MACC Acts Like God?
Quote RPK: This has been going on for far too long. The MACC acts like God. They kidnap families and torture those they arrest. They threaten those they interrogate with death if they refuse to talk.
What RPK means is that MACC acts as if it is accountable to no one or it is all powerful.
IF YOU PERCEIVE THAT ACCOUNTABLE TO NO ONE OR SO POWERFUL MEANS ACT LIKE GOD, YOU HAVE DANGEROUS FALSE PERCEPTION.
Does God kidnap and torture? So is MACC acting like God by kidnapping and torturing?
Even God is accountable to Himself, He cannot tell a lie or do something evil. As the Buddha said, all beings are subject to karma, has karma as their homing ground. If you are not accountable to others you are accountable to yourself.
WITHOUT KNOWING THAT GOD ACTS ACCORDING TO HIS WISH WITHOUT CONSIDERATION FOR OTHERS OR TRUTH OR RIGHT, YOU ARE FOOLISH TO ASSUME IT IS SO. GOD CERTAINLY DOES NOT KIDNAP AND TORTURE AND THUS MACC IS NOT ACTING LIKE GOD.
Impossible to imagine X without Y:
Quote: "It is impossible to imagine CBS News, journalism or indeed America without Walter Cronkite," he said.
Spurred or driven by emotion, a proxy of mental force, not guided by genuine understanding the person utters what is false in order to exaggerate the achievements of Cronkite. It is possible to imagine CBS News, journalism or indeed America without Walter Cronkite and so what is said is said falsely to exaggerate that Cronkite is indispensable when he is.
"It is impossible to imagine CBS News, journalism or indeed America without Walter Cronkite" is a nonspecific rehash-able generic statement that falls under the rule impossible to imaging X without Y that is likely copied from others without understanding to be rehashed to impress others.
People think they understand but they don’t or understand falsely or their understanding is rehashed rules or fixed programmed understanding.
Most if not all emotional people see nothing wrong with what is said that implies what is said is acceptable or true when it is false and it is serious not harmless.
What is truly impossible?
The consciousness state changes that have occurred in recent years, the consciousness state that people exist in today is impossible to imagine, unimaginable before 1977.
The advent of the internet is likely unimaginable or impossible to imagine before it happened.
Goldman Sachs utterly wicked:
What Krugman is saying is that Goldman Sachs made a lot of money selling securities backed by subprime mortgages (virtually worthless backing) and then it turned around by selling those securities short (borrowing them to sell) because they knew those securities will collapse and when they did, they would make more money.
GOLDMAN SACHS MADE MONEY CHEATING BY SELLING SECURITIES BACKED BY SUBPRIME MORTGAGES THAT WERE WORTH MUCH LESS THAN TOUTED.
GOLDMAN THEN ARMED WITH THEIR INSIDER KNOWLEDGE THAT THOSE SECURITIES ARE ROTTEN TO SELL SHORT (BORROW TO SELL) SO THAT WHEN THEY DID COLLAPSE, THEY MADE MORE MONEY SELLING SHORT.
IF THIS IS TRUE, THERE WILL BE A PLACE IN HELL FOR THOSE RESPONSIBLE.
Quote Krugman: Goldman’s role in the financialization of America was similar to that of other players, except for one thing: Goldman didn’t believe its own hype. Other banks invested heavily in the same toxic waste they were selling to the public at large. Goldman, famously, made a lot of money selling securities backed by subprime mortgages — then made a lot more money by selling mortgage-backed securities short, just before their value crashed. All of this was perfectly legal, but the net effect was that Goldman made profits by playing the rest of us for suckers.
Disbelief:
Quote: Opposition figures expressed disbelief over the death of Teo Beng Hock, 30, an assistant to a member of the state cabinet in Selangor, which is ruled by the Pakatan Rakyat opposition alliance.
Whatever that has happened does not require acceptance, let alone belief let alone DISBELIEF.
It is because people have strong self identity that they are very important that they think their belief or disbelief is important when it is nonsense. If someone has informed you something has happened, why do you need to believe or disbelieve it? It reflects advanced doubt that leads to uncertainty that the person would be uncertain about such simple news so that they would doubt or disbelieve it with even much force.
