricted to and developed along certain lines and path and whatever new discoveries may be apparently not truly new but rehashes of the same old things in new guises.
THERE MAY BE GENUINE NEW IDEAS BUT THEY OCCUR TO FEW PEOPLE & ONLY VERY RARELY IN THEM AND EVEN THEN IT MAY BE INSPIRED BY MODELS IN NATURE AND ONCE PUBLICIZED THEY ARE COPIED BY ROTE BY OTHERS. HOWEVER IF THESE INNOVATIONS ARE EXAMINED THEY MAY BE FOUND TO BE COPIED FROM IDEAS IN OTHER FIELDS OR COPIED FROM NATURE AND THEREFORE NOT TRULY NEW BUT DEVELOPMENTS ON ESTABLISHED LINES SOMETIMES ESSENTIALLY CHOPPING TO RECOMBINE WITH IDEAS FROM OTHER FIELDS AND THEREFORE A FORM OF COPYING & JUGGLING RATHER THAN TRULY LIVE SPECIFIC TO A SITUATION REASONING.
I have nobody to copy from:
As diverse and vast the repository of human knowledge is, it is just a library of principles or rules plus information or data to be transferred to or copied by humans and a lot of what is accepted as true may be false (eg Freudian psychoanalysis, id & ego etc) as I have demonstrated that human interpretation of what the Buddha and Jesus taught may be far off the mark. People are copying principles and rules from each other to believe and apply and reasoning based on such copied principles and data is not live specific to the occasion reasoning but rote ruled reasoning. And a lot if not the entirety of what humans know as knowledge may be copied from nature rather than human innovations without precedents eg human flight has precedents and is modelled on bird flight.
Thus the majority if not entirety of human thinking and reasoning is acquiring rules and knowledge already preset in place by others and these too are copied from nature, memorizing them by heart and attempting to apply them in all situations or walks of life.
Seldom if ever do stylish or emotional people gather the facts of a case and then try to fit them together to tell a story but they gather the facts (that may not be facts but they perceive as facts) and then they consult the rules in their minds to interpret the facts of the case according to the rules existing in their minds.
In order for you to tell or find the truth in a situation, you must first be able to see the truth or see things clearly as they are (discernment). Wisdom is the ability to organize or put together what you see clearly to tell you a story of what it is all about and so wisdom or true reasoning is higher than discernment, the mere capacity to see things clearly rather than as you forcefully like or dislike. Without the ability to see things clearly you cannot reason clearly or truly and if you cannot see clearly you are deprived of the possibility of reasoning clearly or wisdom and must resort to its faked substitute, the application of rules reasoning. Because stylish emotional people cannot see things clearly but according to their likes and dislikes, how can they have wisdom or the capacity to reason live to put together the facts of the case after dismissing falsity to come to a conclusion of what it is all about?
I have said many things that are truly without precedent, nobody has ever said it in the past and even today, nobody can or will say what I say. Because nobody has said what I said, I cannot be guilty of copying anyone and I cannot be rehashing from others. All people’s behaviour, dress, thinking, speech have similarities with others so that it is possible or the truth that they copied from others and that is rehashing that has nothing to do with reason but using force to encode and decode.
For instance people are talking about style and yet there is no definition of style. I have said the style in the way a person speak is essentially the way he uses force to stretch syllables, change speed and loudness within and between syllables and words that is consistent in him but differs in others. The consistency means it must be reproduced from memory and the person is therefore regurgitating what he says to fake specific response and he is a robot.
I have said the constant use of force to stretch, change speed and strength of force is the only cause of stress, restlessness and distraction that must beset stylish people and they will increasingly condition them and finally run out of their control and they face certain future madness.
I have said the only cause of sadness is the person’s incessant use of force to prolong that when their force of self preservation deserts them leaving their consciousness exposed, is experienced as sadness.
I have said the only cause of feeling hurt is the person’s incessant use of force to change speed and strength of force that when their force of self preservation deserts them leaving their consciousness exposed, is experienced as hurt. If you must like you must get hurt.
I have said the emotions apart from fear are nothing more than like and dislike in fancy clothes for different occasions. Like is the stirring in speed and strength of a person’s force of going against self under the control of his force of self preservation whilst dislike is the stirring in speed and strength of a person’s force of going against self out of the control of his force of self preservation. Fear is the emotion when his force of self preservation suddenly rises to much greater levels and his force of going against self suddenly drops in speed and strength pulling the person away from what he is doing or makes him run away.
Even nobody has said this: poetry is just playing with words and art and sculpture just playing with images and forms with a false perception that the products are sublime or beyond words, not because they are true but they are false and therefore indescribable.
There is nothing more fundamental that concerns all beings here than their suffering from stress, restlessness and distraction that often drive them to their limits of tolerance and what I say about stretching, changing speed and strength being the causes of stress, restlessness and distraction can be proven because I can demonstrate their presence in the speech of everyone here and I can demonstrate how different speech without stretching, changing speed and loudness sounds and if I tried to imitate the stretching, changing speed and loudness I experience stress, restlessness and distraction rising and therefore what I say is true that has never been said before.
I have changed the world’s consciousness by contagion after 1977 and again in recent years which is without precedent and therefore cannot have been copied.
THUS AS DIVERSE AND VAST HUMAN KNOWLEDGE MAY BE, THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY MANY DIFFERENT SETS OF PRINCIPLES OR RULES ACCOMPANIED BY DATA THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY ALWAYS TRUE THAT ARE MEANT TO BE COPIED AND APPLIED BY ROTE BY HUMANS IN SUBSEQUENT GENERATIONS. THERE ARE VERY FEW GENUINE INNOVATIONS AND MANY INNOVATIONS ARE COPIED FROM NATURE OR ANIMALS. THUS THE REASONING OF ORDINARY STYLISH HUMANS MAY CONSIST OF COPYING RULES AND DATA FROM OTHERS AND REHASHING THEM AND THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO REASON LIVE SPECIFIC FOR EACH OCCASION OR EXAMINING AND EXTRACTING THE FACTS OF A CASE AND PUTTING THEM TOGETHER TO TELL A STORY RATHER THAN CONSULT THEIR MENTAL RULE BOOK TO TELL THEM WHAT IT ALL MEANS.
The basis of people’s actions is like or dislike, not reason:
Everything that happens to emotional people, even top scientists, is an occasion for like or dislike and often they are not even aware they are liking or disliking.
Everything they say or do has accompanying expressed like or dislike that may be genuine or faked together with the substance of what they say or do that may be valid or false, nonsensical or conflicting. Often the conveyed like or dislike is the principal and even only basis of what they say or do.
Because like and dislike is all about the stirring of force that has no reason and is blind, how can people who are conveying like or dislike in what they say or do truly specifically reason?
Even scientists can be heard expressing their like for this theory as opposed to their dislike for a rival theory implying their like and dislike is based on reason or meaningful. How can someone who don’t know the nature of like and dislike, who are often unaware they are expressing like or dislike that is the major intention of what they say or do truly reason?
“Workaholic Wenger gunning to outstrip Fergie” is an objectively false statement and it is stated in such a way as to stir ‘wow’ or attraction for what he is proposing. Because wow or like is about force and nothing to do with reason, what he said that is false (did he ascertain Wenger is indeed gunning to outstrip?) with a false purpose, namely to stir thrill or liking.
If the facts that you supply your reason can be proven to be objectively false, then your reason has no hope of arriving at truth. A lot of what people express in their speech can be proven false and if these are the input for their reasoning then the product will always be false.
YOU MAY NOT AGREE WITH ME THAT EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS TO PEOPLE IS AN OCCASION FOR LIKE OR DISLIKE AND THERE IS ALWAYS DISCERNIBLE ACCOMPANYING LIKE OR DISLIKE THAT MAY BE GENUINE OR FAKED IN WHATEVER PEOPLE SAY OR DO AND THEY ARE OFTEN UNAWARE OF THEIR LIKE AND DISLIKE, BUT IF WHAT I SAY IS TRUE AND LIKE OR DISLIKE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REASON BUT IS ALL ABOUT MEANINGLESS STIRRING OF MENTAL FORCE, THEN IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO REASON TRULY BASED ON THE SPECIFICS OF AN EVENT.
A rude surprise:
For example if in the course of a seemingly routine conversation someone unexpectedly turned on you by asking with such fabricated concern, “Why are you so rude?” the person who is a rules thinker may be taken aback and dumbstruck, may be agitated and his rules thinking will tell him to respond tit for tat so that his anger may be stirred to such intensity that he cannot resist verbally attacking the other person.
The person who is a genuine specific to the occasion thinker will calmly assessed the situation and know that the other person’s motive is to invite him to argue with her and thus knowing it is a fruitless exercise that will stress both he will choose the correct but unpalatable option of asking the person to get out.
TO GET SUCKED HIM TO VERBALLY ATTACK ANOTHER PERSON IS A COUNTER PRODUCTIVE FORCE DRIVEN REACTION THAT RULE BOUND TIT FOR THAT THINKERS MAY FIND IT HARD TO RESIST BUT A LIVE THINKING PERSON WILL ASSESS AND REALIZE THE EVIL INTENT OF THE OTHER PERSON TO PROVOKE HIM AND CHOOSE THE BEST OPTION TO TELL THE OTHER PERSON TO GET OUT.
Why people get stunned:
Nowadays things happening no matter how unexpected do not stun me but all people with style must get stunned that they seek to hide from others.
The reason why a person can get stunned is because he is somnolently totally dependent on a stream of instructions or rules telling him what to perceive, think, speak and do in order to function and this stream of rules or instructions is vulnerable to disruption because it must be accessed and retrieved and is powered by force that can be disrupted by something of sufficient gravity or force happening. Without the usual stream of instructions telling him what to perceive, think, say or do he is unable to perceive, think, speak or do live by himself and he is thereby paralyzed or stunned.
A person who is not dependent on rules or pre recorded instructions or software programs that must be accessed and retrieved but uses genuine specific live free of force reason to function has no instructions on which to depend that can be disrupted and therefore he cannot be stunned or paralyzed by power failure to be unable to perceive, think, speak or do things until power is restored.
A person who is just a company director depends totally on his staff and secretary to get things done and should anything happen to his staff he is helpless because he has never done anything by himself. A person who is a ‘hands on’ operator cannot be stranded because he does everything by himself obviating the need for a secretary or office boy.
Fear itself can cause someone to become stunned but fear is not being stunned and the two must not be confused with each other.
True reason has no force that can be interrupted and it is only force that has momentum that is vulnerable to disruption and thus if a person can be stunned it indicates his activities eg his reasoning is rule bound, rehashed driven by force that is vulnerable to disruption and so if something happens of sufficient intensity to disrupt the stream of rule bound rehashed reasoning, the person becomes stunned or paralysed until he regains his composure or power is restored.
Being stunned can occur without fear. The reason why a strong England supporter will become stunned on hearing the unexpected news that England lost and failed to qualify for the European championships is not because he is seized by fear but he is stunned is because he has forceful expectations of qualification, he expects things to go according to plans, his usual stream of perceiving, thinking including reasoning, speaking and doing things is mindlessly rehashed dictated by force and the happening of something that is of significant importance to him disrupts the usual flow of power and all his activities grind to a halt and he is powerless and don’t know what to do or think or say.
Only a presumptuous person has expectations and not only has he expectations but his expectations are driven by excessive emotional force or his expectations are emotional and when the emotional expectations is unexpectedly thwarted, he is stunned or there is a sudden power failure driving that usually drives his activities.
A person of true reason performs all his activities live specific for the occasion not rehash what was pre-recorded driven by excessive force and so even if he expected England to qualify, there is no emotional or forceful drive in his expectations that can be brought to a crunching halt and so it is impossible for him to be stunned.
THE FACT THAT A PERSON CAN BE STUNNED INDICATES HE IS A JUKEBOX OPERATOR REHASHING WHATEVER HE PERCEIVES, THINKS, SPEAKS AND DOES DRIVEN BY FORCE NOT GUIDED BY GENUINE REASON THAT CAN BE ARRESTED BY EVENTS OCCURRING. WHENEVER SOMETHING UNEXPECTED OCCURS THE USUAL STREAM OF FORCEFUL RULE BOUND AUTOMATED INSTRUCTIONS AS TO HOW TO PERCEIVE, THINK, SPEAK AND DO IS ARRESTED CAUSING HIM TO BE STUNNED UNTIL POWER IS RESTORED.
IN OTHER WORDS BEING STUNNED IS A SUDDEN SYSTEMIC POWER FAILURE IN A PERSON WHOSE REASONING IS NOT GUIDED LIVE BY REASON BUT INSTRUCTED BY RULES IN HIS MIND OR COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON RULES IN HIS MIND TELLING HIM WHAT TO DO THAT CAN BE INTERRUPTED BY THE OCCURRENCE OF SOMETHING HAPPENING OF SUFFICIENT INTENSITY TO DISRUPT THE USUAL FLOW OF POWER.
THE AROUSAL OF SIGNIFICANT FEAR EG THE SUDDEN SHAKING OF AN EARTHQUAKE CAN DISRUPT THIS USUAL FORCEFUL STREAM OF INSTRUCTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ACCESSED AND RETRIEVED TO TELL THE PERSON WHAT TO DO BUT FEAR IS A CAUSE OF BEING STUNNED, IT IS NOT BEING STUNNED ITSELF.
IF A PERSON’S REASONING OR ASSESSMENT AND GUIDING OF HIS ACTIVITIES IS LIVE AND TOTALLY BASED ON TRUE REASON, SINCE THERE IS NO FORCE IN TRUE REASONING OR RULES TO BE RETRIEVED THAT CAN BE INTERRUPTED AND SO HIS REASONING CANNOT BE PARALYZED BY WHATEVER IS OCCURRING AND THUS EVEN IF SOMETHING UNEXPECTED HAPPENS HE IS STILL REASONING, STILL KNOWS WHAT TO DO OR SAY.
IT IS BECAUSE A PERSON IS BEHAVING LIKE A COMPUTER THAT REQUIRES A STREAM OF INSTRUCTIONS AS TO WHAT TO DO TO BE ACCESSED AND THEN ACTIVATED ORDERING WHAT TO DO OR SAY THAT HE CAN BE STUNNED IF SOMETHING DISRUPTS THE USUAL STREAM OF INSTRUCTIONS. WITHOUT THESE INSTRUCTIONS HE IS HELPLESS AS TO WHAT TO SAY OR DO. A PERSON WHO IS NOT OPERATING LIKE A COMPUTER IS NOT DEPENDENT ON A STREAM OF INSTRUCTIONS TELLING HIM WHAT TO DO AND BECAUSE THERE IS NO STREAM OF ORDERS THAT HE DEPENDS ON TO FUNCTION HE CAN STILL FUNCTION IN SITUATIONS WHERE THE INSTRUCTION DEPENDENT ROBOT IS CRIPPLED.
Swift reply means based on force not reason:
Whenever a person makes a swift reply sometimes even before what is proposed is finished, it means it is a force or (usually) dislike reaction and it cannot be based on reason. Even if a reply is delayed it can be still based on force or dislike because the person merely delayed its execution or it is a delayed rule reasoning reply.
It takes time to consider and compose a reasoned reply and thus if someone immediately delivers a reply it cannot be based on reason but on force or emotion. For instance even before I complete pointing out that a person is stretching his syllables, he has got angry and cut me off and that can only come from blind force or dislike never reason. Each time you do this you are bonding yourself to force that will end in agony and eternal wandering not heaven.
A person who will make a hasty unthinking reply based on dislike cannot reason specifically and on the occasion that he gives thought to a reply he is merely replying in a rote ruled reason manner and he is incapable of a specifically reasoned consideration of a situation.
Speculators causing oil price to rise beyond control:
According to Newsweek, the increased numbers of speculators and the money they wield is responsible for the crazy rise in oil price which should only be about $40-60 per barrel. Because there is too much money chasing oil, buying oil not because they need it but to sell on for profit, the price rises precipitously. As a result everyone suffer especially the poor whose livelihood may be wiped out by such greed motivated speculation.
Thus those who speculate in oil futures do not know what payback in suffering they have due as a result of recklessly causing suffering to others. Even if they bought the oil with their own money it is God who created the oil for everybody’s use and you are reckless and will be punished for generating artificial excessive demand for oil. If you borrowed money to speculate on the market that is even worse in terms of punishment.
IT IS ALWAYS MINDLESS FALSE RULES GREED DIRECTED THINKING THAT IS BEHIND SUCH SPECULATION NEVER LIVE SPECIFIC REASONING. THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT POOR BUT ALREADY HAVE PLENTY OF MONEY BUT IT IS INSATIABLE AS A RESULT MANY OTHERS’ LIVELIHOODS ARE RUINED. THEY DO NOT REALIZE IT IS POSSIBLE FOR THEM TO LIVE IN ABJECT POVERTY IN THE FUTURE.
GREED IS MERELY AN ATTRACTION FOR MONEY AND VALUABLES THAT IS ALL ABOUT FORCE NOT REASON. ONCE YOUR MENTAL FORCE IS STIRRED AT THE PHYSICAL SIGHT OR THOUGHT OF MONEY YOU ARE IRRESISTIBLY DRAWN TO DO WHATEVER YOU CAN TO POSSESS IT.
SUCH SPECULATION IS NEVER WITHOUT EVEN INTENSE ANXIETIES OF LOSS & NEED EFFORT, IS STRESSFUL AND A TRULY REASONING MAN WILL SAY HE DOES NOT NEED THE MONEY, THINK OF OTHERS AND THUS NOT SPECULATE TO PILE UP EVEN MORE MONEY FOR HIMSELF.
Why is he stunned when his faculties are intact?
Nothing has physically happened to a person’s faculties (eg knocked unconscious, drunk or hands tied), they are still intact so why is the person stunned or forcefully frozen in inactivity by something happening (eg news of father’s death)?
It cannot be anything to do with his senses or faculties so the stunning must be a functional or instruction problem. Something has disrupted or interrupted the instructions that usually tell him what to do or say and without them he is lost and thus stunned.
If it is true that a person does not perceive, think, speak and do things directly but indirectly through a mental jukebox where he merely activates pre-recorded activities then it is possible that some disruption preventing the jukebox from functioning will cause stunning.
If a person operated live or directly, he does need to access a recording to do or say things, he can say or do things directly for that occasion then he cannot be stunned.
A MAN OF TRUE REASON CANNOT BE GUILTY OF ANY FALSITY:
IF A MAN WHO CAN TRULY REASON CANNOT FIND SUFFICIENT FACTS TO DRAW A CONCLUSION THAT IS TRUE HE WITHOLDS ANY CONCLUSIONS AND SO A MAN OF TRUE REASON CANNOT BE GUILTY OF FALSITY, CANNOT COMMIT A FALSITY. AND SO IF YOU CAN EXAMINE WHAT SOMEONE SAID AND FIND FALSITY HE CANNOT BE A MAN OF TRUE REASON BECAUSE A MAN OF TRUE REASON WILL ONLY STATE THINGS HE KNOWS AS TRUE OR HE REFRAINS FROM SAYING ANYTHING.
THUS THE OBJECTIVE PROOF THAT A PERSON HAS TRUE REASONING IS THAT WHATEVER HE SAYS IS IMPECCABLE, CANNOT BE PROVEN TO BE FALSE BECAUSE A PERSON OF TRUTH WILL ONLY DRAW A CONCLUSION THAT MUST BE TRUE BECAUSE HE REFRAINS FROM MAKING ANY CONCLUSIONS IF THERE ARE INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION.
Brazil shocked at woman’s jail rape:
Assuming what is said is true, Brazil (as a nation) is shocked (impossible) then what it is saying is not that Brazil is in fear but stunned or frozen into inactivity by the news.
STUNNING MUST NOT BE CONFUSED WITH FEAR. FEAR CAN CAUSE STUNNING BUT BEING STUNNED IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM BEING FEARFUL.
THUS IF YOU ADMIT YOU ARE STUNNED OR SHOCKED BY SOMETHING HAPPENING YOU ADMIT YOU ARE A ROTE OPERATOR WHO CAN ONLY REASON BY RULES OR INSTRUCTIONS NOT SPECIFICALLY EXAMINE ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS OF A CASE AND PUT THEM TOGETHER AND GET A TRUE PICTURE OF WHAT HAPPENED.
Why true reason cannot be stunned:
True reason never has force in it and therefore cannot be stunned into suspension.
Only something that has force can be disrupted by force.
False or rule bound instruction reasoning is force driven and can be stunned or suspended. Any reasoning that has conveyed force is tainted and no longer true reasoning. Reasoning that has style has force and is therefore not true reasoning.
Just as you can copy Elvis’ hairstyle, by interacting with someone, you can copy his thinking and reasoning style or how he uses force in a particular way to reason.
Thus a person with true reason cannot be stunned unless you knock him out physically.
A man of truth will always examine what he says to see if it is true and if he is not certain it is true he either refrains from saying it or he states it as ‘may be’, therefore he cannot be guilty of falsity.
If you say something without examining the meaning of what you say you must have copied it from others or if have examined it but you are not sure of its truth and you still say it then you are not a man of true reasoning.
The relationship between mental force and true reason:
True reason is like the man running on a smooth straight track without obstacles on either side or bumps on the ground.
True reason hampered by force is like the athlete forced to run on a sometimes bumpy sometimes soggy ground with encroaching obstacles on either side that make him twist and turn as he moves forward and because the obstacles are fixed he always has to twist and turn in a certain way that is characteristic in him and different in others and this is his style of thinking or reasoning.
So long as the obstacles on the ground and sides remain, so long as force attends true reason throughout its journey so long will true reason be compromised or tainted.
Until a person’s reason is truly freed from the constraints of force it is never true and you are deluded if you think you can be forceful, emotional, like and dislike and yet sometimes think truly and sometimes think falsely. A man of false emotional ruled instructional reasoning is a man of false emotional ruled instructional reasoning until he removes all force attendance in his thinking.
Crooked thinking:
People sometimes derisively refer to others’ thinking or reasoning as crooked or warped. Only force, mental force can warp and make reasoning crooked.
Thus the presence of force in a mind permanently warps or makes crooked a mind’s thinking or reasoning and until the present mental force is lifting the mind is permanently maintained in warp-ness.
People refer to evil’s people’s thinking as crooked but whoever is emotional, liking or disliking has crooked thinking. Crooked thinking is never part time but full time.
Power Overload:
Being stunned is merely the rapid rise in power in a mind as a result of something unexpected happening (eg news of father’s death) to a level that the system cannot handle and it disrupts the communication lines between a person’s instructions and his jukebox which is responsible for all the stylish person’s perceiving, thinking, speaking and doing which are thereby brought a halt until power is restored to normal levels.
A person of true reason does not depend on a mental jukebox to function, does not have one and there is no force acting or crimping his reason which remains intact whatever happens, he does not possess excessive mental force that can be stirred by an event occurring to overload the system and therefore he never experiences being stunned.
YOU CAN FAKED THE EXPRESSION OF BEING STUNNED TO IMPRESS OR DECEIVE OTHERS BUT EVEN IF IT IS FAKED YOU ARE HEADED FOR MADNESS BECAUSE YOU ARE FORCEFULLY WILLING YOURSELF TO BE STUNNED THAT BECOMES INCREASINGLY REALISTIC.
WHEN IT IS GENUINE, BEING STUNNED IS JUST A SUDDEN PRECIPITIOUS RISE IN POWER OF THE PERSON’S MENTAL FORCE OF GOING AGAINST SELF CAUSED BY A SIGINIFCANT EVENT (EG NEWS OF FATHER’S DEATH) THAT DISRUPTS THE COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN HIS CONSCIOUSNESS AND HIS MENTAL JUKEBOX THAT IS THE SOURCE OF THE SUBSTANCE AND STYLE OF HIS PERCEIVING, THINKING, SPEAKING AND DOING TO CAUSE THE PERSON TO BECOME IMMOBILIZED BY FORCE.
ALTHOUGH ALL ORDINARY OR EMOTIONAL, LIKING AND DISLIKING STYLISH PEOPLE MUST GET STUNNED SOMETIMES, IT IS NOT COMPULSORY, ANYONE WHO DOES NOT POSSESS STYLE (NO STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS), DOES NOT LIKE OR DISLIKE OR ARE EMOTIONAL CANNOT BE STUNNED BY WHATEVER HAPPENS. STUNNING IS SUFFERING AND THOSE WHO CAN BE STUNNED ARE VULNERABLE TO SUFFERING HEADING FOR MORE SUFFERING.
The Buddha says you have a crooked mind:
The Buddha: Just as a fletcher straightens an arrow shaft, even so the discerning man straightens his mind -- so fickle and unsteady, so difficult to guard.
If many or most men have straight minds the Buddha is mad to ask you to straighten it and it is only because he perceives that ordinary people’s minds are bent that he tells you to straighten it. And this so to one who perceives rightly, even those who are supposed to be intelligent, good and religious leaders who are supposed to represent the Buddha or Jesus can be demonstrated to have seriously bent minds.
Only force, a person’s mental force coupled with force applied by others impacting on him can bend a person’s mind that once bent is glacial or very slow to change if at all. A person’s mind is bent in a certain way that differs from others and is reflected in his personality, the way he perceives, thinks or reasons, speaks and does things. Thus if there is force present in a person’s mind, he cannot have true live reasoning but his reasoning must always flow in a meandering channel dictated by his mental force, his mental force and not his reason that is handicapped to greater or lesser extent is the boss.
Only force can make a mind fickle and unsteady, true reason has no force that can make a mind fickle or unsteady.
Sharpening their claws:
Just as butchers regularly sharpen their knives on a grindstone, in the same way stylish people keep their mental force in good nick or shape by regularly sharpening it by using it to stretch syllables, change speed and loudness.
A person’s style in speech and motion is partly deliberate because the fool is desirous of impressing others or attracting attention and partly involuntary. First you use force to practice style and then force seizes you to helplessly practice your style.
If you do not sharpen your claws daily by practicing style, forcefully stretching (prolonging), changing speed and strength of force then in time your claws will become blunt, you will no longer be wracked by emotions, likes and dislikes, sadness, hurt and cannot be stunned and thus liberated your mind becomes calm clearly thinking and you are headed for safety.
On the other hand if you keep your claws sharp you must harm others with debts to be repaid and those razor sharp claws will ultimately be turned back on you, you do not believe.
THE BOTTOM LINE:
THE PERSON WHO DOES NOT PAY ATTENTION TO DETECT FORCEFUL PROLONGING OR STRETCHING SYLLABLES, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS IN HIS SPEECH BUT NEVERTHELESS BELIEVES HIMSELF TO BE VIRTUOUS, DESIRES TO BE FREE OF SUFFERING (FROM STRESS, RESTLESSNESS, CANNOT CONCENTRATE, SADNESS, FEELING HURT, GETTING STUNNED, MAD ROTE BEHAVIOR AND VIOLENCE) IS A FOOL, HYPOCRITE AND CHASING AFTER A POT OF GOLD AT THE END OF A RAINBOW.
DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE IMPORTANCE OF WORKING TO STOP STRETCHING SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNES. WHAT IS AT STAKE IS YOUR FUTURE INSANITY AND THEN DESTINATION IN ANOTHER ETERNITY OF SUFFERING.
No common sense, no initiative:
People can be heard decrying others’ lack of common sense or lack of initiative with an air of self superiority and if you watch employees in jobs that are quite menial, they are at loss at what to do if they have not done something before, they need to be told, even precisely what to do before they can do anything and even then they must be told repeatedly or programmed repeated to hammer the instructions into them.
In other words the people with no initiative, no common sense must be told specifically in each instance what to do or say before they can do or say it and they are displaying robotic behaviour.
However, what distinguishes them from their brethrens is relative than absolute. The less obviously robotic ones merely have more robotic options to select from and rather than wait for their superiors to program them in new situations, they can refer to their existing mental programs and adapt them to a new situation.
THUS THE EXISTENCE OF PEOPLE DERIDED AS WITHOUT COMMON SENSE OR INITIATIVE INDICATES THEY ARE ROBOTS WHO NEED TO BE TOLD OR PROGRAMMED AND IT IS NOT JUST THEY WHO ARE ROBOTS BUT THOSE WHO SNEER AT THEM DO NOT REALIZE THEY ARE MERELY SUPERIOR ROBOTS.
Calm in thought, speech and deed:
The Buddha: Calm is his thought, calm his speech, and calm his deed, who, truly knowing (there are those who do not truly know), is wholly freed, perfectly tranquil and wise.
The Buddha advocates calmness in thought, speech and deed as the way to release from suffering. You can only be calm if there is no force in your mind and that means no emotions, no likes and dislikes.
The only and simple way a person can truly become calm in speech and deed is if he achieves no use of force to stretch syllables, change speed and loudness. So long as you keep using force to stretch, change speed and loudness you cannot be truly calm and you are headed for suffering.
93. He whose cankers are destroyed and who is not attached to food, whose object is the Void, the Unconditioned Freedom -- his path cannot be traced, like that of birds in the air.
94. Even the gods hold dear the wise one, whose senses are subdued like horses well trained by a charioteer, whose pride is destroyed and who is free from the cankers.
95. There is no more worldly existence for the wise one who, like the earth, resents nothing, who is firm as a high pillar and as pure as a deep pool free from mud.
97. The man who is without blind faith, who knows the Uncreate (that which is not created), who has severed all links, destroyed all causes (for karma, good and evil), and thrown out all desires -- he, truly, is the most excellent of men.
Rules About Questioning Others:
People who see do not need rules but for those who do not see they need rules to guide them but even with rules, especially on the spur (emotion) of the moment they may disregard all the rules that they preach to others.
Unless the other person’s viewpoint that you question is wrong and the viewpoint that you want to convert him to by questioning him is true or beneficial to him then you are a fool to question and therefore sow doubt in him with serious karma for you.
Of course you may insist (you need force to insist) that your view that you want to convert to is true and beneficial but if you are deluded, it does not absolve you of karma.
For instance, a friend may have decided to buy a certain clothes and you don’t like it and you ask him, “Are you sure you want to buy it?”
The matter is frivolous and you are trying to impose your taste in style on him so that he will dress according to your taste and if that is suffering you have debts not merit talking out of his ‘awful’ taste in clothes.
If you cannot see or know the truth, you see liking & disliking as true and good when they are meaningless and stressful, then it is no point you follow the rules about questioning others because perceiving your questioning based on your liking and disliking you perceive your position is right when it is wrong.
IT IS NOT THAT YOU SHOULD NEVER QUESTION ANOTHER BUT WHEN YOU QUESTION ANOTHER, MAKE SURE HIS POSITION IS WRONG AND YOUR POSITION IS RIGHT. IF YOUR POSITION IS WRONG THEN YOU ARE TRYING TO CONVERT HIM FROM HIS WRONG TO YOUR WRONG THAT WILL CONFUSE HIM FURTHER WITH DEBTS NOT MERIT TO YOU.
THE WISE PERSON WILL ONLY QUESTION ANOTHER IF HIS POSITION IS WRONG AND HARMFUL AND HIS POSITION IS TRUE AND BENEFICIAL TO ADOPT.
YOU MAY POINT YOUR FINGER AT ME AND SAY I TOO QUESTION OTHERS BUT IF MY QUESTIONS ARE BASED ON TRUTH AND YOURS BASED ON EMOTION, RESENTMENT, THEN YOU ARE TRYING TO COMPARE CHALK WITH CHEESE.
Reasons why people question others:
You do not need reason to question others because when well developed, the urge to question, to take issue, to doubt others, to impress others with your ‘intellect’ is hard to resist. Just to question is reason to question itself.
Questioning others is part of self identity views that lead to future woe according to the Buddha. It is because a person is opinionated, full of views that he is attached to and want to ventilate that he will question others when they are at variance with his views.
People deliberately ask questions that are hard to answer or take much effort to answer because they (secretly) enjoy putting others in a spot not realizing they will have to pay dearly for many lives to come.
Questions can be merely words just to attack others eg “why are you so stupid?” is motivated by dislike to attack the person. He is not interested in the reasons why you are stupid but using the question to convey his attack.
People deliberately want to sow doubt and uncertainty in others that their questions introduce.
People ask questions falsely just to please others that they are friendly. Example, they launch into a fusillade of questions like “how are you, did you have a nice journey, how was the food, did you have any trouble, what do you think of this, what do you think of that?” not because they want to or are interested to know but because you are important to them for some reason and they are faking their concern for you.
The difference between questioning & doubting:
People often use questioning and doubting in an interchangeable fashion that reflects their muddled thinking.
Asking a question is very different from doubting others with serious karmic consequences and it is possible in each occasion for a discerning person to determine the person is asking a question or doubting another.
When you truly question someone, you want to know something that you truly do not know that the other person may have the answer.
When you doubt someone, you are trying to say he is wrong, by asking him ‘loaded’ questions, you want the person to consider his position and change to a position that you like.
A man of truth does not ask loaded questions or hint, he tells you straight in your face in his opinion you are wrong and why it is so, he does not question you wanting you to make the conclusion yourself.
Thus when you doubt someone you already know the answer you want and your question is dishonest or a ploy.
Why are you so stupid?
There is a genre or type of question that are similar to this representative question “Why are you so stupid”, eg ‘why are you so rude, so difficult, so greedy”.
It is unlikely if not impossible that a person fashioned that question himself but he heard others use it, liked it without being able to pinpoint exactly why he liked it (the truth is he liked it because it is a cloaked sarcastic attack on the other person) and then copied without knowing the exact meaning of what he is asking.
When you ask another person, “Why are you so stupid” you mean that you are stupid is beyond question, it is an established fact and you should tell him why you are so stupid. It is unlikely if not impossible that he wants to know the reasons why you are stupid and it is therefore a dishonest or false question that is calculated to not just tell you are stupid but ask a question that will be difficult if not impossible to reply.
IT IS DIFFICULT IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE OTHER PERSON TO REPLY WITH REASON WHY HE IS SO STUPID AND SO HE WILL HAVE TO RESORT TO EMOTION, TO ATTACKING THE OTHER PERSON OR SARCASTICALLY GIVE A REPLY. IF HE WERE TO USE REASON TO REPLY HE MUST EITHER ADMIT HE IS STUPID AND GIVE REASONS WHY OR IF HE DISAGREES, HE MUST CALMLY GIVE THE REASONS WHY HE IS NOT STUPID.
EVEN THOUGH GOATS MAY NOT REALIZE IT, THEY CAN SENSE VAGUELY IT IS A DIFFICULT QUESTION TO REPLY AND IT IS THRILL OF HURTING OTHERS IN A CLOAKED QUESTION THAT MAY HAVE THE APPEARANCE OF MERELY JUST WANTING YOU TO TELL HIM WHY YOU ARE STUPID.
THERE IS A GENRE OF QUESTIONS THAT CAN BE REPRESENTED BY ‘WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID’ THAT EMOTIONAL PEOPLE COPIED FROM OTHERS WITHOUT TRULY UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS MEANT BY THE QUESTION.
IT REFELCTS PEOPLE’S ADVANCED FALSE PERCEPTION THAT THEY DO NOT REALIZE WILL END IN MAD PERCEPTION THAT THEY ARE GOOD AND MERELY TELLING OFF SOMEONE IN A GOOD NATURED WAY WHEN THEY ASK, “WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID” WHEN THEY ARE ASKING A QUESTION THAT THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THE ANSWER THAT ALSO CHALLENGES THE PERSON TO GIVE HIM THE REASONS WHY HE IS STUPID, A TALL ORDER TO MOST IF NOT ALL.
Two true reasons for asking a question:
There are two true reasons for asking a question that does not lead to insanity:
You do not know something and want someone who might know to tell you.
You want to draw someone’s attention to a question whose correct answer will benefit him by providing insight that will lead to reduced suffering and show the way even to heaven.
Any other reasons eg to impress others with how sharp or critical you are, to attack others, to hint are false and leads to insanity whether you realize the false nature of your question or not.
Questioning & Doubting:
Questioning is open or positive and based on true reason whilst doubting is closed or negative and based on force or emotion or dislike.
Questioning others is asking a series of pertinent questions based on (true) unemotional reason to establish the facts of a case.
Doubting is rejecting or dismissing or scoffing and you need force and false reason not true reason to dismiss or refuse to accept.
Something that is proposed to you is either true or false. If you can see or know it is false then it is false, what is there to doubt or reject? If you can see or know it is true then you are foolish and courting madness to not accept what you see and know is true. If you do not see or know whether it is true or false then you just neither know it is true or false, what is there to doubt or not accept or reject?
Thus doubting is the forceful and unnecessary ‘more’ that is not letting your yes be yes only as Jesus commanded that comes from evil not good.
If you let your yes be yes only then something that is proposed to you is true, false or unknowable, what is there to doubt or use force to not accept or reject? Doubting is the unnecessary forceful more that comes from evil not good.
IF YOU KNOW SOMETHING PROPOSED TO YOU IS TRUE AND YOU USE FORCE TO DOUBT OR REFUSE TO ACCEPT IT AS TRUE (EG NEWS THAT YOUR FATHER IS DEAD) THEN YOU ARE COURTING FUTURE MADNESS BY FORCEFULLY REJECTING TRUTH THAT WILL FINALLY END WITH A TOTALLY INABILITY TO ACCEPT AND SEE WHAT IS TRUE.
IF YOU KNOW SOMETHING PROPOSED TO YOU IS FALSE THEN IT IS JUST FALSE AND IT IS ABSURB & TOTALLY UNNECESSARY TO USE FORCE TO REJECT OR DOUBT IT THAT WILL END IN YOUR FINAL INABILITY TO LEAVE THINGS AS IT IS OR INABILITY TO ACCEPT ANYTHING.