What is so important about you that that your belief or disbelief is required or relevant?
ANYONE WHO DISBELIEVES WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS COURTING MAD DOUBT AND UNCERTAINTY THAT IS NEVER A PLEASURE BUT EVEN A FETTER TO FUTURE WOE ACCORDING TO THE BUDDHA.
Despite blips, SingTel rides the cycle best
This statement is always false and boasting or beating one’s own drum.
Why is this so?
Without making an exhaustive study of how different companies are performing one is not entitled to say that Singtel rides the cycle best.
One can rightfully say Singtel rides it well, but to say it is best betrays it is driven by emotion to beat one’s own drum rather than based on objective analysis. And he should not speak too soon for the wheel is still in spinning and the first one now will later be last. Things can change ugly overnight, just ask GM, Ford, Citibank, UBS and Honda.
Thus able to understand did he and those who read understand the statement is false, driven by emotion to beat his own drum?
Justice of convenience in UK:
Those who preach of greater justice & governance in developed countries are speaking falsely because this is a world of vested interests where those with power can escape lightly or without account.
I saw the video in which Steven Gerard the England football captain without provocation, not defensively punched another person several times even breaking his tooth just because he refused to hand over the controls to the pub CD player. The court ruled he was not guilty of affray and dismissed the case. How convenient so that England can have its highly touted captain.
Arrogance and aggressiveness is conditioning and Gerard is a man on a short fuse who will not tolerate opposition from others and must get his way like a spoilt brat, one day he will land in serious trouble eg beaten up by a Mike Tyson and for his actions he will even land in hell. Even the man who calls his brother ‘you fool’ is in danger of the fire of hell, what more someone who punches another several times (unprovoked, he punched first) can escape hell.
Smiling Joe Biden chides Ukraine and Georgia
Just because the US and those countries are allies and Biden chides them does not mean it is tough love or love is involved. In trying to be too clever you are fabricating or falsifying that love is involved when it is not, it is merely Biden chiding the countries.
Exactly what love is can be defined and if you do not know what love is you should not be referring to it.
True love is neither tough nor gentle nor anything, love is just love that is without force but guided by reason.
LOVE IS THE CONCERN AND CARE FOR ANOTHER BEING BORN OF REASON OR UNDERSTANDING NOT ATTRACTION OR FORCE. WHATEVER THAT IS SAID OR DONE THAT HARMS THE OTHER PERSON, THAT STIRS THE OTHER PERSON EMOTIONALLY IS NOT LOVE BUT PASSION.
WHATEVER SAID AND DONE THAT GIVES PLEASURE (A PASSIVE FEELING OF PLEASANT OR EXTREME PLEASANTNESS) NOT LIKING OR LUST OR EXCITEMENT IS BORN OF LOVE.
THEREFORE THE PERSON IS TALKING NONSENSE, DOES NOT KNOW WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT AND IT REFLECTS ON HUMANKIND THAT SUCH WEBSITES LIKE BBC SEE NOTHING WRONG, DOES NOT CENSURE IT.
Whatever is sad or hurt is not love:
Reflecting their muddled thinking and delusion people think that when they feel sad or hurt about someone, they are loving.
Whatever is sad or hurt is not love but passion, possessiveness and the loss of what is possessed gives sadness or hurt.
SADNESS AND HURT IS SUFFERING AND TRUE LOVE CANNOT CONVEY SUFFERING OR PRODUCE SUFFERING. TRUE LOVE IS PLEASANT TO BOTH DURING AND THEREAFTER, WHATEVER GIVES A BITTER OR SAD OR HURT AFTERTASTE IS NOT LOVE.
Why Anwar sodomy charge bogus:
A Malaysian court on Friday barred opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim from obtaining evidence on sodomy charges against him, freezing an earlier decision which granted him the information.
There is no understandable reason for the prosecution to delay the release of evidence even when ordered to do so by the court.
If the evidence is true, it cannot be altered by anyone but is proof that sodomy took place. Even if revelation of the evidence allows Anwar to prepare its defence it is unrighteous to withhold release to handicap a person’s defence.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IF YOUR EVIDENCE IS BOGUS, NOT FINALIZED, YOU ARE DELIBERATING WHETHER WHICH CONCOCTED BITS TO ADD IN OR OMIT, THEN IT IS UNDERSTANDABLE WHY YOU SHOULD MAKE SUCH A FUSS ABOUT RELEASING THE EVIDENCE.