IF YOU DO NOT KNOW WHETHER SOMETHING PROPOSED TO YOU IS TRUE OR FALSE THEN YOU ARE FALSELY PRESUMPTUOUS TO DOUBT OR REFUSE TO ACCEPT OR REJECT IT BECAUSE THERE IS A RISK YOU MAY BE FORCEFULLY REJECTING WHAT MAY TURN OUT TO BE TRUE.
THUS DOUBTING IS TOTALLY UNNECESSARY, IS BASED ON FORCE, IS USING FORCE TO REFUSE TO ACCEPT OR REJECT AND WHATEVER IS BASED ON FORCE IS CONDITIONING SO THAT WITH REPEATED PRACTICE, THE PERSON’S DOUBTING IS EASY TO AROUSE TO INTENSE LEVELS THAT IS HARD TO SHAKE OFF, BECOMES MORE CHAOTIC OR IRRATIONAL AND HE DOES NOT REALIZE HE IS HEADED FOR INSANITY.
DOUBTING THAT IS FALSE AND FORCEFUL LEADS TO UNCERTAINTY, A CONFUSED DISTURBED EMOTIONAL STATE OF THE MIND THAT IN TURN CAUSES THE FOOL TO DOUBT THAT THEN CAUSES FUTRTHER DOUBT IN A VICIOUS TIGHTENING CIRCLE THAT WILL END IN MADNESS NOT BLISS.
THE BUDDHA IS CORRECT TO SAY THAT DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY ARE LINKED, THEY ARE NOT HARMLESS OR INNOCUOUS OR A PRIVATE MATTER BUT IMPACTS ON OTHERS TO MAKE THEM ALSO DOUBT AND BE UNCERTAINTY AND TOGETHER THEY ARE ONE OF THREE LOWER FETTERS THAT LEAD TO FUTURE EXISTENCES IN WOE.
If you cannot tell the difference between questioning and doubting when they are crucially very different things then you are undiscerning or have muddled thinking.
If you think doubting is not based on force but based on reason and justified then you may have false perception or wrong view that the Buddha said led to hell or the animal womb.
If you perceive doubting as totally unjustified, harmful to self and others and based on force that has nothing to do with reason then you have right view.
Doubt and uncertainty is not just present in a being’s thinking and speech but it is systemic, present in how the person sees (eg rapid oscillations of eyes sideways) and hears and reflected in the hesitancy or tentativeness of his movements. Sometimes people scratch themselves not because it is itchy but because a situation causes them to be doubtful and uncertain. There is doubt and uncertainty in the substance of what people say reflected in their penchant to use ‘perhaps’, ‘maybe’. ‘er’, ‘hmm’, ‘well’ and repeat themselves (eg “I, I think, think it is right” instead of ‘I think it is right’) when something is clearly true and doubt and uncertainty in the way people speak. There is such a thing called a smile of bemusement and that is a smile of puzzlement or doubt and uncertainty.
How come the Dalai Lama or no other gurus or cleric in any religion or medic teach you about this fundamental subject that applies to all beings that is the cause of much daily suffering and is conditioning them to greater woe and will send them to future states of woe?
I cannot believe:
Saying ‘I cannot believe’ is always, not may be expressing doubt.
If something that has happened is not true, why not say it is false instead of saying I cannot believe? If you won’t say it is false then perhaps it may be true. If it may be true why can you not believe what may be true?
Something happening is either true or false or you do not see or know, so what is there to believe or not believe or doubt?
You hear people, even great scientists who are supposed to be seekers of truth, who decry religion as emotional speak regularly of their doubts of this and that, that implies their doubts are meaningful when it is meaningless, it just a use of force to assert that you cannot accept what you do not know or see is true or false. If a person is supposed to be a competent logician and he does not know what he says is nonsense (eg I like this theory, I don’t like that theory, I doubt this and that), isn’t he like a fool who thinks himself wise?
A LOT OF PEOPLE INCLUDING THOSE WHO PRIDE THEMSELVES AS VERY INTELLECTUAL DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT, THEY THINK THEY ARE TALKING REASON BUT THEY ARE TALKING FORCE, TALKING WHAT WHEN SCRUTINIZED IS MEANINGLESS.
True reason is like a mirror:
All beings possess true reason but the presence of mental force warps it to greater or lesser extent.
Just as modern telescopes’ mirrors can be adjusted in curvature to cancel out the fluctuating refractive aberrations caused by the earth’s unstable atmosphere, in the same way, a person’s true reason is like a mirror that in the absence of force is perfectly reflective to render an undistorted image of whatever is presented to it but the presence of force distorts the surface of this mirror in a complex way that is characteristic of each being. The severity of this distortion varies with the momentary intensity of force acting on the mirror but the pattern of distortion is largely unchanged and characteristic for each being, each being has a characteristic force signature acting on his true reasoning and only the intensity of force varies from moment to moment. This pattern of distortion by a mental force is stable and may be changed to become worse or be reduced in severity with effort and time or persistence in some beings. Thus some people’s crooked thinking may improve or become worse with age.
Because all ordinary people have significant mental force always present that is manifest in his forceful style of speech and doing things, his likes and dislikes and emotions, they cannot have true reason but their true reason is to greater or lesser extent distorted by their mental forces and that is always tormenting never a pleasure. In truth their reasoning is never live specific for the occasion but in general, by rules or instructions or orders rehashed for a particular occasion occurring. This is robotic reasoning that is identical with computer reasoning. It is their implacable mental force that clings on like an octopus or leech on their true reasoning that is responsible for converting them into rule bound ‘in general’ reasoners and the only way out is to eliminate their mental force (by not stretching syllables, not changing speed and loudness) that will enable their reason to revert to its undistorted state.
Ordinary people are motivated by greed (for gain, sensate pleasures) and that is about force not reason, they are never motivated by reason but reason designed to maximize their gains for their greed and therefore they are not genuine beings of reason but faked beings of reason who will not tell you what is on their minds.
Lies that do not add:
Razak is supposed to be an analyst, how come he did not analyze to see that what he said do not add?
In his own affidavit, he claims he contacted ASP Musa who then recommended the two policemen who are supposed to have killed Altanturya. He admitted he only asked them to patrol around the house and not harm her.
If this is the case, how come he was in frequent contact by phone with the two policemen both during and after the night she was taken away from his house? He does not know them directly but only through Musa so how come he is regularly contacting them especially when Altanturya has now disappeared and cannot be still pestering him?
Do the two policemen deny taking Altanturya from Razak’s house that night? If they do not deny so and they were acting illegally (there is no official order to arrest her) then they are responsible for her death in their custody even if they did not do it so why are they claiming to be framed?
Even if they do not implicate Razak, they must be held responsible for her illegal detention and death.
Lies can send you to hell that is far more painful and everlasting than death by hanging but the fool does not believe there is far more terrible consequences than admitting the truth and dying for it.

So much contact just to shoo her away?
If the policemen’s brief were to patrol the house and chase off Altanturya, why would Razak need to contact them so regularly during and after the night?
If instead their mission was to kill her, then it is understandable that Razak would want to monitor proceedings closely and be anxious about its success and therefore be in frequent contact.
YOU ARE DOING SOMETHING TERRIBLE TO SOMEONE WHO WAS ONCE YOUR LOVER AND YOU ARE EAGERLY FOLLOWING THE PROGRESS. WHAT YOU DO NOT REALIZE IS A PLACE IN HELL FOR YOU.
Why people must be in doubt and uncertain:
Anyone who appreciates falsity (eg liking and disliking, jokes, smiling that are false that people find meaningful) must experience doubt and uncertainty. If you do not have any doubt or uncertainty about what is false that you appreciate but you are totally forcefully certain that they are true and beneficial then you are already mad or it won’t be long before you are mad.
Only a person who can effortless see and know the truth about what is happening will have no doubt because he sees and knows the truth and does not force himself to accept what is false.
Anyone who is constantly going against himself to force himself to say or do things to deceive, impress, please, intimidate and dominate others must experience doubt and uncertainty in himself and what he does that is meaningless and makes him a slave of others.
Anyone who is constantly using force to prolong, change speed and strength of force that causes insoluble stress, restlessness and distraction that is killing him must experience doubt and uncertainty especially when he cannot see that he is killing himself.
In addition people deliberately wickedly doubt themselves and others. They ask people ‘are you sure’, ‘do you mean it’, ‘is that so’, ‘really’, ‘I can’t believe it’ that deliberately stirs doubt in themselves and sow it in others. They laugh or smile at what others say that is in truth discounting or doubting what others say that they want others to falsely perceive that they agree.
Forceful conviction cannot be sustained indefinitely:
IT IS THE VERY PRESENCE OF FORCE BACKING THE CONVICTION OF FORCEFUL PEOPLE THAT CANNOT BE SUSTAINED FOREVER BUT MUST PERIODICALLY WANE OR WEAKEN THAT IS THE PRIME CAUSE OF THE DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY THAT BESET THEM. IF YOUR CONVICTION IS BASED ON TRUTH AND SEEING THEN THERE IS NEVER FORCE IN YOUR CONVICTIONS THAT CAN WEAKEN TO GIVE RISE TO DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY.
Whether they can see it or not the truth is that people’s certainty about what they say or do, what they believe is true is with force not reason or truly seeing and knowing that it is true.
Ordinary people are all forceful people and therefore they believe and see and know with force.
No matter how forceful you assert and will yourself to believe and see what you say and do and accept is true, the force behind it cannot be sustained and whenever the force backing it slackens or inevitably weaken momentarily the emotional person is wracked by doubts that lead to uncertainty.
WHETHER WHAT YOU PERCEIVE AS TRUE IS GUIDED BY REASON, BECAUSE YOU SEE OR KNOW OR IT IS BACKED BY FORCE, MAINTAINED AND PROJECTED BY FORCE CAN BE KNOWN OBJECTIVELY.
IF IT IS TRUE THERE IS FORCE IN YOUR CONVICTIONS THEN BECAUSE FORCE CANNOT BE SUSTAINED INDEFINITELY BUT IT MUST PERIODICALLY WEAKEN, THEN WHENEVER THE PERSON’S MENTAL FORCE WEAKENS HE IS WRACKED BY DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY.
IF WHAT YOU SEE AND KNOW IS TRUE AND HAS NO FORCE NEEDED TO MAINTAIN IT THEN SINCE THERE IS NO FORCE, IT CANNOT PERIODICALLY WEAKEN TO CAUSE DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY.
I don’t mean to leave you behind:
Many are satisfied that what they say and what they hear is the truth when it is far from the truth, as demonstrated by the examples below.
Quote Shell sticker on back of car: I don’t mean to leave you behind.
The message will strike a chord in emotional people because they are fascinated or attracted to falsity and somehow vaguely they know the message is sly, not quite true which is what attracts them to it.
A person of true reason will never appreciate it because it is false and malicious in a disguised way.
It is not the superior Shell petrol that is responsible for you driving behind him and you may be using the same Shell petrol as him but it is just by chance that you happen to be behind him and therefore the statement is false and trying to make others perceive falsely that the reason he is driving behind is because of his petrol.
It is always pretentious or patronizing to say you don’t mean it. If you truly did not mean it then you would not have brought the matter up and it is because you do mean to be in front and you want to tell a lie and blame the petrol that you patronizing attribute your driving in front to your petrol.
The fact that someone has said it means he has considered the notion, in this case, that of leaving the other person behind because of a superior feat of driving or driving a superior car. After lifelong practice, emotional people automatically get a thrill at being first or beating another and therefore his ‘I do not mean to’ is a lie. Even if he knows his position ahead has nothing to do with his prowess, goats usually cannot help smirking or falsely entertaining that it is due to their superiority.
“LEAVING OTHERS BEHIND” COMES FROM AN URGE, FROM FORCE, NEVER REASON BECAUSE REASON WILL NEVER ADVOCATE SOMETHING THAT IS FOR SHOW AND STRESSFUL, DRIVING TO LEAVE OTHERS BEHIND AND WHAT COMES FROM AN URGE IS CONSTANT, INDISCRIMINATE, ENSLAVING. NO ONE IS A MASTER OF HIS URGE TO LEAVE OTHERS BEHIND AND THEREFORE THE FACT THAT HE HAS STATED HE DON’T MEAN TO LEAVE YOU BEHIND MEANS IT HAS OCCURRED TO HIM, SECRETLY HE IS TAKING CREDIT FOR IT EVEN IF HE REALIZES IT IS HIS PETROL THAT IS RESPONSIBLE. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE HE DID NOT FEEL A THRILL OR DELIGHT AT BEING IN FRONT OF YOU AND THEREFORE HE IS HYPOCRITICAL TO SAY HE DID NOT MEAN TO.
I am not here to raise a white flag:
This is a statement of aggression (forcefulness) or attacking and is not letting his yes be yes only.
Not everyone knows what raising a white flag means and it is a styled way of saying ‘surrender’. Emotional people like to hint, they cannot call a spade a spade, they like to impress you with their speech. “Raising a white flag” is more ‘wowing’ than plain old ‘surrender’.
When you speak of ‘raising the white flag’ you force people to think of raising a white flag and what it means which is more work for them then if you said ‘surrender’. Thus you have karma troubling others to do more mental work that will also condition them to do more mental work.
A person of reason will say that Derby County’s position is very difficult but I will try my best to retrieve it and I am confident of doing that. “I am not here to surrender” is a rebuttal which is always based on attack or force not reason. A person of reason assesses the situation and realizes that objectively Derby County is in a critical condition and based on reality he will compose an appropriate statement.
IT DOES NOT NEED REASON TO REBUT, BUT YOU ALWAYS NEED FORCE TO REBUT. ALL YOU NEED IS SOMEONE TO PROPOSE SOMETHING AND YOU JUST SHOOT IT DOWN LIKE SAYING ‘BULLSHIT’, WHICH IS WHAT MOST ORDINARY PEOPLE, EVEN DEMURE WOMEN ARE VERY GOOD AT.
He might think his statement is full of meaning and appropriate but who in his right mind thinks he took on the job to raise the white flag? Obviously he was handed the job by Derby and he took the job to rescue Derby’s grave position and so it is not saying anything of reason but it is just stirring of emotion.
THUS IN MANY SITUATIONS PEOPLE THINK THEY HAVE SPOKEN THE TRUTH OR THEY HAVE HEARD THE TRUTH WHEN THEY HAVEN’T. IT IS JUST THEY ARE INURED TO FALSITY AND ARE SWITCHED OFF, DRIFTING ALONG TRYING TO MAXIMIZE THEIR RETURNS IN POSSESSIONS AND SENSATE PLEASURES BUT NEVERTHELESS SOMETIMES ENTERTAINING THOUGHTS THEY ARE QUITE DEVOTED TO TRUTH AND FAIRNESS.
Not truly but forcefully certain:
Ordinary stylish people are never truly or with reason and understanding certain but they are always forcefully certain, there is force in the certainty of what they believe, say or do and because force cannot maintained in strength indefinitely but must periodically wax or weaken, everything their force backing their beliefs, deeds and speech slacken they become stricken by doubt and uncertainty.
If it is true there is excessive unnecessary force in your convictions, in what you say or do, then because force cannot be sustained forever but must periodically diminish because force is wearing and stressful, then with the diminution of force you must experience doubt and uncertainty of what you previously held and did with such forceful conviction or certainty.
If it is true there is no excessive unnecessary force in your convictions, deeds and speech but it is based on reason and understanding then there is no force in it to slacken and it is impossible for you to experience doubt and uncertainty.
In addition whatever is forceful induces stress, restlessness and distraction that is cumulative and so what conviction, speed and deed that is forcefully rendered cumulatively increases stress, restlessness and distraction that in time forces you to retreat for respite and that is when doubt and uncertainty start to haunt you.

Lashing out, denying & bearing it

All people with emotion and style, no matter how tough, even strapping hunks, must experience emotional hurt every now and then that gets easier to arouse, more intense and irrational or unpredictable as they grow old because they are constantly forcefully changing speed and strength of force to fabricate their styles and to experience like and dislike that is usually shielded by the force of self preservation and just as the best and largest well wielded umbrella in the world cannot always block out the sun and rain, every now and then you must get pelted and burnt, in the same way every now and then the force of self preservation will fail to shield to expose the person to hurt or the full brunt of the sharp forceful changes in speed and strength of his force of going against self.
When faced with hurt, goats have three options.
They may choose to lash out, mobilizing the force of going against self to lash out at the hurt and lash out at others or objects in the way in the process not only further bonding themselves to force but because they use greater force to lash out, they are intensifying the strength and speed of their force of going against self that will increasingly seize them with a tightening grip that will end in a mental hell of being seized by intense force capable of intense accelerations of speed and strength that will torment and then kill them. Lashing out is foolish, self defeating and makes it worse because by mobilizing greater force, you are bonding yourself ever stronger to force that will end in mental hell. It is because most ordinary people have practiced lashing out when provoked in the past they are already seriously seized or enslaved by mental force that they have identified as their friend and because it is too hard to reform themselves and they are proud they refuse to embark on change not realize they are a walking time bomb.
(You hear people screaming off in their cars and bikes, revving their bikes or cars needlessly, this is a form of lashing out because they are hurt and want to shake off their hurt by lashing out or want to hurt others too like the crazed man spitting up the sky only for the spittle to descend on himself)
When faced with hurt they may choose to deny. Most ordinary people automatically smile to deny their hurt, when they see or hear something hurtful, they smile or sing a song or act as if they are enjoying it when they are hurt. This is using force to fake enjoyment instead of hurt and because it is using force to oppose the force causing hurt, it generates conflict or a clash of force in that fool’s mind. Thus denial is similarly foolish because it is practicing forceful conflict that becomes more intense, easy to arouse and chaotic as you grow old and that denying person too is headed for agony.
(There are many who wear near permanent smiles on their faces who will smile no matter what insults are hurled at them. It is not that they are immune to hurt but they are denying partly to get back at you, partly because their pride will not permit them to show hurt)
The third option that is less exercised is to not deny or lash out but use force to bear or oppose the hurt searing through his mind. This is limiting damage and again using force to resist force that damages the mind and conditions it to force.
What foolish stylish emotional people do not discern is that their hurt is caused by their constant use of force to change speed and strength of force to express their style and to experience like and dislike and by erasing their use of force to express style, by learning to not like or dislike, they will finally kill off their force of going against self changing speed and strength that is the only requisite to experience hurt and thus not hurt he does not need to lash out, deny or bear.