THUS UNLESS THE PROSECUTION IS MAD (WHICH THEY AREN’T) IT MEANS THAT THEY ARE PERSECUTING NOT PROSECUTING AND THEIR EVIDENCE IS INSUFFICIENT, BOGUS, HAS NOT BEEN FINALIZED THAT THEY ARE WITHOLDING.
IT REFLECTS THE INCOMPETENCE OF THE SYSTEM THAT WITHOUT BUILDING A VIABLE CASE AGAINST ANWAR THEY HAVE ALREADY CHARGED HIM. IF THEY HAVE BUILT A VIABLE CASE, WHY ARE THEY SO RELUCTANT TO REVEAL IT TO THE PUBLIC?
Buffett: I’m keeping my Goldman Sachs warrants:
If Goldman Sachs makes money by unscrupulous means and you don’t care or you don’t bother to know and you accept your share of the proceeds you are guilty too and so it is that Warren Buffett is not a wise man but a fool.
Jesus said it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to heaven and Buffett is the world’s richest man and profiting from his reputation.
Buffet boasting to incite envy:
Buffett’s statement is not guided by reason but driven by force to boast about his acumen or foresight in investing in Goldman Sachs that he wants to incite envy so that people will look up to him as a man with the Midas touch.
He is thrilled by his windfall from Goldman Sachs and wants to incite others to be interested in money and so he is sinning, incurring karma for himself.
Even those old are childish and emotional, it is force in excitement or delight and wanting to make others envious that motivates what they say or do in this case to brag and make others envious.
Malaysian justice grossly unfair to Anwar:
According to US state laws, the Malaysian justice system is abusing its powers and behaving in a grossly unfair manner denying Anwar access to evidence the state has against him in the sodomy case.
What is written below by a former US prosecutor is emotional & full of style:
Quote: So, what is Anwar asking for? And here, I do have to do a little tit-for-tat comparison, so please excuse. Under my state’s law (an US state), the state must disclose all evidence that it intends to use at trial. It must also turn over all exculpatory evidence (evidence tending to suggest the innocence of the defendant). I, as prosecutor must also provide the names and reports of all experts I intend to call as a witness in the state’s case including the results of any tests or assessments done; the statements of any witnesses I intend to call, any tapes and recordings of statements made by the defendant, any information I have that tends to impeach the credibility of state’s witnesses, including prior inconsistent statements, relationship with the prosecution and evidence suggesting a character for untruthfulness. Significantly, all the above-mentioned items must be disclosed without request. They are what we call “automatic discovery”. It would appear that Anwar’s requests do not exceed what the majority view in U.S. law would consider stuff to which he is entitled without even having to ask.
What is written above is full of style, driven by emotion and wasting a lot of energy that also confuses the reader.
A pure substance only version might be this:
Under my (US) state law, the state must disclose all evidence that it intends to use at trial. It must also turn over all exculpatory evidence (evidence tending to suggest the innocence of the defendant). The prosecutor must also provide the names and reports of all experts he intends to call as a witness in the state’s case including the results of any tests or assessments done; the statements of any witnesses he intends to call, any tapes and recordings of statements made by the defendant, any information he has that tends to impeach the credibility of state’s witnesses, including prior inconsistent statements, relationship with the prosecution and evidence suggesting a character for untruthfulness. All the above-mentioned items must be disclosed without request. They are what we call “automatic discovery”. Anwar’s requests do not exceed what the majority view in U.S. law would consider stuff to which he is entitled without even having to ask.
Understanding not necessarily involved:
The person who is a former prosecutor spoke eloquently and 'succinctly' that would tend to impress the gullible that even if he is full of style and emotional, he nevertheless understands what he is talking about.
You may be deceived.
As a trained and experienced prosecutor, you must memorize what rights defendants have and these include access to evidence and so when faced with this situation of Malaysian authorities’ intransigence and balking at furnishing its case, it is a matter of matching what Malaysian prosecutors are doing and what American state prosecutors are supposed to do and when there is a gross mismatch it means the Malaysian authorities are not playing fair.