FEELING HURT IS THE RESULT OF ALLOWING YOUR MENTAL FORCE OF GOING AGAINST SELF TO CONSTANTLY CHANGE (ACCELERATE IN) SPEED AND STRENGTH SHIELDED BY YOUR FORCE OF SELF PRESERVATION IN ORDER TO FABRICATE YOUR DISTINCTIVE STYLE AND IN ORDER TO EXPERIENCE LIKE AND DISLIKE (OF WHICH ALL THE EMOTIONS EXCEPT FEAR IS MADE FROM). WHENEVER THE FORCE OF SELF PRESERVATION BECOMES OVERTAXED OR LISTLESS AND FAILS TO SHIELD THE CONSCIOUSNESS THE FULL BRUNT OF THE SPEED AND STRENGTH OF FORCE CHANGES OF THE FORCE OF GOING AGAINST SELF IMPACTS ON THE CONSCIOUSNESS CAUSING SHARP SEARING HURT.
THUS NO MATTER HOW TOUGH OR MACHO OR WISE OR GOOD YOU THINK YOU ARE, SO LONG AS YOU HAVE STYLE, YOU LIKE AND DISLIKE, YOU MUST SUFFER FROM REGULAR HURT THAT GETS EASIER TO AROUSE TO MORE INTENSE LEVELS, MORE CHAOTIC AND WILL END IN INSANITY AND YOU ARE NOT BLAMELESS BECAUSE YOU PERSECUTE OTHERS WITH YOUR ROTE INSINCERE STYLE AND YOUR LIKES AND DISLIKES (HATE AND ANGER IS DISLIKE).
BECAUSE IT IS FOOLISH AND SUICIDAL TO HAVE STYLE AND LIKE AND DISLIKE IT IS TO BE EXPECTED THAT WHEN FACED WITH HURT, STYLISH LIKING AND DISLIKING PEOPLE WILL ALSO LASH OUT, DENY OR ENDURE RATHER THAN MAKE A RETREAT FROM THE USE OF FORCE, IN THE PROCESS COMPOUNDING THEIR SUFFERING AND INTENSIFYING THEIR BONDAGE TO FORCE, HURT & CONFLICT THAT WILL END IN TORMENT THAT MAY BE UNIMAGINABLE.
Looking for a challenge:
The man who is looking for a challenge is bonded to this world and headed for woe not safety.
There are many who think nothing, who think they are good and admirable when they say they are looking for a challenge by switching jobs, seeking fresh pastures, going overseas, climbing a mountain etc.
They challenge others, eg I challenge you to say it in front of a girl.
You never challenge yourself with reason but you challenge yourself with force and in the process of challenging yourself or anyone you are bonding yourself to force.
If you are doing something because of a challenge you cannot mean it, cannot want to do it for its own sake but you are forcing yourself to do it to meet the challenge you set yourself and therefore you are a hypocrite.
You do or say something because you want to or it serves some purpose not to prove you can do it.
CHALLENGING IS ALL ABOUT FORCE AND NOTHING TO DO WITH REASON AND IF YOU BELEIVE IN CHALLENGES YOU BELIEVE IN FORCE. IF YOU PERCEIVE CHALLENGES ARE BASED ON REASON YOU MAY BE RIGHT OR YOU HAVE ADVANCED FALSE PERCEPTION THAT WILL END IN MAD PERCEPTION.
THE SUBSTANCE OF ANY CHALLENGE (SAY IT BEFORE A GIRL) IS MERELY A CONVENIENT EXCUSE OR VEHICLE FOR WHICH TO APPLY FORCE TO FULFILL THAT EXCUSE OR VEHICLE.
IT IS FORCE THAT IS THE DRIVE NEVER REASON THAT IS THE GUIDE FOR LIES, NONSENSE AND CONTRADICTIONS:
(If you think true reason is present and needed to tell lies, speak falsely, nonsensically, contradictorily, to attack or challenge someone, you may be right or have false perception. True reason is never present and what you need is mental force or ill will to tell lies, speak falsely, nonsensically, contradictorily or attack or challenge others. What reason present is not true reason but programmed rote logic or mental ‘tit for tat’ rules. Thus telling lies, speaking falsely, nonsensically, contradictorily, attacking and challenging verbally is all about using force or ill will, nothing to do with true reason as opposed to programmed rules reasoning. In addition it is their likes and dislikes that is based on force that is the basis for what people say that is false, nonsensical, contradictory, attacking or challenging and because they confuse liking and disliking with meaning and reason, they think their falsity, silliness, contradictoriness, attacking and challenging is based on reason when it is based on a stirring of their mental forces to what has happened or is said to them)
WORDS AND SPOKEN IDEAS WHETHER TRUE, FALSE, NONSENSE (MAKES NO SENSE), CONTRADICTORY (THE ‘WELL’ CONTRADICTS WITH THE SUBSEQUENT ‘I WILL HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT’) CAN BE MERELY VEHICLES OR EXCUSES TO TRANSMIT FORCE TO THE RECIPIENT.
WHENEVER SOMEONE SAYS SOMETHING HE KNOWS IS FALSE (TELL A LIE) HE MUST SUSPEND HIS REASON, PRESS THE PAUSE BUTTON ON HIS REASON AND APPLY FORCE TO WHAT HE WANTS TO SAY TO RAM IT THROUGH. THEREFORE IT IS FORCE AND NOT REASON THAT IS THE BASIS OF A LIE.
IF THE PERSON DOES NOT KNOW WHAT HE SAYS IS A LIE OR FALSE, THEN IT IS EITHER BECAUSE HE COPIED WITHOUT THINKING FROM OTHERS OR HE HAS TOLD THAT LIE SO OFTEN THAT HE HAS COME TO (FORCEFULLY) PERCEIVE IT AS TRUE. EVEN IN THESE TWO SCENARIOS IT IS FORCE WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE MEANING OR FALSITY OF WHAT HE SAYS THAT IS THE DRIVE FOR THE FALSITY NOT REASON WHICH MUST BE SUSPENDED.
SIMILARLY WHEN SOMEONE WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING TO ATTACK OR CHALLENGE SOMEONE TO A VERBAL FIGHT (ARGUMENT) IT IS NOT REASON THAT IS THE GUIDE BUT HIS MENTAL FORCE HAS ALREADY BEEN STIRRED TO ATTACK OR CHALLENGE THE OTHER PERSON AND THE WORDS OR SUBJECTS HE CHOOSES ARE MERELY CONVENIENT VEHICLES TO MOUNT HIS ATTACK.
THE ILL WILL THAT IS A FETTER THAT THE BUDDHA SAID DETAINS BEINGS IN THE LOWER REALMS IS ESSENTIALLY FORCEFULNESS.
ILL WILL IS JUST FORCEFULNESS AND THE PRIMARY MANIFESTATION OF HIS ILL WILL OR FORCEFULNESS IS HIS CONSTANT USE OF FORCE TO FORCEFULLY STRETCH, CHANGE SPEED AND STRENGTH AND SECONDARILY HIS USE OF FORCE TO SAY OR DO THINGS THAT ARE FALSE, NONSENSE, CONTRADICTORY OR TO ATTACK OR CHALLENGE OTHERS.
YOU HAVE TO SUSPEND REASON AND USE FORCE TO TELL A LIE. IF YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU SAY IS A LIE THEN YOU MUST HAVE COPIED IT WITHOUT REASON FROM OTHERS OR YOU MUST HAVE TOLD THAT LIE SO OFTEN THAT YOUR REASON IS PERMANENTLY SUSPENDED AND YOU FORCEFULLY PERCEIVE IT AS TRUE (ALSO CALLED DELUSION) IN WHICH CASE YOU STILL USE FORCE TO TELL IT WITH REASON ABSENT BECAUSE IF REASON WAS PRESENT HOW COME YOU DO NOT KNOW IT IS FALSE?
IF REASON IS PRESENT YOU WILL KNOW WHAT YOU SAY IS NONSENSE OR CONTRADICTORY AND IT IS ONLY BECAUSE WHAT YOU SAY IS BY ROTE AND COPIED WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING FROM OTHERS OR YOU HAVE FORCEFULLY ACCEPTED WHAT NONSENSE AND CONTRADICTION YOU SAY IS TRUE, THAT YOU SAY WITH FORCE AND WITHOUT REASON WHAT IS NONSENSE AND CONTRADICTORY.
WHENEVER SOMEONE ATTACKS ANOTHER WITH WORDS OR CHALLENGES HIM TO AN ARGUMENT, IT IS HIS HOSTILITY THAT IS AROUSED FIRST AND THEN HE SCOUTS AROUND FOR SUITABLE WORDS OR SUBJECTS WITH WHICH TO ATTACK OR CHALLENGE HIM AND THUS IT IS NOT REASON BUT FORCE THAT IS AGAIN THE DRIVE OF WHAT IS SAID TO ATTACK OR CHALLENGE.
A PERSON’S ILL WILL THAT THE BUDDHA SAID IS ONE OF FIVE FETTERS THAT DETAIN HIM IN THE LOWER REALMS IS ESSENTIALLY OR ENTIRELY HIS FORCEFULNESS THAT DRIVES HIM TO FABRICATE A STYLE THAT IS NOTHING MORE THAN FORCEFUL STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND STRENGTH THAT STRESSES, MAKE RESTLESS AND DISTRACT HIMSELF AND OTHERS AND IN ADDITION DRIVES HIM TO TELL CONSCIOUS AND UNCONSCIOUS LIES, SPEAK NONSENSE AND CONTRADICTORILY. IN ADDITION IT IS HIS FORCEFULNESS THAT CAUSES HIM TO ATTACK OR CHALLENGE OTHERS IN WHICH THE SUBJECT OR WORDS HE CHOOSES ARE CONVENIENT VEHICLES TO TRANSMIT HIS FORCE. TRUE REASON IS NEVER PRESENT THROUGHOUT BECAUSE IF TRUE REASON IS PRESENT IT WILL TELL HIM WHAT HE SAID OR DID IS FALSE (A LIE), NONSENSICAL OR CONTRADICTORY, IS MERELY AN EXCUSE TO ATTACK OR CHALLENGE.
FORCEFULNESS IS ILL WILL AND ALL EMOTIONAL PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS FORCEFUL, ALWAYS USE UNNECESSARY FORCE TO STRETCH, CHANGE SPEED AND STRENGTH OF FORCE IN WHATEVER THEY PERCEIVE, THINK, SPEAK AND DO, THEY USE FORCE TO TELL LIES, SPEAK NONSENSE AND CONTRADICTIONS, TO ATTACK OTHERS IN WORDS AND DEED.
TRUE REASON IS NEVER PRESENT WHEN A PERSON SPEAK FALSELY (EG TELL LIES), NONSENSICALLY OR CONTRADICTORY OR USES WORDS TO ATTACK OR CHALLENGE ANOTHER BUT FORCE IS ALWAYS THE DRIVE PRESENT. WHAT REASON PRESENT IS FALSE ROTE OR RECORDED RULES LOGIC. JUST AS YOU CAN PROGRAM RULES THAT GUIDE COMPUTERS WHAT TO DO OR SAY, IT IS RIGID PROGRAMMED LOGIC, THE LOGIC PRESENT WHEN PEOPLE TELL LIES, SPEAK NONSENSE, CONTRADICT, ATTACK AND CHALLENGE IS PROGRAMMED FALSE LOGIC THAT MAY DECEIVE THEM THEY HAVE TRUE LOGIC. FURTHER BECAUSE THEY MISTAKE THEIR LIKING AND DISLIKING WHICH IS NOTHING MORE THAN A STIRRING OF FORCE AS MEANINGFUL, THEY THINK THEIR DISLIKE FOR YOU OR WHAT YOU SAY IS PERFECT JUSTIFIED REASON TO ATTACK OR CHALLENGE YOU.
Whether something you say (or do) is true or false, nonsensical, contradictory is objective never subjective. It may be determined if not by you then by those who discern and by God.
If you say or do something that is false, nonsensical or contradictory and you do not know it then you must be a fool who does not know what he is saying or doing. The only way for this to happen is that you copied it by rote without reasoning or understanding what you copied from others or you are deluded, you perceive what is false, nonsensical or contradictory as perfectly true, understandable or meaningful or you mistake the stirring in speed and strength of your mental force (also known as your liking or disliking) as the meaningful basis of what you said that is false, nonsensical or contradictory. If you like a lie you told to flatter someone then you may perceive that because your liking is meaningful, your lie must be meaningful or true.
WORDS ARE MEANT TO CONVEY MEANING BUT THEY CAN BE HIJACKED BY FORCE TO CONVEY FALSITY, NONSENSE AND CONTRADICTION AND THIS IS THE CASE WITH HUMANS WHEN THEY USE FORCE ATTENDED BY FALSE PROGRAMMED RULE BOUND REASON, THEIR LIKE AND DISLIKE TO HIJACK WORDS TO CONVEY FALSITY, NONSENSE, CONTRADICTION AND TO ATTACK AND CHALLENGE OTHERS.
WHAT MATTERS IN LIES, NONSENSE & CONTRADICTION, ATTACKING AND CHALLENGING OTHERS WITH WORDS IS FORCE NOT REASON AND THAT FORCE IS CALLED ILL WILL AND IS THE SAME FORCE THAT DRIVES STYLE OR STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND STRENGTH IN THE NAME OF PUTTING ON A SHOW TO IMPRESS, PLEASE, INTIMIDATE AND DOMINATE OTHERS.
TRUE, FORCE FREE REASON IS NEVER INVOLVED IN TELLING LIES, FALSITY, NONSENSE, CONTRADICTIONS, ATTACKING AND CHALLENGING OTHERS.
WHAT IS PRESENT IS LIKE AND DISLIKE, PROGRAMMED RULE BOUND REHASHED LOGIC AND THE FALSE PERCEPTION OR DELUSION THAT WHAT IS FALSE, NONSENSE, CONTRADICTORY, ATTACKING OR CHALLENGING IS TRUE AND BASED ON GENUINE REASON. APART FROM LIKE AND DISLIKE AND PROGRAMMED LOGIC WHAT IS PRESENT IS IMPLACABLE FORCE THAT POWERS WHAT IS SAID OR DONE THAT IS NEVER LIVE SPECIFIC TO THAT OCCASION BUT REHASHED STANDARDIZED FROM HIS MENTAL JUKEBOX.
(If people who attack another verbally examined their mental state when they attacked another, they will realize that they were initially angered by what is said that may not be provocative but they have false perception it is or they are sensitive and thus driven on by their anger they search for something that they usually if not always have said in the past before to say to attack the person. Often they cannot help attacking because their anger that they have practiced for so long so well rises sharply beyond their control that they must attack and they are headed for madness if they did not correct themselves)
False reasons:
If you liked what you say that is false, nonsensical and contradictory, attacking or challenging then because you liked what you said you may perceive it as meaningful when it is false, nonsense, contradictory, attacking or challenging. Because liking is merely a controlled stirring in speed and strength of your mental force your liking for what you said is false reason. You have been deceived by force to think your liking for what you said falsely, nonsensically, contradictorily, attackingly and in challenge is based on reason.
Because what you said that was false, nonsense, contradictory, attacking or challenging is backed up by programmed false rules logic (eg I smile because I like someone and because liking is good, smiling also must be good), what you said that is false, nonsense, contradicts, attacks and challenges must be based on reason not emotional.
Because what you said that was false, nonsense, contradictory, attacking or challenging is backed up by programmed false rules logic gets you what you want eg cons a girl to like you or makes you money, you might falsely perceive it as meaningful and reasonable, perfectly understandable because it gets you what you want.
WHEN PEOPLE VERBALLY ATTACK OR CHALLENGE ANOTHER, THEY USE EXCESSIVE FORCE TO EVEN VIOLENTLY STRETCH THEIR SYLLABLES WITH ACCELERATING ACCELERATION IN SPEED AND LOUDNESS AND IT IS THIS WHICH IS THE STYLE OF WHAT THEY SAID THAT IS THE WARHEAD OF THEIR ATTACK AND THE SUBJECT THEY CHOSE IS JUST THE ROCKET THAT DELIVERS THE PAYLOAD OR WARHEAD.
How can you resolve what you deny?
If you deny your hurt but insist by smiling and singing a song (humming) that you are happy, how can you end your hurt? Since you tell yourself and others that you enjoy what hurts you, then you should continue to hurt and not see why you should be hurt.
It is only when you can admit and face your hurt, examine why is it that you are hurt that a way out of your hurt is possible.
It is because have denied so well so long, they don’t want to show their hurt because it is perceived as loss of face that it near impossible for them to face their hurt.
A person who denies his hurt must experience excruciating conflict and tension that he does not understand why is occurring in his mind and body. He has a pathological or insane drive to deny or refuse to see such that he may already be blind and proudly so.
As they say, big boys (and girls) don’t cry. As Thatcher said, this lady is not for turning.
Jesus spoke of turning so that he may heal you; big boys don’t turn and refuse to be healed.
False logic:
Quote minister: 32 heads (cabinet ministers) is better than three (appointed to adjudicate over whistle blowing video clip).
It is false logic that more heads are better than one, the more people are involved in something the better the chances of a solutions. If all the cabinet ministers have vested interests and the matter of the video clip is actually self evident without need to ascertain its veracity, then it is an excuse and lie that 32 heads will be better than 3 heads. A thousand fools are no better than three fools. If you refuse to acknowledge the truth no amount of heads is better.
It is not the number of heads that is important but the quality in terms of discernment and reasoning (wisdom) that is important and better. One wise man is better than a million fools.
If more heads are better how come throughout the history of mankind and even today not one has discovered that there is constant forceful stretching of syllables, changes of speed and loudness in the speech of everyone in this world and this is the only cause of stress, restlessness, distraction, sadness and hurt in people?
THUS IF YOU SUBSCRIBE TO SUCH FALSE PROGRAMMED LOGIC YOU MAY BELIEVE AND PERCEIVE WHAT YOU SAY THAT IS FALSE, NONSENSICAL, CONTRADICTORY, ATTACKING OR CHALLENGING TO BE TRUE AND UNDERSTANDABLE.
When does numerical superiority counts?
Only in matters where numerical superiority counts does it matter that more people are involved. Eg if you want to build the Great Wall of China or the pyramids or you want to crunch numbers then 32 people are better than three, otherwise it is foolish to extrapolate that (a rule that more is better) to deliberating over a matter. If you do not want to arrive at the truth, it does not matter how heads are involved.
The fallacy of rules:
Faith in rules and rites is according to the Buddha a fetter to future woe.
32 heads is better than three heads is an expression of the rule of the superiority of numbers or two is better than one.
If you want to fight with another then two is better than one but this is not necessarily so because a Mike Tyson can fight with four puny men and still win.
This is a rule coined by humans and not absolutely true, it is sometimes true and sometimes false or there are exceptions. What is the point of having something when there are exceptions that render that rule false? Why not approach each situation on a case by case basis depending on its merit?
Thus rules are artificial impositions by men who then treat them as sacrosanct and impose it on everyone. For instance, in the rule that there should be no correction allowed on cheques, even a minute correction detected might make an overzealous employee reject that cheque when it is not a sign of tampering with much trouble to others.