EVEN A COMPUTER (THAT HAS NO UNDERSTANDING) MAY BE PROGRAMMED TO COMPARE WHAT MALAYSIAN AUTHORITIES ARE DOING COMPARED TO THE LAWS PERTAINING TO ACCESS OF EVIDENCE BY DEFENDENTS AND COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT MALAYSIAN LAW IS UNFAIR, ABUSIVE.
JUST TYPE IN A LIST OF RIGHTS OF DEFENDANTS INTO THE COMPUTER IN WHICH YOU HAVE TO ANSWER ‘YES’ OR ‘NO’ AND THE COMPUTER CAN COME TO THE CONCLUSION IF THE PROSECUTION HAS FAILED IN ITS DUTIES.
IF THE PROSECUTION IS STILL NOT READY WITH ITS EVIDENCE, IT SHOULD NOT HAVE HASTILY CHARGED ANWAR BUT WAITED UNTIL IT HAS A ‘SOLID’ CASE. HOW CAN YOU CHARGE A PERSON WITHOUT HAVING FINALIZED YOUR CASE?
A difference of programming not understanding:
The difference between you not ‘knowing’ and him knowing the rights of defendants in court cases is not that he understands and you not understand but that he has been programmed with the rights of defendants whilst you have not been programmed.
For two persons who have been similarly programmed, the intelligent robot is the one who can rapidly retrieve the correct information or programming to aptly apply to the situation whilst the stupid robot fails to retrieve or applies the wrong programming to the situation.
IF YOU ARE AN INTELLIGENT ROBOT, YOU REMEMBER AND RAPIDLY, APTLY RETRIEVE AND APPLY A PROGRAMMING TO A SITUATION. IF YOU ARE A STUPID ROBOT, YOU FORGET OR SLOWLY AND INCORRECTLY APPLIES A PROGRAMMING TO A SITUATION.
Who are you calling small then, the Toyata iQ is back and beefy:
The person does not mean what he is saying and his purpose is to make much of it (iQ is not small) and scoff at those who belittles it.
It is impossible that a person who truly understands what he is saying will not to understand that he is indulging in emotion to scoff and is inviting readers to stir their emotions over the matter of size of the car. If the person truly understood the meaning of what he said, he will understand that stirring force is meaningless and wastes energy and leads to stress, restlessness and distraction.
BECAUSE HE AND EVERYONE IN THIS WORLD DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THAT THE STATEMENT BELIES ITS INTENTION WHICH IS TO STIR MENTAL FORCE TO MOCK OVER THE MATTER OF A CAR’S SMALL SIZE THAT HE DISPUTES, HE AND THEM DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT IS SAID, THEY ARE MERELY PROGRAMMED TO INTERACT IN A REHASHED FASHION THE SUBSTANCE AND EMOTION OF THE SITUATION.
“Who are you calling small then, the Toyata iQ is back” conforms to a standard format, “Who are you calling X then, the Y is Z”. Fill in the X, Y & Z with different entities and you can rehash the standard format to mock or argue in apparently different situations to stir emotion. The circumstances of each occasion may be different but the emotion stirred is the same, to take issue, to dispute and scoff and these are meaningless and no person who understands will speak what is meaningless.
What it takes to understand:
Understanding is simply seeing (as it is not as you like or dislike it) and thus knowing something as it truly is.
Rehashing is falsification whilst something specifically composed for the situation is genuine.
Thus it is important for a person to correctly determine if something he said or heard is rehashed or specifically composed for an occasion, if he mistakes what is rehashed as genuine then he does not see the truth and does not understand.
In the same way, it is important to determine what is style and what is substance, what is the emotional motive of what he says or hears. If the person cannot differentiate what is substance and what is style in what he says or hears, cannot perceive the emotional motive of what he says or hears, he does not understand truly.
IN ORDER FOR SOMEONE TO TRULY UNDERSTAND WHAT HE IS SAYING OR WHAT HE HEARS OTHERS SAYING, HE MUST SPEAK OR HEAR THINGS CLEARLY AS THEY ARE, NOT AS HE LIKED OR DISLIKED IT AND SPEAKING AND HEARING THINGS CLEARLY AS THEY ARE MEANS HE MUST BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY WHAT IS REHASHED FROM WHAT IS NOT REHASHED, WHAT IS SUBSTANCE AND WHAT IS MEANINGLESS STYLE, WHAT ARE THE EMOTIONAL ACCOMPANIMENTS IN WHAT HE SAYS OR HEARS.
BECAUSE THERE IS ALWAYS REHASHING, ALWAYS SUBSTANCE AND STYLE, ALWAYS EMOTIONAL ACCOMPANIMENTS TO WHATEVER IS SAID IN THIS WORLD, A PERSON WHO TRULY UNDERSTAND MUST SEE CLEARLY WHAT IS SAID IS REHASHED, HAS STYLE THAT CAN BE PRECISELY DEFINED AND HAS EMOTIONAL ACCOMPANIMENTS THAT BELIE THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT IS SAID.
BECAUSE PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD, EVEN THOSE WHO THINK THEY ARE VERY INTELLECTUAL CANNOT TELL WHAT IS REHASHED FROM WHAT IS NOT, THEY CANNOT PRECISELY IDENTIFY THE MEANINGLESS FOR SHOW STYLE IN SPEECH, THEY CANNOT IDENTIFY THE EMOTIONAL ACCOMPANIMENTS IN WHAT THEY SAY OR HEAR, THEY DO NOT AND CANNOT TRULY UNDERSTAND.
Thus if you understand:
Thus if you understand what you say, you must understand that you are rehashing if you are rehashing, there is style and exactly what it is, if you have style, you have emotional accompaniments or motives for saying something if they are present.
Thus if you understand what you hear, you must understand that they are rehashing if they are rehashing, there is style in what they say and exactly what it is, they have emotional accompaniments or motives saying something if they are present.
BECAUSE PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD CANNOT SEE THEY ARE REHASHING WHEN THEY ARE, CANNOT PERCEIVE AND DETERMINE PRECISELY WHAT IS THE STYLE IN WHAT THEY OR OTHERS SAY, CANNOT IDENTIFY THE EMOTIONAL ACCOMPANIMENTS OF WHAT THEY SAY OR HEAR, THEY DO NOT TRULY UNDERSTAND.
AS THE BUDDHA SAID, HE AND GOD IS THE SEER AND KNOWER OF ALL, THERE IS NOTHING HE DOES NOT KNOW. THUS IF YOU TRULY UNDERSTAND YOU MUST UNDERSTAND WHATEVER YOU HEAR AND THAT MEANS YOU UNDERSTAND IT IS REHASHED IF IT IS REHASHED, IT IS STYLE IF IT IS STYLE, THERE IS EMOTIONAL ACCOMPANIMENTS IF THERE ARE. IF YOU CANNOT DETECT THEM EVEN WHEN THEY ARE PRESENT, YOU ARE A PERSON WHO DOES UNDERSTAND WHAT HE SAYS OR HEARS.
Never say die for a contestant:
“Never say or die” or ‘never give up’ or ‘fight to the end’ is a program, a command that is rehashed again and again for situations at hand that the person supplies force and becomes a robot or slave of that command.
Thus there is nothing meaningful or understandable about the dictum, ‘never say die’, it is just a rule that you follow or don’t, and only force not understanding to follow it.
It is likely to be false too because there are circumstances when the person will ‘say die’ but if he desperately enough for something he will then ‘never say die’, therefore it is a truth of convenience.
What understanding means:
Understanding means seeing or hearing things as they are, whether spoken or done by yourself or others. And seeing things as they are means you see them infallibly, with calm clear certainty as true, false or nonsense.
And emotional stylish people in this world have great difficulty even inability to tell what they see or hear is true or false, harmful or beneficial. Often they perceive what is false and harmful as true and beneficial eg I smile (harmful) because I like (harmful) someone.
Thus if emotion is being conveyed in your speech or what you heard and you do not even detect it, cannot define it, how can you truly have understood?
Being able to read and write is not about understanding, it is about being programmed to encode and decode in a particular language.