THUS IF YOU HAVE FAITH OR ACCEPT AS TRUE THAT THIS WORLD CONFORM TO RULES THAT YOU MUST CONSCIENTIOUSLY IDENTIFY AND SEEK TO APPLY WITHOUT FAIL WHEN THEY MAY BE FALSE OR EVEN OBVIATED (EG BREAD CAN BE CREATED OUT OF THIN AIR AND A DEAD PERSON BROUGHT BACK TO LIFE), THEN YOU MAY BE HEADED FOR FUTURE WOE ACCORDING TO THE BUDDHA.
The reason why the person said 32 ministers is better than three heads is because he wants to falsely impress you that the government is serious in resolving this matter of the videotape when little or no deliberation is necessary because it is self evident and the government is not serious about getting to the bottom of the matter.
The thing about goats is that they will seek to apply rules without exemptions on you but they will not apply the rules on themselves.
Rites & rules are inseparable:
Rites and rituals may be like the two sides of a coin that cannot occur separate from each other.
Because the Buddha said he is all knowing & seeing, if that is true then the fact that he spoke about rites and rules together being one of three fetters to future woe must (not may) mean they are somehow connected to each other or intimately linked.
What might be or is the relationship between rules & rituals?
A ritual needs a plan of action of what to say or do and how to say or do it, that plan which is rigid, prefixed set of rules of how and what to say and do and thus when someone performs a ritual he is de facto acting according to a plan or set of rules of how and what to say or do. Without a plan or set of rules of what to say or do, how to say or do it, you cannot have a ritual and thus when a person carries out a ritual he is de facto obeying a set of rules of what and how to say or do certain things and he is therefore rule bound.
True reason will never tell you to do something false, meaningless, harmful and stressful and therefore will never guide you to activate a particular rehashed speech or action because true reason sees and knows it is not a genuine response but it is a faked as if specific but impersonal general repetitive response to a situation and so the person will have to resort to the only alternative, false or mechanical or rote reason and that is fixed rules that when certain criteria stated in that rule is fulfilled you activate that ritual or pre-orchestrated conduct.
(The only alternative to true reason or understanding why in guiding any action is mechanical reason or rules and thus if reason will not do it, rules must be do it)
Rules are meant to be obeyed and you do not obey rules with reason because that needs understanding why you do or say so but you obey rules with blind unquestioning force and act according to the protocol or plan or letter of a particular rule and that de facto is a ritual. All obedience of rules are ritualistic, act or saying according to the rule and never based on true reason why you should act and say certain things.
Thus rules and rituals are inseparable, one cannot exist without the other and the Buddha is correct and all knowing in linking them together as a fetter not just to the lower realms but to future woe. A ritual is nothing more than a pre-rehearsed plan or set of rules of what and how to say or do that true reason will never guide to say or do and so the person must resort to false or mechanical reason or rules to instruct him when to initiate the particular ritual.
A RITUAL IS NOTHING MORE THAN A PLAN OF ACTION OR SET OF RULES OF WHAT TO SAY OR DO, HOW TO SAY OR DO IT THAT IS TO BE CARRIED OUT OR OBEYED AND IT NEED RULES TO INSTRUCT THE PERSON AS TO WHEN TO ACTIVATE THE RITUAL BECAUSE THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE, TRUE REASON WILL NEVER GUIDE SOMETHING THAT IS FALSE AND HARMFUL.
The fact that you do not know or see that what and how you and your cohorts here say is rehashed according to plan or you are a robot does not necessarily mean that you are not a robot but it may mean you are undiscerning, cannot see things clearly as they are, you are distracted, restless and stressed to see clearly.
The practice of yoga or tai chi is a ritual does not confer good mental or physical health or calm as promised because so long as you continue to have style, to forcefully stretch syllables, change speed and loudness there is no peace for you and you must be hounded by stress, restlessness and distraction that you can only seek to control with decreasing efficacy by tai chi or yoga. The diversion of yoga or tai chi or exercises may break your engrossment with affairs of this world and therefore afford you a measure of calm and reduction of stress but it will never cure you of stress, restlessness, distraction, sadness and feeling hurt. Tai chi has a plan of what and how to pose and move your body parts and you must obey that plan or set of rules otherwise you will not or cannot practice tai chi. Reason will not advice you to practice tai chi and so you must have rules that vary between people eg the rule of practicing early in the morning without fail or in the evening that must be obeyed or the robot feels something is amiss.
Fairly sophisticated humanoid robots or robots that mimic humans like Asimo the Honda robot who can run on stage, stop, bow, wave, clap hands and take a tray with a cup from you to hand it over to another human recipient gives a discerning observer a clear insight into the intimate relationship between rules and rituals.
A robot like Asimo has no consciousness and it is composed of sensors that tell its central processors not everything that is going on around it but only particular features of what is going on that it has been instructed to detect in order for its central processors to determine by the rules that it has been programmed with to activate pre-rehearsed sequences of what the robot should say or do in those circumstances.
Whatever Asimo has not been programmed to perceive it cannot perceive, even if they are present but you can reprogram it to perceive new things if you want provided it is within the capacity of its CPU to perceive.
Asimo has no genuine reasoning, only a set of rules programmed into him of what it should activate when its sensors detect certain things.
Whatever Asimo has not been programmed to do it cannot do but you can reprogram Asimo or his rules so that he can do new things.
Because whatever Asimo can do is not live specific to the occasion but it was pre-recorded and replayed on cue as faked not genuine specific action for the occasion, whatever Asimo can do is ritualistic or standard and fixed according to a plan.
Thus as marvellous as you might think Asimo is, there is nothing in him than a set of many rules that govern what rituals it will initiate and there are no actions in him apart from rituals or programmed courses of actions according to a plan or set of rules.
EVERYTHING ASIMO DOES IS RITUALISTIC OR HE ONLY PERFORMS RITUALS OR PRE-REHEARSED AND REGURGITATED STEREOTYPED ACTIONS, HE CANNOT DO ANYTHING THAT IS NOT PRE-ORCHESTRATED THAT HIS CPU HAS NOT BEEN PROGRAMMED TO DO AND THE ONLY WAY IT CAN DECIDE WHICH RITUAL AMONGST THE MANY HE HAS BEEN PROGRAMMED TO CARRY OUT TO ACTIVATE IS NOT THROUGH TRUE OR GENUINE REASONING BUT THROUGH RULES THAT TELLS HIM WHICH RITUAL TO PERFORM AND HE MUST OBEY WITHOUT FAIL. ALTHOUGH IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO PERFORM RITUAL A IN SITUATION C, IT CANNOT DO SO BUT IT ALWAYS PERFORMS RITUAL A IN SITUATION A BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT IT HAS BEEN TOLD TO DO BY ITS RULES AND IT CANNOT ACT WITHOUT ITS RULES. YOU CAN REPROGRAM ASIMO TO PERFORM RITUAL A IN SITUATION C AND THEN IT WILL ALWAYS PERFORM RITUAL A IN SITUATION WITH NO QUESTIONS ASKED.
It is not surprising but to be expected that all ordinary people who are in truth biological robots not part time but in everything they perceive, think, speak and do that means they must obey rules that are inherent in robotic rehashed behaviour and require rules to guide their rendition because true reason will not do so should in addition have unfaltering faith in specifically definable rituals and rules.
PEOPLE ARE FULL TIME ROBOTS RENDERING RITUALIZED REHEARSED SPEECH AND MOTION ACCORDING TO RULES PROGRAMMED BY THEMSELVES OR BY SOCIETY AND THOSE RITUALS ARE ACCORDING TO RULES OF WHAT AND HOW TO SAY OR DO CERTAIN THINGS IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS AND THUS IT IS NOT A SURPRISE BUT IT IS TO BE EXPECTED THAT THEY SHOULD ALL HAVE FAITH IN RULES AND RITUALS.
Not only is everything they think, say and do robotic or rehashed rituals but even what they perceive and how they perceive are rehashed or robotic or ritualistic. For instance each person sees with a particular brand of style of how he prolongs his gaze, how much force he applies in his stare, the speed and strength of force changes as he shifts his gaze restlessly between objects. What he sees too is selective according to what he likes or dislikes. For example a lustful man will be on the look out for women or sexual objects to lay his gaze on and so he does not see everything but only what he wants to see, namely sexual objects.
A RITUAL IS AN INDEPENDENT OR STANDALONE SEQUENCE OF SPEECH AND MOTION THAT MAY HAVE PURPORTED PURPOSES OR BENEFITS THAT ARE FALSE, IT (RITUAL) IS REPEATED MANY TIMES DEPENDING ON THE OCCURENCE OF CERTAIN CRITERIA OR RULES.
FOR SOMETHING TO BE A RITUAL IT MUST HAVE A PLAN OF WHAT AND HOW TO SAY OR DO AND THAT PLAN IS ITSELF A SET OF RULES OR RULES THAT MUST BE OBEYED ABSOLUTELY NOT FOR SAKE OF DOING SOMETHING MEANINGFUL BUT JUST IN ORDER TO CARRY OUT THAT RITUAL AND THEREFORE A MAN WHO HAS FAITH IN RITUAL TO PRACTICE RITUAL MUST ALSO HAVE FAITH IN RULES THAT GOVERN A RITUAL.
TRUE REASON WILL NEVER GUIDE A PERSON TO PERFORM A RITUAL WHICH IS REPETITIVE AND REHASHED NOT SPECIFIC TO AN OCCASION AND IS THEREFORE FALSE AND FABRICATED AND BECAUSE TRUE REASON WILL NOT GUIDE THE PERSON MUST RESORT TO FALSE OR MECHANICAL REASON AND THAT IS RULES THAT WHEN CERTAIN FIXED RIGID CRITERIA ARE FULFILLED YOU MUST ACTIVATE THAT RITUAL WITHOUT FAIL.
THUS RULES ARE NEEDED TO INSTRUCT THE PERSON WHO HAS FAITH IN RITUALS WHEN TO INITIATE A PARTICULAR PRE-REHEARSED RITUAL AND RITUALS ITSELF ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A SET OF RULES OF WHAT AND HOW TO SAY OR DO THAT MUST BE OBEYED ABSOLUTELY WITHOUT QUESTIONS WHY OR IT WILL NO LONGER BE A RITUAL.
IN OTHER WORDS RULES IS THE FRAMEWORK OR PLAN OF A RITUAL AND RULES ARE NEEDED TO INITIATE A RITUAL AT A PARTICULAR TIME BECAUSE TRUE REASON WILL NOT DO IT SO FALSE REASON OR RULES MUST DO IT.
Robotic or jukebox behaviour is very deceptive. It will deceive the unwary and distracted who are themselves robots that it is a real live person speaking or doing specifically before them but in truth it is a mindless robot or automaton rehashing what is in truth standardized, rigid & pre-orchestrated as if it is genuine specific for the occasion.
The Buddha is not the highest because he says so but it can be objectively proven that he is by what he said that can be verified true and not said by anyone else before and even since.
He said no one has powers over him, God could not make him disappear but he can make himself invisible to God and everyone else. Unless you can see or know this not the case, that is, the Buddha is lying you have no right to say it is false. You can say you do not know but you cannot say it is false because you do not know or see.
The difference between a parrot and a live person:
Superficially a parrot or robot may deceive another that he is a live specific to the occasion person but there are things a parrot or robot cannot do.
A parrot or robot cannot perceive, think, say or do things that it has not been programmed to perceive, think, say or do even though it is possible to perceive, think, say or do a certain thing.
Thus it may reflect that all ordinary people with style are parrots or robots that they never perceive, think, say or do the things I do that no man has done before even though it is possible for them to do so (unless you think I am a truly remarkable man that only I and not them can perceive, think, say or do the things I do that they cannot.
A robot who has not programmed himself to detect stretched syllables, changing speed and loudness will not detect them even though it is possible to detect them and they are present all the time in his speech and that of others.
In order for a person who is a robot to do or say new things you must reprogram him laboriously to do so and then he will do or say that new thing by rote or faithful facsimile.
THUS BECAUSE HUMAN ROBOTS ARE MUCH MORE SOPHISTICATED, THEY HAVE A VASTLY SUPERIOR REPERTOIRE OF RESPONSES TO A SITUATION, THEY CAN SWAP TRACKS MIDSTREAM, THEY CAN FOOL THEMSELVES AND OTHERS THEY ARE LIVE SPECIFIC TO THE OCCASION PERFORMERS BUT IF YOU ARE ASTUTE YOU WILL REALIZE HE ALWAYS SPEAK AND BEHAVE IN A CERTAIN WAY THAT MUST BE FROM MEMORY OR ROTE AND THE THINGS HE SAY OR DOES HAS BEEN SAID IN THE PAST BEFORE THAT CANNOT BE AN ACCIDENT BUT IT IS ROTE. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR MARILYN MONROE TO SPEAK LIKE ELIZABETH TAYLOR WHEN IT IS POSSIBLE TO DO SO AND YOU CAN LABORIOUSLY TRAIN HER TO DO SO BECAUSE MARILYN NEEDS TO BE PROGRAMMED IN ORDER TO SPEAK LIKE LIZ TAYLOR.
Thus a person who has been trained by himself and others to greet another ‘g’day’ or ‘hi. mate’ will always say that but never ‘good day’ or ‘hello mate’ even when it is possible for him to do so because it is rendered by rehash impersonally and he is a hypocrite.
Either reason or rules:
If you don’t use live specific to the occasion reason to say or do something you must use rules to determine whether you say or do.
Apart from reason or rules can you nominate any other agency to determine what you say or do?
If you neither use reason nor resort to rules then what you say or do will be mad, out of no reason or rule.
THUS ONLY LIVE SPECIFIC TO THE OCCASION REASON OR STANDARD FIXED RULES CAN GOVERN OR DETERMINE WHAT A PERSON SAYS OR DOES.
EITHER YOU SPEAK ACCORDING TO REASON OR YOU SPEAK ACCORDING TO RULES WHICH ARE INFLEXIBLE AND PREDETERMINED.
Ras Adiba :I am the one PM had in mind
Former newscaster Ras Adiba Radzi is pretty sure she is the woman in wheelchair Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi mentioned as “capable and presentable” but unable to get permanent employment.She is probably think nothing and think it funny or pleasurable what she said.
It is presumptuous and unless Badawi specifically mentioned her, you should not jump to conclusion that he is talking about you as it is fantasy and flirting with future madness that is not without harm to others because they too may imagine what may not be true that Badawi is referring to her.
When you say pretty sure it means you use force to be sure because you cannot use reason because reason will tell you that you cannot be sure and you are pretty sure with force that conditions such that increasingly you become forced to perceive what is imagined is true.
It is because she is conceited and has self identity views that she is pretty sure he is talking about her.
Rituals are the products of rules:
Rituals are the product of rules so how can they be separate?
It is because a being foolishly desire to behave or speak a certain thing in a certain way repetitively because it is seen as impressive, will impress others that he MUST resort to rules that will govern or determine that what and how he says or do will faithfully conform to what he desires.
And because what he says or does is not specific to the occasion but what he desires to be repeated, he must have a set of rules of when to render it because it is not specific to the situation and need cues or rules as to when to initiate it.
Rules is theory & ritual is practice:
Rules is the theory behind rituals and rituals is the putting into practice of rules.
There is false reasoning or understanding but never true reasoning or true understanding behind a ritual and apart from rules or mechanical generalizations or standardizations, there is nothing or no other basis behind rituals.
There are two kinds of rules. Rules that can be put into practice in word or deed and when they are put into practice they become rituals and there are rules that cannot be put into practice.
Rules that can be put into practice are for example ‘always greet or smile at someone you meet’ or ‘wash your hands before you eat’.
There are many people who do not always greet others or wash their hands before they eat and nothing untoward always happen to them as a result of their actions and so these rules are rigid and false.
Thus obeying these rules a person practice the ritual of always saying standardized, “Gee dai mate” (his corruption of ‘good day mate’) or he unfailing washes his hands obsessively before he eats.
Because not everyone always greet others and not everyone always washes his hands these rules and the rituals that ensue from their practice are false although the foolish man will rationalize to justify his actions eg he washes his hands because he does not want to catch germs eating and he greets others because he is so good.
Rules that cannot be put into practice are like ‘two heads are better than one’ that can be used to influence one’s actions but cannot be put into practice. You cannot practice ‘two heads is better than one’ in speech and actions but you can use this rule to govern your action eg you expand the numerical strength of your army or staff instead of improving the quality of your army or staff in the mistaken rule that more is better when Alexander the Great’s smaller better organized army has defeated much bigger armies in battles.
Rules are involved in two ways in rituals. Apart from the ritual being the embodiment or putting into practice of rules, it is always rules that determine if a ritual is activated. Rituals are never activated by specific to the occasion true reason or understanding why you should do so but rituals are always executed by rules eg eating time means wash your hands not I wash my hands this time before I eat because I had worked on potentially poisonous or infective stuff.
BECAUSE RULES ARE THE THEORY BEHIND RITUALS AND ARE ALWAYS REQUIRED TO ACTIVATE A RITUAL, RULES AND RITUALS MUST BE INSEPARABLE, THERE CANNOT BE RITUALS IN SPEECH AND ACTION WITHOUT RULES AND THERE CANNOT BE RULES WITHOUT RITUALS. THUS THE BUDDHA HAS PENETRATIVE WISDOM OR INSIGHT IN GROUPING FAITH IN RITUALS AND RULES AS A FETTER TO FUTURE WOE.
Why people resort to rules:
An important reason why people resort to rules to run their lives is because they cannot reason very well or reason at all partly because of their lowly or undiscerning nature, their inability to examine things unemotionally and decide. Just like a blind man needs a walking stick, a person who cannot reason very well need rules no matter how poor to guide them.
Thus the rule two is better than one often serves them well but there are situations when they will be caught out.
If you are a robot you cannot function without rules because robots need rules to tell them what to do and so if you are a devoted robot, you accept your robotic existence without question, are satisfied with it then you need rules and are lost without rules to tell you what to do in each situation.
Why people are poorly or non reasoning:
True reason, that is reason not backed by force or ruled reasoning, has no force to fight force and in any confrontation with force it must lose and force is intolerant and it will drive true reason out. Thus anyone who is tolerant of force, who nurtures force in his mind has no true reason because true reason cannot compete with force and force will drive true reason out of his mind and thus blind and needing to survive he must resort to second best namely rules to instruct him what to do or say in various situations where he must decide what to do or say.
Anyone who is emotional, who acknowledges he likes or dislikes whether he knows or not know the nature of what he is talking about regarding like or dislike, anyone who is stylish and therefore constantly uses force that is unnecessary to stretch, change speed and strength must be poorly or absent in true reason and strong or completely dependent on rules to instruct him what to say or do.