Being able to say or do certain things that appear to be appropriate to the situation, that fellow robots appreciate and sanction is not about understanding but programming, nowadays you can program a computer to fly a plane and drive a car and it will arrive safely at its destination safely in most circumstances. Being able to conduct a seemingly rational conversation or able to join in to play games or work has nothing to do with understanding but all about programming of things to say and do when certain cues are present.
INSTEAD TRUE UNDERSTANDING IS ABOUT BEING ABLE TO SEE WHETHER SOMETHING SAID OR DONE IS TRUE OR FALSE. WHATEVER THAT IS REHASHED IS A FAKE AND FALSE, WHATEVER IS STYLE IS FALSE, FOR SHOW TO IMPRESS OR PLEASE, THE WAY SOMEONE SAYS OR DOES SOMETHING IS ABOUT HOW HE USES FORCE THAT IS MEANINGLESS, BLIND AND HARMFUL TO PROLONG, CHANGE SPEED AND STRENGTH AND THEREFORE FALSE.
THUS A PERSON WHO UNDERSTANDS WHAT HE HEARS, WHETHER SAID BY HIMSELF OR OTHERS MUST UNDERSTAND WHETHER IT IS TRUE AND FALSE, MUST CLEARLY THE STYLE AND EMOTION PRESENT IN IT. IF A PERSON CANNOT TELL WHETHER SOMETHING SAID IS TRUE OR FALSE, HE PERCEIVES WHAT IS FALSE IS TRUE, HE CANNOT TELL AND PERCEIVES STYLE AND ACCOMPANYING EMOTIONS AS TRUE OR GOOD, HE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND.
THERE IS ONLY ONE UNIVERSAL DEFINITION OF UNDERSTANDING AND IT IS THE ABILITY TO SEE THINGS AS THEY TRULY ARE. BECAUSE EVERYTHING SEEN OR HEARD CAN BE CLASSIFIED AS EITHER TRUE OR FALSE AND IT UNIVERSALLY APPLIES TO EVERYONE, FOR A PERSON TO TRULY UNDERSTAND HE MUST INFALLIBLY SEE WHAT IS TRUE IS TRUE, WHAT IS FALSE IS FALSE, WHAT MAKES NO SENSE AS NO SENSE, WHAT IS HARMFUL IS HARMFUL.
Tweet a prayer - Judaism's holiest prayer site joins Twitter
There is nothing inherently holy about any prayer.
Only a being can be holy or unholy, an immaterial lifeless object or group of words cannot be holy or unholy and it is their false perception that makes them perceive it is holy.
You mean you can classify prayers into mildly, moderately and highly holy? In other words, virtue is not about things you do and don’t do, but what holiest prayers you recite or chant?
IT IS DENSE DELUSION THAT YOU CAN PERCEIVE PRAYERS THAT ARE JUST GROUPS OF WORDS AS HOLIEST OR NOT.
HOLINESS APPLIES TO BEINGS NOT OBJECTS AND IS DETERMINED BY WHAT HE SAY OR DOES THAT CONFORMS TO TRUTH AND HARMLESSNESS.
MOST IF NOT ALL EMOTIONAL PEOPLE MEMORIZE THEIR PRAYERS BY HEART AND THEY ARE MERELY ADLIBBING OR REGURGITATING BY ROTE OFTEN WITHOUT PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT THEY UTTER. WHAT IS SO HOLY ABOUT THAT?
The Buddha is the Holy One:
When Upaka the âjãvaka had spoken thus, the Blessed One addressed him in the following stanzas: `I have overcome all foes; I am all-wise; I am free from stains in every way; I have left everything; and have obtained emancipation by the destruction of desire. Having myself gained knowledge, whom should I call my master? I have no teacher; no one is equal to me; in the world of men and of gods no being is like me. I am the holy one in this world, I am the highest Teacher, I alone am the absolute Sambuddha; I have gained coolness (by the extinction of all passion) and have obtained Nirvàna. To found the kingdom of Truth I go to the city of the Kasis (Benares); I will beat the drum of the Immortal in the darkness of this world.'
Holiness is the purity of a being’s soul:
If there is such a thing as holiness, as the Buddha refers to when he said he is the holy one in the world, then it can be clearly defined as such and such. Not only can holiness be clearly defined but each person’s holiness is not the same and there is a hierarchy of holiness with the Buddha at the pinnacle (and the Devil at the lowest).