Because all ordinary people including those who think very highly in terms of goodness and intelligence can be demonstrated to be emotional, to like and dislike, to have style, they must all be deficient or even absent in true reason and what they call their reasoning is their mental rules of explaining, instructing them what to say or do.
Anyone who is driven by force as manifest in his style, emotion, like and dislike is deficient or absent in reason and strong in force, he is a closed and dead system unto himself and is the man Jesus described as seeing but seeing, hearing but not hearing.
The possible sources of a person’s actions:
Whatever action in speech and deed must have a source or basis. It is impossible that there can be no basis.
The possible sources of a person’s actions are a) seeing and knowing b) reasoning c) rules d) copying and e) automatism.
Everything that happens or exists in the world of existence has a nature that is objective, applies to everyone and may be determined precisely such and such is the nature of for example love, such and such is the nature of lust or liking.
Thus if you see and know the nature of something then you not need to resort to reason or rules with regard to action concerning that subject. If you see and know as the Buddha can that all beings even insects are valid beings like you, experience suffering when you harm them and you are accountable for killing them (Jesus said do not kill or you will be judged) then you will wisely avoid all killing or harming of all living creatures.
If you cannot see or know the nature of something then you have to resort to either reasoning or rules to guide your actions regarding that subject.
Because everything has a nature that applies to everyone then if you reasoning or thinking process determined correctly the nature of that object or subject then it is true reasoning. Reasoning is the process specific to an occasion that is based on what you can see or know is true to work out the nature of what you cannot see or know. That your reasoning is correct can be objectively proven by evidence. For instance you can prove that the stretching of syllables, changing in speed and loudness is the cause of stress, restlessness and distraction by comparing the difference between practicing and not practicing them. If I were to experience stress, restlessness and distraction by deliberately stretching, changing speed and loudness then I must be correct in my reasoning.
By contrast, rules are observations you or others made from past experiences that you adopt without question to apply to situations that occur to try to explain them and be the basis of your actions. You accept the mental rules as true and obey them without question and often if not always the rules are found wanting or even seriously wrong.
Another way of behaving is to copy what others do without understanding why. For instance you see others sporting Elvis hairstyles and you like it and you too wear an Elvis hairstyle. The basis is copying is a model for what is to be copied, the person’s liking or disliking or coercion by others to copy.
The last way of behaving is by automatism. When you have trained your mental parrot so well to say or do a certain thing in a certain way, it will automatically render it for you when a similar situation arises and you have been bypassed from the loop or superfluous. Most if not all the greetings by others eg ‘good morning’ is automatic by rote which is why sometimes the person makes a slip and say good morning when it is evening.
Knowing & seeing and reasoning as the sources for behaviour is precluded for ordinary stylish or emotional people (much as they like to be indignant) and so they have to resort to copying based on liking and coercion, rules and automatism as the basis for their behaviour and interpreting things.
A person who is emotional, liking and disliking and finds them meaningful when they are meaningless stirring of force, who appreciates falsity (style, smiling, jokes are falsity) cannot see or know the truth, cannot work out from what he knows or sees the truth of things he does not know or see except in his delusion that he can and does.
NO PERSON WHO CAN SEE OR KNOW THE TRUTH, OR CAN WORK OUT THE TRUTH OF WHAT HE DOES NOT SEE OR KNOW BASED ON WHAT HE KNOWS OR SEES WILL ACCEPT OR APPRECIATE FALSITY BECAUSE HE KNOWS FALSITY IS FORCEFUL, STRESSFUL AND ENDS IN MADNESS AND BECAUSE ALL ORDINARY PEOPLE APPRECIATE AND ACCEPT FALSITY (THEY SEE LIKING & STYLE AS MEANINGFUL, JOKES AS MEANINGFUL, THEY CANNOT SEE THAT DEAFENING SILENCE IS FALSE OR SURE CANNOT PRETTY AS WHEN THEY HEAR ‘PRETTY SURE’, THEY PERCEIVE A SOUND CAN BE ‘FUNNY) THEY CANNOT SEE OR KNOW THE TRUTH AND CANNOT REASON OUT THE TRUTH.
A PERSON WHO CAN REASON WILL NOT USE FORCE BECAUSE THE IMPACT OF FORCE ON HIS MIND IS PAINFUL, CONDITIONS HIM EVERMORE TO FORCE AND WILL END IN LOSS OF CONTROL AND INSANITY. BECAUSE ALL ORDINARY PEOPLE CONSTANTLY SUBJECT THEIR MINDS TO FORCE IN THEIR USE OF FORCE TO FABRICATE STYLE OR CONSTANT STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND STRENGTH, TO LIKE OR DISLIKE, TO BE EMOTIONAL THEY CANNOT BE TRUE BEINGS OF REASON BUT THEIR REASON IS APPARENT NOT REAL.
IT IS FORCE AND NEVER REASON THAT IS BASIS BEHIND COPYING AND BEHAVING ACCORDING TO RULES IN WHICH THE RULES AND MODELS FOR COPYING ARE MERELY TEMPLATES OR MOULDS FOR THE APPLICATION OF FORCE TO CARRY THE RULES OR COPYING OUT. THUS WHEN A PERSON BEHAVE ACCORDING TO RULES OR COPYING, HE IS BEHAVING ACCORDING TO FORCE NOT REASON.
THUS A PERSON OF FORCE WHO IS ALWAYS A PERSON OF STYLE AND LIKE AND DISLIKE CAN ONLY BEHAVE IN THREE WAYS:
HE MAY COPY WITHOUT QUESTION THE BEHAVIOR OF OTHERS BECAUSE HE LIKES IT OR HE IS COERCED TO DO SO IN WHICH NO REASON IS INVOLVED BUT THE BEHAVIOR TO BE COPIED IS A TEMPLATE OR MOULD FOR HIM TO PERCEIVE AND THEN APPLY FORCE TO MAKE A COPY IN HIS OWN MIND.
HE MAY BEHAVE ACCORDING TO RULES THAT MAY BE COPIED FROM OTHERS OR FABRICATED BY HIMSELF IN WHICH THE RULES ARE MERELY MOULDS OR TEMPLATES FOR HIM TO APPLY FORCE TO BEHAVE ACCORDING TO WHAT THE RULES SPECIFY.
HE MAY BEHAVE BY AUTOMATISM IN WHICH WELL PRACTICED SEQUENCES OF BEHAVIOR AUTOMATICALLY ACTIVATE THEMSELVES IN THE PRESENCE OF THE STIMULI THEY WERE INTENDED TO REACT TO.
SEEING AND KNOWING THE TRUTH IS RESERVED FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT ROBOTS, WHO EXIST SPECIFIC FOR THE OCCASION WITHOUT RESORTING TO REHASHING, WHO DO NOT LIKE OR DISLIKE BUT SEE EVERYTHING AS IT IS NOT AS THEY LIKE OR DISLIKE IT.
REASONING OUT SPECIFIC TO THE OCCASION THE NATURE OF SOMETHING HE DOES NOT KNOW OR SEE INITIALLY IS RESERVED FOR PEOPLE WHO CAN SEE AND KNOW THE TRUTH SO THAT BASED ON WHAT HE ALREADY SEES AND KNOWS HE CAN WORK OUT THINGS HE HAS NOT SEEN OR KNOWN AND WHAT IS REASONED OUT IS VERIFIABLE BECAUSE IT IS TRUE.
There may be those who are indignant and think I am derisive to say they cannot reason, cannot work out the truth. If you can reason or work out the truth why do you see nothing wrong with statements like ‘deafening’ silence, ‘pretty’ sure, that ‘well’ or ‘fine’ contradicts the subsequent statement ‘I will have to think about it’, how come you cannot work out that there style in everyone and it is all about stretching, changing speed and loudness that is the only source of the insoluble stress, restlessness and distraction that you must suffer from and persecute others? If you can reason or work out the truth, why can’t you see yourself liking and disliking all the time and how this is unnecessary and applies force on your mind that harms it, conditions it and will end in madness? Examine your reason carefully and you may realize it is rules, liking and disliking that you mistake for your reasoning.
Why rules and rituals must be false:
Even if you cannot see or know that rules and rituals are false and harmful, if you have faith that the Buddha is all seeing and knowing then they must be false and harmful because it is impossible for something that is true and beneficial to lead to future states of woe.
Whatever you do repetitively with your body or speech that has no obvious physical objectives is a ritual.
Thus tai chi, yoga or exercises (jogging, gym work or playing games) are all rituals in which keeping fit, curing stress are all excuses because they are not true cures for stress, restless or distraction but merely props.
They fact that you do not accept them as rituals but you insist they are meaningful may not reflect you are right but may reflect your inability to see the truth. As Jesus might have said, who amongst you can extend your life even one day by practicing yoga, tai chi or exercises. Without stopping stretching syllables, changing speed and loudness you will not see an end to stress, restlessness and distraction that will kill you in agony and send you to perdition.
Fengshui is part rules part rituals:
Fengshui is part rules and part rituals, so are superstitions.
If you believe there is basis or truth in them and you practice them, you have faith in rules and rites that is the fetter to future woe.
Just because you insist they are not rules or rituals does not mean you are right or there is a special case for you that you will not end in perdition whereas others will.
Does fengshui guarantee you to become prosperous?
If not everyone who practices fengshui is endowed with prosperity and good luck and those who do not practice can have prosperity and good luck, even those who unwittingly practice bad fengshui also enjoy prosperity, on what basis or truth do you perceive fengshui as true?
If fengshui is true and no hocus pocus then everyone who practices according to fengshui must become prosperous and everyone who fails to practice must become destitute.
Thus you have no right to believe what you cannot see and know as true, if you do you are presumptuous, a defilement of the mind according to Buddha. A defiled mind cannot see the truth.
Kidman really, really scared by paparazzo:
Is it possible for someone to be really scared, let alone really, really scared instead just scared? If it is not possible for anyone to be anything more than scared by something, then this ‘really, really’ is false.
Is it possible for someone to be not really scared? It is possible to be not scared by something but it is impossible for someone to be not really scared. What you mean in a false way when you say he is not really scared is that he is faking he is scared.
Is Kidman not faking she is scared or she was extremely scared the same as Kidman really, really scared?
If you agree there are differences then the person spoke falsely when he said she was really, really scared.
If he or you can reason out or work out the truth, how come this statement does not arouse your disapproval?
It is the force never reason that makes delusions hard to shake off:
There are those who believe and practice fengshui and those who do not and it is not the reason behind their belief but the force and fear (another force) of loss if they did not obey that makes it hard for people to shed their beliefs (delusions) about fengshui.
True reason is understanding and once understood if there is no force, the belief is instantly relinquished.
It is the force behind the belief in fengshui through repeated conditioning practice even to great mental strength and the fear of bad consequences if they did not obey the dictates of fengshui (because they are attached to their lives here and will lose it) that makes it hard if not impossible for people who have faith in rituals and rules to shed their beliefs.
Many people have false perception that because their belief eg in fengshui is hard to shake off, it keeps recurring in them automatically, it is true when the fact that it is hard to shake off is because it is held in place by force and force is false.
THE FACT THAT A BELIEF IS HARD TO SHAKE OFF IS NOT A SIGN OF IT BEING TRUE BUT A SIGN THAT IT IS BACKED BY FORCE WHICH IS ALWAYS FALSE AND HARMFUL AND THEREFORE FALSE OR A DELUSION.
In the same way all sinful and stressful behaviour like practicing style (forceful stretching, changing speed and strength), likes and dislikes, emotions (anger, hate), addictions or vices (gambling), urge to attack or challenge others are hard to shed because they are backed by force that is conditioning and detaining that makes it hard or impossible for people hooked on them to shake off.
I cannot imagine my mother’s anxieties:
If you can reason or work out the truth you should be able to work out that this statement is false because how intense her anxieties can be imagined and therefore it is false to say it is unimaginable which was said falsely to exaggerate how great the mother’s anxiety.
If you keep telling yourself you cannot imagine things that you can imagine in time to come you will truly be unable to imagine things that you should be able to imagine or it is possible for God to fulfil your desire to be able to not imagine things that are imaginable and that is insanity.
BECAUSE YOU ARE ALWAYS SAYING YOU CANNOT IMAGINE THIS AND THAT AND IN TRUTH YOU CAN BUT YOU ARE FAKING TO EXAGGERATE HOW GREAT SOMETHING IS, IT MAY BE POSSIBLE BY GOD TO CREATE A STATE FOR YOU WHEREIN YOU CANNOT IMAGINE THINGS THAT ARE IN TRUTH IMAGINABLE AND RATHER THAN A PLEASURE, THAT MAY BE TORMENTING AND MAD.
Completely inappropriate behaviour:
Quote: Kate McCann screamed in 'anger and disgust' when she was offered a two-year jail sentence if she confessed to killing Madeleine, relatives have revealed. She repeatedly shouted out 'No, no, no' when she learned of the alleged police 'deal'.
Comment: Ordinary people see nothing wrong and think she is justified with this ‘grandstanding’ emotional behaviour when it is false, for show, inappropriate and lead to insanity for her even if it turns out she had nothing to do with her daughter’s disappearance.
Nothing is served to be outraged by the police’s offer of plea bargaining except to suffer yourself by getting upset and conditioning yourself yet again to intense mental force that will end in insanity whilst subjecting the police however dastardly to abuse that will also condition them to suffering for which you have karma not merit.
And what might be the intent or motive for her emotional display?
The motive might be to impress the gullible she is innocent. The McCanns used money donated to them to help find their child to pay off their mortgages and that is unrighteous behaviour and reflects on them.
The purpose of reasoning is to know:
The purpose of reasoning is not for adornment, to make money or establish rules for future (rote) behaviour, but it is to know what you did not know and see previously that it is important for you to know. If you reason about something useless or frivolous you are practicing nonsense that will end in madness.
If you see and know you do not need to reason. For instance if you secretly saw the policemen kill Altanturya, you secretly heard Razak instructing them, you do not need to reason to work out who killed her because you saw and know who killed her.
A person of truth who did not see what happened and cannot reason out what happened will just leave matters as it is and will not jump to conclusions or speculate or fantasize what it might have been thereby conditioning himself to false perceptions that the foolish person does not realize become increasingly compelling until he cannot separate fact from fantasy and become confused.
If you cannot see and did not know and you cannot reason then you must resort to copying, rules and automatism that are always false, dangerous and harmful to cope with your not seeing and knowing what happened in order to make some sense of what is happening or fake as if you are competent or knowledgeable to impress others.
There is nothing mysterious or indefinable or supernatural about knowing and it is just a process of arriving at knowing what you previously did not know separating facts from fiction and piecing together what you know as facts to then know what happened.
Ordinary people are poorly seeing and knowing that are crucial requisites for reasoning and therefore by extension they must also be poorly reasoning.
The reason why they are poorly or never seeing or knowing is because they never see with reason but they see with force, with liking and disliking selectively in a forcefully prejudiced way and they have already advanced false perception. For instance they perceive that silence can be deafening, a sound can be funny, they are pretty sure (meaning sure can be pretty) and speak of unimaginable suffering that surely they can imagine however imperfectly and probably quite perfectly.
As a result of poorly or never seeing they become poorly or never knowing, their minds are cluttered if not filled with delusions implanted like viruses by others or themselves that like weeds choke their ability to reason and thus unseeing, not knowing and unable to reason they have to cover up their deficiencies and resort to copying from others, rules and automatism to survive in this world.
In lieu of reason or the capacity to work out live specific for each occasion what is the truth, you have to resort to fixed rules or pre-recorded explanations what things mean but reality never conform to rules which always have exceptions and therefore it is foolish to resort to and live by rules. Apart from rules, the person who cannot reason learns to copy speech and behaviour he does not understand from others that appear appropriate to the common occasions he finds himself in and in time his trained mental parrot begin to dish out his copied speech and actions automatically on cue even without his approval or paying attention.
Unimaginable:
If you keep saying you cannot imagine what you can imagine, however imperfectly and probably even quite perfectly, thereby misleading others, it may be possible for you to exist in a world where you cannot perceive what in truth can be perceived.
It is possible for you to be born blind or deaf and thus though it is possible to see or hear, you cannot see and hear. If you think that is a pleasure, then you should keep on saying “I cannot imagine how he could have done it”. What has happened or can happen can be imagined.
A Scientist Speaking Nonsense:
Quote scientist: "Perhaps we might start to understand a little more about the common ancestor of African great apes and humans and whether it lived in Africa or Eurasia."
Comment: Science is supposed to be at the forefront of mankind’s quest for truth or facts about this world and so you would expect scientists to display reasoning and thoughts that are more orderly and rational than common people but this scientist may not be atypical but reflect that even scientists talk nonsense too or in a muddled or unnecessarily complicating & thus confusing fashion.
The ‘perhaps’ and ‘might start’ in the above sentence make no sense and are totally unnecessary, do not add any meaning but serve to confuse the reader. Whether deliberate or involuntary, it reflects hesitancy or doubt and uncertainty that must exist in his mind. Even over a simple matter like this he is hesitant as expressed in his ‘perhaps’.
If we have already started to understand in the past then what he said is false. If it is silly, there is no need to talk about ‘starting to’ understand but to just talk about ‘understanding’ he is ponderous or mechanical and has false perception that will end in mad perception. Such ponderous speech comes from the urge to say more and have style in one’s speech to impress others falsely with one’s authoritativeness such that in time the person cannot go straight to the point but must always beat around the bush. You will be foolish to accept the words of such a person as gospel.
If you yourself have a tendency and liking to speak in a verbose way like him then you might side with him and say I am nitpicking. However if it is never a pleasure to speak like him and you are suffering then by defending him you are defending suffering and shall head for suffering in the future.
It suffices to say, “We might understand a little more about the common ancestor of African great apes and humans and whether it lived in Africa or Eurasia"
This is not a matter of untidy language but reflects seriously muddled thinking that will influence the way he studies his subjects and arrive at conclusions.
The fact that he phrased himself thus is not an accident but reflects he sees nothing wrong; he has a vacillating mentality of not letting his yes be yes only and how he said it is much ado about nothing.
The way he said it is unnecessarily complicating and not the hallmark of clearly reasoning mind. What he says may sound impressive to the gullible and may be subconsciously intended to be impressive but it is all a matter of style and saying things that are superfluous or hollow.
NOT ONLY IS ‘PERHAPS’ AND ‘START TO’ TOTALLY UNNECESSARY, THEY ARE DISTRACTING TO THE SPEAKER AND LISTENERS AND A PERSON WHO SPEAKS THUS HAS KARMA NOT MERIT.
IF YOU CAN SEE AND KNOW THE TRUTH, DID YOU SEE AND KNOW THE WAY THE SCIENTIST EXPRESSED HIMSELF IS RIDICULOUS? IF YOU DID NOT SEE OR KNOW, MIGHT IT MEAN YOUR ABILITY TO SEE AND KNOW AND TO REASON WHAT YOU DID NOT KNOW MIGHT BE SERIOUSLY MORE DEFICIENT THAN YOU MAY CONCEDE?
ANYONE WHO IS STRESSED, RESTLESS AND DISTRACTED CANNOT THINK STRAIGHT AND BECAUSE ALL SCIENTISTS HAVE MANIFEST STYLE (FORCEFUL STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGES OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS) & EMOTIONS, THEY MUST BE STRESSED, RESTLESS AND DISTRACTED AND THEREFORE CANNOT THINK STRAIGHT AND THEREFORE THE PRODUCTS OF THEIR MINDS MUST BE SUSPECT OR SKEWED.
Rules control rituals:
All conduct in speech or actions that are memorized with the intention for replay in the future are not intended for replay on all occasions but on selected occasions and there must be rules determining when and where these selected occasions have arrived so that the memorized speech or action can be commenced.
Thus without rules governing when to start or stop a recorded behaviour that recorded behaviour is useless. Without programmed rules as to when to initiate which particular pre-recorded motion, all the programmes of pre-recorded motion in the humanoid robot Asimo however impressive are useless. Apart from fixed rules there is nothing else that can serve as the reliable guide for Asimo as to what to do in the situations he might be faced with.
Without telling Asimo through fixed programmed instructions how to dance or run or clap hands it would not be able to do so. These fixed programmed instructions on which Asimo depend on to act or perform its various rituals are the rules that enable Asimo to carry the various rituals and so rules are again essential to perform rituals, there can be no rituals without rules defining the ritual or providing the theory of the ritual in addition to rules that tell the ritualistic person when to start and stop each ritual.
Because all stylish people can be shown objectively to render everything they think, say or do from a mental jukebox, even what and how they perceive (eg see, hear) is rehashed according to a program, they are full time or constant practitioners of rituals and it is not surprising but to be expected that they should have faith in what they are doing all the time, namely obeying rules and practicing rituals.
Not entirely to blame:
People are not entirely to blame themselves for liking and disliking and finding it hard to shake off even when they are both false and suffering leading to greater suffering.
People and indeed animals everywhere bombard them with audiovisual inputs that induce their mental forces to stir attractively or repulsively and because liking and disliking are forceful, they are conditioning or addictive that becomes increasingly strong with continued practice such that all beings here, even those who think they are quite good have liking and disliking that are very strong and because there are hard to resist and arise strongly they identify with their likings and disliking not realizing they are headed for torment.
When someone smiles at you he or she is inviting you to like them and once you have been stirred to like it conditions you to like and can be transferred to other targets.
This world neither sees nor knows the truth:
The Buddha said the truth is not easily seen and the truth he is speaking is not something exotic or merely related to spiritual matters but it is the truth everywhere in everything you perceive (see, hear, smell, taste and touch) that the Buddha implies beings in this world cannot see.
Jesus implied the same when he spoke of the spirit of truth whom the world neither sees nor knows; if this world can see, know or reason out the truth then it will not need another counsellor who is the spirit not of supernatural powers or great strength but of truth, and he will not need to teach all things.
And what is the truth that is everywhere that people cannot see?
The truth everywhere that people cannot see is the constant forceful stretching of syllables or units of motion, changing of speed and strength of force that is for show to impress, please, intimidate and dominate that is the only source of the stress, restlessness, distraction, sadness and feeling hurt they must all suffer even to suicidal and homicidal levels, the objective falsity, nonsensicality, contradiction, attacking and challenging nature of what people say or do.
It is the stress, restlessness and distraction engendered by their enslavement to force that renders them unable to see, know and reason out the truth and keep them enslaved in torment headed for even greater and everlasting torment.
THUS BY IMPLICATION OF WHAT THE BUDDHA AND JESUS SAID, THIS WORLD CANNOT SEE AND KNOW THE TRUTH AND BECAUSE OF THIS THEY CANNOT ALSO REASON OR WORK OUT THE TRUTH AND WHAT IS LEFT IS FOR THEM TO RUN THEIR LIVES ACCORDING TO RULES, COPYING WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING AND AUTOMATIC REHASHED RENDERING. IN ORDER TO ESCAPE TORMENT, THEY MUST DEVELOP SEEING AND KNOWING PARLY BY WEANING THEIR MINDS OFF FORCE.
No stylish behaviour means no rules needed:
If your speech and behaviour is not stylish that needs memorizing and rehashing then you need not have rules to govern when which piece of memorized speech or action is desirable and you are free to speak and behave accordingly depending on the situation at hand.
But if you desire to be stylish in what you say or do you must somehow commit to memory the stylish way you said different things and must have some sort of rules to determine when you should render this or that sequence and you must be rule bound.
THUS IF YOU MUST HAVE STYLISH BEHAVIOR THAT NEED TO BE MEMORIZED AND REPRODUCED YOU MUST PRACTICE RULES AND HAVE FAITH IN RULES THAT THE BUDDHA SAID LED TO FUTURE STATES OF WOE.
Shed solace:
As I have said, the only cause to sadness that leads to depression is the constant use of force to prolong, eg stretch syllables and motion and unless you stop using force to prolong you will never see an end to sadness and whatever else you may do are diversions to either deny or hopefully ameliorate but never cure the sadness.
It is a form of practice of ritual and faith in rules to believe in and participate in the shed therapy described below which may only coincidentally work.
I know I am right because by stopping stretching, I have experienced a permanent end to sadness that was unthinkable in the past. If you have not stopped stretching your syllables yourself you have no right to say I am wrong or how do I know unless you want to create karma for yourself.
Australian men find solace in a shed
By Phil Mercer BBC News, Sydney
Australia has come up with a novel weapon in the fight against high rates of male suicide and depression - a variation on the humble shed.
The Men's Shed movement is booming in disused warehouses and other suburban buildings, which are being transformed into havens for mostly older men to socialise.
At the last count there were 216 of them around the country and more are on the way.
Perched in between native bushland and a busy railway line is the North Sydney shed.
The former scouts' hall is a fully equipped workshop. It hums with activity and a fair dose of cheeky Aussie humour.
"We talk about all sorts of things - from cake recipes to sex - so we cover a wide field," said supervisor John Marlin, a kind-hearted bear of a man who is in his early 70s.
Supporters have insisted the workshops are a breakthrough in men's health as the informal atmosphere is encouraging them to talk more about their problems - such as depression and loneliness.
Postponing the inevitable:
Shed therapy may postpone the inevitable by providing company that prevents you from sinking too deep into depression to become suicidal, it provides diversions that merely stave off the inevitable final sinking into depression either later or after you depart.
Privacy please:
Have you ever heard Jesus say ‘Can we have some privacy or quiet please?’, ‘read the bible, please’, ‘think of your Father in heaven, please’, please do not be upset that I am going or I am pleased to announce that the Father will give you another counselor?
Have you heard the Buddha say, ‘be virtuous, please’ or ‘please do not kill?’
The please is a form of nicety that is unnecessary but necessary to exert pressure or force on the other person to obey and that is always sinful not meritorious. Please can have various meaning, it can be threatening or as if begging or to convey appreciation (eg ‘yes please’ to the waiter’s offer of another serving).
PLEASE IS AN UNNECESSARY PLEASANTRY OR NICETY THAT NICE PEOPLE ARE ATTRACTED TO WITH FORCE NOT REASON TO USE AND IF IT IS FOR SHOW, NOT NECESSARY YOU ARE HEADED FOR INSANITY FOR SEEING WHAT IS MEANINGLESS OR HARMFUL AS MEANINGFUL AND BENEFICIAL FOR YOU.
What do people mean by ‘please’?
You hear people frequently say ‘please’ and you yourself probably has a penchant to use ‘please’.
So what is meant by ‘please’? If you are frequently using ‘please’ and frequently hearing ‘please’ and you do not know what it means precisely then you are a person who does not know what he is speaking or hearing and that is an indication of somnolent rote speech imitating others without understanding.
When people say ‘please’ they mean ‘please me’, they want others to do or say things to please them.
Because all ordinary people are stylish emotional people they cannot mean ‘make me happy’ but by pleasing them they mean ‘make me like myself’ and because liking has nothing to do with reason but the stirring of mental force, you are asking others to make you stir your mental force attractive to yourself or asking them to make you sin.
YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO ASK OTHERS TO PLEASE YOU BUT IT IS UP TO OTHERS WHETHER THEY WANT TO PLEASE YOU OR YOU. IF YOU ASK OTHERS TO PLEASE YOU, YOU ARE ASKING THEM TO GO AGAINST THEMSELVES TO PLEASE YOU AND THAT IS ASKING THEM TO ACT OR PUT ON A SHOW. IN REALITY WHENEVER PEOPLE TRY TO PLEASE ANOTHER THEY MUST BEHAVE IN A SUBSERVIANT OR OBESIANT WAY AND THAT IS ASKING PEOPLE TO ENSLAVE THEM TO YOU.
You may disagree but you may have false perception that you are meritorious to reply ‘yes, please’ to a waiter’s enquiry of a top up. It suffices to say, “yes” without rudeness or haughtiness.
Whenever people use ‘please’ they may have different intentions. The common intention is to exert (unrighteous) pressure on you to do what they want you to do. Other intentions are to threaten (please stop that) or to beg you, please help me or it may be faked just to impress others that they are polite and friendly.
‘PLEASE’ IS A SHORTENED FORM OF ‘PLEASE ME’ BUT THE PERSON MAY NOT MEAN WHAT HE SAYS & WHAT HE MEANT BY USING ‘PLEASE’ IS TO SOUND POLITE OR FRIENDLY OR USING ‘PLEASE’ AS A GENERAL FOR SHOW RULE OF SPEECH (ALWAYS MINDLESSLY USE ‘PLEASE’ WHEN REQUESTING FAVORS FROM OTHERS). WHATEVER THE INTENTION IT IS NOT MERITORIOUS TO USE ‘PLEASE’ BUT CREATES KARMA THAT YOU MAY REFUTE NOT NECESSARILY BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
Examples of poor reasoning and rules faking as reasoning:
A glaring example that mankind is poorly reasoning and people are passing off rules as reasoning is the conviction of the lone gunman in the disappearance of Tony Falconio in the Australian outback.
It is impossible for a lone gunman to commit the crime because the couple’s van was found some kilometres from the crime scene and no lone gunman can drive his own 4WD and the couple’s van at the same time to abandon it so far away from the scene.
It is a rule that any lone gunman can commit a crime but in this case the rule is found wanting because the gunman would have to do the impossible, drive two vehicles at the same time. Thus because the police and the judiciary operate by rules thinking they failed to realize this glaring faux pas.
Again the McCanns were quick to accuse the police of framing them regarding the finding of DNA evidence of their child in their hired car when it is physically impossible for the police to frame them because the child has disappeared so where can police get material from her to frame them?
The rule is that police can frame people but in the context of this case, it is not possible for police to frame.
THUS WHAT PEOPLE CALL THEIR REASONING MAY BE THEIR APPLYING OF RULES TO A SITUATION WITHOUT REALIZING AND IT IS ONLY WHEN THEY COMMIT SOME FAUX PAS THAT THE TRUE NATURE OF THEIR ‘REASONING’ IS EVIDENT.
THUS PEOPLE MAY BE DELUDING THEMSELVES WHEN THEY THINK THEY ARE REASONING BECAUSE THEY MAY BE APPLYING RULES OR GENERALIZATIONS WITHOUT REALIZING, A FOOL WHO DOES NOT KNOW WHAT HE IS DOING.
Wanting a favour you cannot refuse:
Whenever people add ‘please’ to their requests, they want to sound polite or friendly not because they are genuinely so polite or friendly but they want to exert (unfair) psychological pressure on the other person to accede to their request.
Because they never state that they want to impress you with their politeness and friendliness so that you have greater incentive to do what they want from you, they are hypocritical.
This is the common hypocritical motive but there are other motives like threatening or demanding.
If you mean what you say then by saying ‘please’ you mean the other person should please you. It is preposterous that the other person can please himself by carrying out your request and so the ‘please’ must imply ‘please me’ by carrying out my request.
However in the usual course of events, when people say ‘please’ they do not mean what they say but they want to put on a show of being polite or friendly because they need something from you.
Genuine & to be heard friendliness:
There is false friendliness that is to be heard or seen and there is genuine friendliness.
What is false cheap friendliness that is to be heard or seen?
Saying ‘please’ when one wants something done by another is polite or to be heard false cheap friendship whilst smiling whilst speaking or doing is to be seen false friendship.
What is genuine friendship?
It is speaking and doing things that does not harm the other person but benefits him.
Not harming the other person means speaking without style or forceful stretching, changing speed and loudness that stresses, make restless and distracted, not telling lies, not speaking nonsense or contradictory messages, not attacking directly or indirectly (sarcastically or poking fun), not attacking or challenging or arguing. Benefiting another means saying things that are helpful or insightful or alleviates his suffering or problems.
If your spoken ‘please’ has style or forceful stretching, changes in speed and loudness then it is stressful rather than soothing to the person addressed. If it exerts pressure on the recipient to accede to your demands then it persecutes him rather than benefit him.
Saying please is what some people learnt to force themselves to say by copying without understanding from others and although initially they may be self conscious that they are forcing themselves to do so to get what they want, increasingly they begin to perceive their pleases are genuine, from the bottom of their hearts, good for themselves and others and because the urge to say ‘please’ is very strong, they automatically say ‘please’ even without awareness, they identify with their pleases not believing they are hypocrites practicing the rule of always saying please headed for future woe according to the Buddha.
THUS THE ‘PLEASE’ THAT ACCOMPANIES REQUESTS IS NOT GENUINE FRIENDLINESS BUT FALSE TO BE HEARD FRIENDLINESS THAT HAS MOTIVE IN EXERTING PSYCHOLOGICAL PRESSURE ON THE OTHER PERSON TO ACCEDE TO YOUR DEMANDS AND YOU ARE DELUDED TO THINK YOU ARE GOOD WHEN YOU ARE UNRIGHTEOUS.
Connotations:
Many words have taken additional meanings or connotation through the abuse of frequent usage by many people such that they may have many meanings that are quite different and so ‘please’ has many different meanings when used.
In the usual sense when you say ‘please help me’ you mean ‘please me by helping me’ or make me happy or make me like myself by helping me which is a demand. In this case you have no right to ask others make you happy or like yourself by acceding to your demand.
But through the corruption of usage, the use of please when requesting help has degenerated into a form of even impersonal courtesy or politeness or to convey false for show friendliness. Because I said ‘please’ you should oblige me or I am good.
Another connotation of please is that I am distressed or weak so ‘please’ or ‘I beg you’ help me and because I am begging you, you must oblige. Exactly how distressed you are that others must please you by helping you can be known if not by you then by God and if your distress is exaggerated or even non existent and your imploring please is to manipulate others you are headed for woe.
Prolonging:
It only takes a certain amount of time to get on stage, get your diploma and leave but you can prolong the duration because you perceive it is an occasion to display yourself by taking longer than necessary to walk to the dispenser of your diploma, to turn to the audience and wave, to smile and engage him in small talk with view to prolonging the duration of your receipt of your diploma and to again wave before you ‘sign off’ with a smile and prolonging your walk down the stairs.
Thus not only is it possible to prolong any physical act (eg prolong your golf swing by adding stylish multiple curves to its path) but people are prolonging all the time, they prolong their sex act or feeding to extract ‘maximal’ pleasure or reflect their grasping at it.
You use and need force to prolong, never reason and because it is forceful it is conditioning or addictive such that in time it is automatic and constant to prolong and rather than being an adulterated pleasure it is tormenting to prolong and is the only cause of sadness that leads to depression.
Distress is a sign of genuineness is a rule:
People do not realize they are subscribing to a rule when they automatically associate genuine distress which is always an act no matter how genuine as a sign the person is not faking but what he said happened is genuine.
Thus in the case of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance many foolish observers were saying how can the mother be faking when her anguish at the discovery was so genuine. She may be genuinely anguished but not necessarily because her child was kidnapped but because she has suddenly lost her child permanently in an accident.
Again many including the police were taken in by the girl’s visible distress to accept what she said has happened to be true when she may have other causes of distress because she did spend a night alone in the pitch darkness and wild fearing snakes and predators and she may be anxious for fear of discovery of her faked disappearance of her boyfriend.
Again it was remarked that no professional actress could have acted like Kate McCann did that night and therefore what she said must be true that a kidnapper took her child. This is again rules thinking that fails to take into account that no true tragedies occur on the screen and the son who died is not the actress’ real son and the death is not a real death whereas in this case even if the kidnap is not genuine, she did suffer an accidental death of her daughter.
Thus a person who is always applying rules to ‘solve’ problems may be deceived he has genuine reason and treating each case on its merits but he is a fool who can be tricked by others and overrating his reasoning capability.
ALL EXPRESSIONS ARE FABRICATED AND HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH REASON BUT EVERYTHING TO DO WITH FORCE AND WHEN WELL PRACTICED THE PERSON IS FORCED TO EXPRESS RATHER FORCING HIMSELF TO EXPRESS AND BECAUSE THE EXPRESSION IS INVOLUNTARY, FOOLS PERCEIVE THE EXPRESSION IS GENUINE WHEN IT IS FAKING THAT HAS GONE OUT OF CONTROL. THE FOOL’S RULE IS THAT THE MORE DRAMATIC OR FLORID AN EXPRESSION, THE MORE GENUINE IT IS.
Applying rules not reasoning:
Quote: I've always been of the opinion that once you've qualified as a team - as Croatia have - the pressure and intensity just isn't there.
Yes, they will want to win at Wembley, but when 50-50 tackles are flying in, there's only one team who will be willing to put their bodies on the line and that's England.
He is not reasoning to know but applying rules to predict an outcome of a match that he does not have sufficient facts to predict. A wise person will not even venture to predict a result because it is dicing with falsity that leads to doubt and uncertainty. For instance it was widely predicted that Russia will beat Israel but the opposite happened. A superior team may attack a hundred times and fail to score and the weaker team may score with its only attempt. If unknown to you, a team has been bribed to lose or the referee is biased, then you are a fool to try to predict the result.
Once you have qualified as a team, the pressure and intensity just isn't there is a rule or generalization that may not apply in this case (A Russian magnate has offered Croatia four Mercedes to beat England). “When 50-50 tackles are flying in, there's only one team who will be willing to put their bodies on the line and that's England” too is not an instance of reasoning but a rule or generalization he is attempting to fit into this situation that may not apply.
A REASONING PERSON ASSESSES EACH SITUATION ON ITS MERIT AND IN THIS CASE HE REALIZES HE CANNOT TELL WHAT WILL BE THE OUTCOME OF THE MATCH AND HE REFRAINS FROM MAKING PREDICTIONS. THE FOOL PLUNGES AND MAKE BETS BASED ON RULES.