HOLINESS IS THE PURITY OF A BEING’S SOUL AND THAT IS FREEDOM FROM EVIL WHICH IS FREEDOM FROM ALL DESIRES. DESIRES ARE ABOUT TENDENCIES OR INCLINATIONS AND THE BUDDHA IS FREED FROM ALL TENDENCIES OR INCLINATIONS.
FREED FROM ALL STAINS, HAVING ABANDONED EVERYTHING AND DESTROYED ALL DESIRES THE BUDDHA SAYS HE IS THE HOLIEST ONE, HAVING ENCOMPASSED IN HIS MIND ALL THE MINDS OF ALL THE BEINGS THAT EXIST.
YOU MAY BE RIGHT THAT A BOOK OR PRAYERS OR SOME OBJECT CAN BE HOLY OR YOU MAY BE CULTIVATING FALSE PERCEPTION THAT WILL END IN MAD PERCEPTION THAT AN INANIMATE OBJECT POSSESSES HOLINESS JUST AS A BUDDHA POSSESSES HOLINESS.
All emotional liking and disliking people experience greed often without awareness that greed has arisen in them and reflecting their lack of understanding, they don’t know the nature of the greed that seizes and torment them, threatening them with ruin.
Greed is merely the liking or stirring of a person’s mental force attractively at the thought of or perception of objects material and immaterial for personal gain or acquisition. Greed has nothing to do with reason or understanding and is all about the stirring of mental force that makes the person want to acquire the object of his greed even at all costs risking loss.
Objects that are targets of greed can be material like money, cars, houses, shares, cattle or immaterial like status (doctor, lawyer, general) or fame.
Greed requires self identity view (a fetter to future woe according to the Buddha) of a false self that is the centre of the accumulation, objects material and immaterial to acquire or gain that are exalted or valued by deluded society.
Thus when the person greedy for gains see opportunities for money to be made, his mental force is stirred attractively and he restlessly is driven to commit himself to make money, when he sees stock prices plunging and potential for profit should they recover, his mental force is stirred attractively to snap up shares, disregarding the risk that the shares may plunge further in value.
WHATEVER IS ABOUT FORCE IS FALSE, BLIND, SINFUL AND SUFFERING AND SO IT IS THAT GREED IS NEVER THE PLEASURE IT IS MADE UP TO BE BUT MADDENING, THE GREEDY PERSON IS DRIVEN BY IRRESISTIBLE STIRRED ATTRACTION TO TAKE RISKS TO ACQUIRE OBJECTS THAT THEREAFTER HE FEELS AN UNPLEASANT AFTERTASTE NO MATTER HOW HE DENIES AND INSISTS HE IS HAPPY AND SATISFIED WITH HIS ACQUISITIONS. AND GREED IS ADDICTIVE, BECOMES MORE INTENSE AND IRRESTIBLE SHOULD ONE KEEP INDULGING IN ONE’S GREED AND IT WILL TURN MALIGNANT OR MAD.
Like for gain dislike for loss:
Greed in a nutshell is like for gain and dislike for loss. The greedy person cannot bear and is upset or hurt by any losses.
When the greedy person sees avenues or opportunities for gain of objects he desires, his mental force is stirred attractively to grab or want. When he sees avenues for loss, he is disturbed, or upset to take even urgent desperate measures to avert the loss.
As a result he is a robot or slave driven by his attraction to grab opportunities for gain and repulsion to minimize or avert opportunities for loss, even at all costs, risking or even losing his life eg the man who could not bear the loss of his ‘beloved’ Mercedes to resist and be be killed by thieves.
IT IS MINDLESS AND NOTHING MEANINGFUL ABOUT BEING GREEDY, ONE’S MENTAL FORCE BEING STIRRED LIKE A YOYO TO LIKE OPPORTUNITIES FOR GAIN AND DISLIKE LOSS.
No one can understand emotion or style:
Because emotion is about stirred mental force that is blind and has no meaning, no one can understand the emotion conveyed in whatever speech. If you think you can understand emotion, think emotion can be understood, you may be right or have serious false perception that will end in mad perception.