ROBOTS CANNOT REASON BUT THEY OPERATE BY INFLEXIBLE RULES PROGRAMMED INTO THEM AND IF YOU WANT TO CHANGE ROBOTS YOU MUST REPROGRAM OR CHANGE THE RULES THEY ARE PROGRAMMED WITH. BECAUSE ALL ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO HAVE STYLE OPERATE FROM A JUKEBOX IN WHATEVER AND HOWEVER THEY PERCEIVE, THINK, SPEAK AND DO, THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY SOPHISTICATED ROBOTS ENDOWED WITH CONSCIOUSNESS THAT MERELY ACTS AS VOYEUR AND DIRECTOR OR DISK JOCKEY AND IT MAY BE OR IS THE TRUTH THAT ORDINARY PEOPLE CANNOT REASON BUT THEY OPERATE BY RULES THEY AND SOCIETY PROGRAMMED THEMSELVES WITH.
It is force that is ill that is behind lies:
True reason never plays any part in the fabricating and execution of lies, nonsense and speech that is conflicting, attacks or challenges another to an argument. If you think genuine reason must play a part then you have wrong perception or you may have mistaken rules thinking as the true reason involved in all falsity or verbal aggressiveness.
A person does or says something false, nonsensical, conflicting or attacking not without reason but with motive to harm or hurt the other person or un-righteously get what he wants (eg someone’s money, property or love).
A lie or falsity is essentially a series of words that although they (the words) each have true meaning, have been conveniently hijacked by force to be strung together to fashion a falsity that gives the impression of truth but it is an even clever fake in which depending how skilful a liar the person is, the series of words strung together merely provide the framework through which the person can apply force to drive the falsity he desires to transmit and wants others to accept as true.
IT IS FORCE THAT IS ILL OR ILL WILL THAT IS BEHIND THE RULES THINKING (NOT TRUE REASONING) THAT ENABLES THE LIAR TO FORMULATE THE LIE OR NONSENSE OR CONTRADICTORY OR ATTACKING WORDS IN A WAY THAT IS AS CREDIBLE AS POSSIBLE IN THE CONTEXT AT HAND TO CHEAT OTHERS.
IT IS AGAIN FORCE THAT IS ILL OR ILL WILL THAT WILL THEN SEIZE THE THUS FABRICATED LIE AND DRIVE ITS RENDITION USUALLY WITH EXCESSIVE FORCE THAT IS MANIFEST IN THE FORCEFUL PROLONGING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGES IN SPEED AND LOUDNESS WITH A DESIRE OR WILL THAT THE OTHER PERSON SHOULD ACCEPT IT AS TRUE.
THROUGHOUT THE FABRICATING AND RENDERING OF FALSITY, RATHER THAN NECESSARY, IT IS PREFERABLE THAT TRUE REASON BE BANISHED BECAUSE THE PERSON WILL BE SELF CONSCIOUS IF TRUE REASON WAS PRESENT IN THE CONCEPTION AND EXECUTION OF THE LIE.
WHAT THE FOOLISH PERSON WHO TELLS LIES DOES NOT REALIZE IS THAT BECAUSE THE FABRICATION AND EXECUTION OF HIS LIE OR ATTACKING SPEECH IS DRIVEN BY FORCE BACKED BY FALSE RULES THINKING IN WHICH HE MUST BANISH TRUE REASON AND HE WILLS HIMSELF TO BELIEVE HIS LIE OR ATTACKING SPEECH IS TRUE SO AS TO MAKE IT AS CREDIBLE AS POSSIBLE TO OTHERS, HE IS WALKING A TIGHTROPE OF REALITY TESTING AND INCREASINGLY HE BELIEVES WHAT IS FALSE IS TRUE AND HE IS HEADED FOR AN INEVITABLE FALL FROM HIS TIGHTROPE OF CHICANERY TO DESCEND INTO INSANITY.
THUS A PERSON’S ILL WILL WHICH THE BUDDHA SAID IS A FETTER TO THE LOWER REALMS IS ESSENTIALLY HIS FORCEFULNESS THAT IS CONSTANTLY BEHIND HIS USE OF FORCE TO FABRICATE HIS STYLE IN WHATEVER AND HOWEVER HE PERCEIVES, THINKS, SPEAKS AND DOES THINGS OR HOW HE USES FORCE TO STRETCH, CHANGE SPEED, STRENGTH AND DIRECTION WHERE POSSIBLE AND IT IS AGAIN JUST FORCE DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY THROUGH RULES THINKING THAT IS BEHIND HIS FARBICATING AND EXECUTION OF LIES, NONSENSE, CONTRADICTIONS AND ATTACKING WORDS THAT INCREASINGLY CONDITIONS HIM TO THE FALSE PERCEPTION THAT WHAT IS FALSE AND HARMFUL IS TRUE AND BENEFICIAL AND HE IS HEADED FOR CERTAIN MADNESS.
Rules are instructions or orders:
Rules are just instructions or orders and a person who has faith in rules need instructions or orders to function or carry his activities that can only be what and how he perceives, thinks, speaks and does. He cannot operate or function without orders or instructions. Thus those in the military or are of a military bent have special predilection for or devotion to rules.
A computer functions entirely by rules or orders or instructions. Without instructions or orders a computer is crippled, does not know what to do.
In the same way a robot depends entirely on rules or orders or instructions. It cannot do things without orders. You must order it or supply it with pre-orchestrated instructions before it can do anything.
It is ridiculous and false that a true being needs orders or instructions before it can do anything or must be told before he can do or say anything and a stylish person who operates by rehash from a jukebox is such a person, he must have orders or instructions incorporated into his CPU or central processing unit or brain before he can do or say anything, whatever he says or does is what his CPU has been ordered or instructed to do.
Thus a person who is a genuine person does not need rules or orders or instructions either internalized in his own mind or externally by others in order to do or say anything or reason (work with facts to know) for himself but he can examine each situation he is faced with, ascertain the facts of the case and by joining them together come to a true conclusion of what everything is about.
When faced with a situation, a stylish person who is constantly rehashing or faking live falls back on instructions or orders in his mind, cannot help falling back on rules or instructions in his mind to interpret and take actions regarding the situation. If there are no orders or instructions pertinent to the situation he cannot do or say anything and needs fresh instructions from others in order to render him competent in this novel situation.
So long as he has ready answers to a situation at hand that appears (but not necessarily is truly) appropriate or accepted by society or co-robots as appropriate or true, then he will not be found out to be a fake, he will be successful in his fakery, deceiving himself and others he is a live specific to the occasion performer, he is s genuine currency not a clever counterfeit currency. But as soon as there occur situations where he has no outstanding instructions or orders of what to do or say, he is lost, don’t know what to say or do or make of it. Thus the robot exist in anxiety in camouflage of his true nature, he is afraid to expose his shameful inability to perform live and furtive need for rules, instructions or orders in order to function in any way.
ORDINARY PEOPLE WHO HAVE STYLE, LIKES AND DISLIKES OR EMOTIONS MAY SEVERELY UNDERESTIMATE THE PRESENCE OF SPOKEN AND UNSPOKEN RULES OR ORDERS OR INSTRUCTIONS IN THEIR MINDS OR FROM OTHERS THEY ASSOCIATE WITH, THEY MISTAKE THEIR OPERATING BY RULES OR INSTRUCTIONS AS THEIR REASONING AND THUS THEY HAVE AN OVERRATED BELIEF IN THEIR ABILITY TO REASON WHICH MAY BE INFANTILE AND NON EXISTENT IN MANY.
Just as counterfeit currencies come in different grades of sophistry in the same way, people who operate blindly depending secretly on rules or instructions without which they are lost come in different grades of sophistry such that the less sophisticated ones are easily found out by fellow counterfeiters as when they complain of others being too rigid or didactic or rule bound but at the higher or sophisticated levels of counterfeiting, only those who are not counterfeiters can identify them. Only a person who is himself not a counterfeit and therefore knows what is not a counterfeit can unfailing tell what is counterfeited and what is not counterfeited and a person who is himself a counterfeiter amidst everyone who is also counterfeiting can only hesitantly poorly tell apart sophisticated counterfeiters from non counterfeiters because he has only a vague idea of what is genuine as he himself is not genuine.
Tai chi is not a live specific to an occasion series of multiple simultaneous bodily motions but it is a ritual that is intended to be rehashed repeatedly for certain desired purposes for which it may or may not be efficacious.
Thus in order to have tai chi, a ritual with a series of complex simultaneous bodily motion that are to be repeated both for an occasion and to be retrieved and repeated for subsequent occasions, you must have rules or instructions that are the basis of tai chi that you must follow and instruct others and because it is not a specific response to a situation you need rules or instructions as when and where in the future it should be repeated.
THUS RULES OR INSTRUCTIONS OR ORDERS IS ESSENTIAL TO ALL RITUALS, THERE CANNOT BE RITUALS WITHOUT RULES THAT FORM THE THEORY OF THE RITUAL AND YOU IN ADDITION NEED RULES TO INSTRUCT THE PRACTITIONER OF THE RITUAL WHEN AND WHERE TO REPEAT THIS CHOREOGRAPHED RITUAL.
THUS THE BUDDHA IS NOT A MADMAN, HE IS WISE TO GROUP TOGETHER FAITH IN PRECEPTS (RULES OR INSTRUCTIONS) & RITUALS AS A FETTER TO FUTURE WOE BECAUSE SUCH A PERSON IS A DEAD AUTOMATON.
Why in theory people are without reason:
Whenever a person tells a lie, he must temporarily suspend true reason to then be driven by like or attractive force (greed for gains that can be derived from lying is like) or dislike or repulsive force (hate for someone you want to deceive by telling a lie) to fashion a lie by plucking words with true meanings to be cobbled together to present a scenario that appears to be a plausible fit to an existing situation but did not happen and thus fabricated the lie must be executed by excessive force that is needed to overcome forceful self resistance to saying something that is harmful to self (you want yourself to accept what did not happen did happen and that is conflicting even mad) and also fashion the simultaneous style that is needed to distract or divert the other person’s concentration so that he does pay undivided attention to your lie and therefore more likely expose it.
Thus if you keep telling lies you keep suspending your true reason in order to allow falsity to prevail until a time arrives not long after when your true reason is permanently suspended and acceptance of falsity or the perception of what is false is true becomes permanent.
The fact that people cannot see or severely underestimate the presence of falsity, nonsense (what does not make sense), contradiction, sarcasms (meaning the opposite of what they say or lying), excuses, speech that is not intended to convey meaning but act as missiles to attack others or antagonise or argue with them (verbal combat), they cannot see their likes and dislikes, smiles, facial expressions and styles that are always present are false, are all about using force that has nothing to do with reason and are harmful not beneficial as they perceive, they struggle to and even fail to grasp that this is so even after I repeatedly point out to them reflects that they do not possess genuine reason but what reason they have is actually mistaken applying rules to things occurring to them.
If people have true reason or ability to see and work out the truth they would know that what they say and do and others say and do to them are false. It is because they have serious deficiency in the ability to reason and see the truth that they are unable to see or reason out what is pervasive falsity perpetrated by themselves and others.
TRUE REASON CANNOT FIGHT WITH FORCE BECAUSE TRUE REASON NEVER HAS ANY FORCE THAT CAN FIGHT WITH FORCE AND THUS IN ANY ENCOUTER WITH FORCE, REASON WILL BE DRIVEN OUT TO BE REPLACED BY FALSE REASON OR EXCUSES OR JUSTIFICATIONS FOR WHAT THEY SAY OR DO THAT NOTHING MORE THAN WORDS WITH REASON HIJACKED BY THEIR MENTAL FORCES TO OFFER A PLAUSIBLE BUT ALWAYS DECEPTIVE EXPLANATION TO WHAT THEY SAY OR DO.
TRUE REASON MUST ALWAYS KNOW WHAT IS TRUE OR DID HAPPEN AND THEREFORE TRUE REASON MUST BE BANISHED IN ORDER TO FABRICATE FALSITY IN SPEECH OR ACTION (EG SMILE) AND THUS BANISHED FORCE OR LIKE OR DISLIKE OR EMOTIONS HAVE A FREE REIN TO HIJACK TRUE WORDS OR ACTIONS TO FABRICATE A SEEMINGLY PLAUSIBLE ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO TO WHAT ACTUALLY DID HAPPEN WHOSE REALISM DEPENDS ON THE CUNNING OF THAT LIAR AND THEN APPLY EXCESSIVE FORCE TO EXECUTE THE LIE AND PROVIDE DIVERSIONS TO MAKE THE LIE MORE LIKELY TO SUCCEED.
BECAUSE LYING IS FORCEFUL IT IS CONDITIONING OR ADDICTIVE AND AN URGE TO LIE THAT BECOMES INCREASINGLY IRRESISTIBLE AND CHAOTIC SOON DEVELOPS AND IF YOU KEEP LYING YOU KEEP SUSPENDING TRUE REASON THAT SOON YOU BECOME PERMANENTLY WITHOUT TRUE REASON AND MUST DEPEND ON RULES OR INSTRUCTIONS IN ORDER FOR YOU TO FUNCTION.
PEOPLE NEVER JUST TELL LIES BUT THEY FORCEFULLY DENY TO THEMSELVES AND OTHERS WHEN CONFRONTED THAT THEY TOLD LIES AND BECAUSE THIS DENIAL IS BASED ON FORCE, THEY ARE WILLING THEMSELVES TO PERCEIVE THEIR LIES ARE TRUE SO THAT IN TIME THEY TOTALLY BELIEVE AND EVEN PERCEIVE THEIR LIES ARE TRUE.
PEOPLE NEVER TELL LIES BUT THEY FORCEFULLY WANT OTHERS TO BELIEVE THEIR LIES ARE TRUE. BECAUSE YOU FORCEFULLY WANT OTHERS TO BELIEVE WHAT IS FALSE IS TRUE, YOU MUST ALSO WANT YOURSELF TO BELIEVE WHAT IS FALSE IS TRUE SUCH THAT IN TIME YOU CANNOT HELP BELIEVING AND PERCEIVING YOUR LIES ARE TRUE.
THE IMPORTANCE OF ALL THIS THAT THE FOOLISH LIAR IS UNAWARE IS THAT WITH FREQUENT SUSPENSION OF TRUE REASON TO EMBRACE OF FALSE REASON OR EXCUSES TO TELL LIES, HIS SUSPENSION OF TRUE REASON BECOMES INCREASINGLY PERMANENT AND WIDESPREAD SO THAT HE STRUGGLES TO DIFFERENTIATE WHAT IS FALSE AND WHAT IS TRUE, HIS DENIAL OF LYING AND WANTING OTHERS TO BELIEVE HIS LIES MAKES HIM INCREASINGLY PERCEIVE HIS LIES ARE TRUE, HE IS ONLY FORCEFULLY CONTROLLING HIS INSANITY OF PRACTICING FALSITY AS TRUTH AND HE IS HEADED FOR A CERTAIN FINAL LOSS OF CONTROL AND MADNESS.
ANYONE WHO TELLS LIES HAS A CERTAIN APPOINTMENT WITH FUTURE MADNESS AND THE FACT THAT YOU CANNOT TELL YOU ARE TELLING LIES, YOU BELIEVE YOUR LIES ARE TRUE MAKES IT WORSE BECAUSE YOU CANNOT SEE THE WAY OUT OF YOUR PREDICAMENT, NAMELY TELLING THE TRUTH.
AND WHAT MAINTAINS A PERSON IN THIS MAD CAROUSEL OF LIES THAT WILL END IN TRAGEDY?
IT IS THE CONSTANT USE OF FORCE TO STRETCH, CHANGE SPEED AND STRENGTH OF FORCE IN THE NAME OF STYLE THAT KEEPS THE PERSON’S MENTAL FORCE IN GOOD NICK AND CHURNS UP REGULAR INSOLUBLE STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION THAT KEEPS HIM ENSLAVED AND DRIVES HIM HELPLESSLY TO FURTHER STRETCH, CHANGE SPEED AND STRENGTH.
THUS DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE IMPORTANCE OF PAYING ATTENTION TO MAKE EFFORT TO PERSISTENTLY ERADICATE ANY STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS BECAUSE WHAT IS AT STAKE IS YOUR SANITY AND EVEN ANOTHER ETERNITY IN WEEPING AND GNASHING YOUR TEETH.
THE BUDDHA SAID TELLING LIES CAN SEND ONE TO HELL AND IF YOU BELIEVE WHAT I SAID THAT A LIAR FACES CERTAIN NOT POSSIBLE MADNESS EVEN IF HE DOES NOT GO TO HELL WITH THE BURNING, WHIPPING AND POKING HE WILL GET THERE AND YOU CAN EVEN SEE YOURSELF TELLING LIES EVEN IRRESISTIBLY, THEN THE ONLY WAY OUT IS TO KILL YOUR MENTAL FORCE THAT IS THE SOURCE OF LIES BY KILLING YOUR USE OF FORCE TO STRETCH, CHANGE SPEED AND LOUDNESS.
IT IS THE CONSTANT USE OF FORCE TO FABRICATE STYLE OR FORCEFUL STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS THAT KEEPS THE FIRE OF FORCE BURNING THAT DRIVES LIKE & DISLIKE, EMOTIONS, FEAR, SADNESS, FEELING HURT AND THE URGE TO TELL LIES, SPEAK NONSENSE OR CONTRADICTIONS, ATTACK AND ARGUE WITH OTHERS.
Whatever is unnecessary is false:
The Buddha said that you should see danger in the slightest fault.
Whatever you say or do that can be determined objectively is unnecessary is false and so if you practice falsity you are headed for insanity.
Thus if you leg shaking or finger drumming serves no purpose but because you are restless or you scratching your head is not because of itch but puzzlement or habit, then you are practicing falsity or controlled insanity.
All your sighs and grunts, wells and buts and “I say” and hmms and mmms and ‘.....’ may be purposeless or false and you are somnolently headed for madness.
England supporters will get hurt:
Supporters or fans are people who like that which they support, they are attracted to what they support and thus they must get hurt when they found that England unexpectedly lost to Croatia at home.
I was formerly an emotional or liking supporter of England in football and still hold vestigial sentiment but when I discovered they lost this morning I was not hurt at all nor did I deny hurt by smiling as if I liked the news and this is an unimaginable situation in the past where I would be lying if I said I was not hurt. Thus even if the world has not changed, I have changed towards the absence of suffering in a way that would be unimaginable just a few years ago let alone before the 1977 consciousness change which I triggered.
For one who sees, everyone is still changing as visible by their demeanour although they are all still acting and suffering for it.
LIKING AND DISLIKING ARE TOTALLY UNNECESSARY AND ALWAYS SUFFERING. WHATEVER HAPPENS CAN ONLY BE PLEASANT, VERY PLEASANT, NEITHER PLEASANT NOR UNPLEASANT, UNPLEASANT OR VERY UNPLEASANT SO WHAT IS THERE TO LIKE OR DISLIKE OR STIR YOUR MENTAL FORCE TO BE ATTRACTED OR REPULSED?