THUS IF WHAT A PERSON SAID HAS ACCOMPANYING EMOTION, HE CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT HE IS SAYING BECAUSE IT HAS EMOTION THAT CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD THAT IS OFTEN MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT HE SAID THAT MAY BE TRUE, FALSE OR NONSENSE.
IF WHAT YOU HEAR HAS ACCOMPANYING EMOTION, THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN TRULY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU HEAR IS TO UNDERSTAND THAT IT HAS CONVEYED FORCE THAT INTENDS TO STIR YOUR MENTAL FORCE THAT IS MEANINGLESS AND HARMFUL PLUS WHATEVER SUBSTANCE THAT MAY BE TRUE, FALSE OR NONSENSE.
SIMILARLY STYLE CANNOT BE UNDERSTAND BECAUSE IT IS MERELY THE EFFECTS OF FORCE PROLONGING, CHANGING SPEED AND STRENGTH AND ANYONE WHO SPEAKS WITH STYLE CANNOT TRULY UNDERSTAND WHAT HE IS SAYING WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THAT IT HAS CONVEYED STYLE THAT IS MEANINGLESS AND HARMFUL, ONLY FOR SHOW TO IMPRESS OR PLEASE.
WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THAT SOMETHING YOU HEAR HAS STYLE THAT CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD AND IS HARMFUL, YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU HEAR THAT HAS STYLE.
IF A PERSON UNDERSTANDS THAT EMOTION AND STYLE ACCOMPANYING HIS SPEECH IS NOT UNDERSTANDABLE AND HARMFUL, HE WOULD NOT HAVE FABRICATED IT OR ACCEPTED IT FROM OTHERS AND IT IS BECAUSE PEOPLE DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY SAY, DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY HEAR THAT THEY PERCEIVE THEIR ACCOMPANYING EMOTION AND STYLE AS MEANINGFUL AND WELCOME THE EMOTION AND STYLE IN OTHERS’ SPEECH AS MEANINGFUL AND BENEFICIAL WHEN IT IS THE OPPOSITE.
Because no one can understand force and its proxy, emotion (like, dislike, sadness, hurt, agitation, fear) anyone who conveys emotion in what he says is conveying something (force) that he cannot possibly understand and therefore he does not understand what he says and anyone who receives emotion in what he hears cannot possibly completely understand what he hears.
ANYONE WHO CONVEYS EMOTION IN WHAT HE SAYS CANNOT FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT HE SAYS BECAUSE IT CONTAINS EMOTION, A PROXY OF FORCE THAT IS BLIND AND CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD.
ANYONE WHO HEARS SPEECH WITH CONVEYED EMOTION CANNOT TRULY UNDERSTAND IT, HE CAN ONLY UNDERSTAND THAT THE SPEECH HAS SUBSTANCE THAT MAY BE TRUE, FALSE OR NONSENSE AND A STYLE OR FORCE CHANGES THAT ARE MEANINGLESS AND HARMFUL IN GENERATING STRESS, RESTLESSNESS AND DISTRACTION AND THEREFORE THE PERSON HAS ILL WILL.
Like everything said or done by emotional stylish rehashing people, “Tweet a prayer - Judaism's holiest prayer site joins Twitter” is said with style and emotion to convey excitement or ‘wow’, Judaism’s holiest site joins Twitter when it is false and meaningless. What is there to ‘wow’ or be impressed by Judaism’s holiest prayer site joining Twitter?
IF YOU PERCEIVE THAT “Tweet a prayer - Judaism's holiest prayer site joins Twitter” IS JUST A PLAIN STATEMENT UNACCOMPANIED BY EMOTION, NOT INTENDED TO STIR ‘WOW’ IN YOU, YOU MAY BE RIGHT OR YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND. IT MAY BE TRUE THAT IT HAS CONVEYED EMOTION THAT IS INTENDED TO STIR READERS TO ‘WOW’ AND BECAUSE EMOTION CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD, THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STATEMENT CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT HE SAID AND THE ONLY WAY TO FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS SAID IS THAT IT IS NOT A PLAIN OR TRUE STATEMENT BUT IT HAS CONVEYED BLIND, MEANINGLESS, HARMFUL INCOMPREHENSIBLE EMOTION ACCOMPANYING THAT MAY BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT IS SAID.
Why she has no understanding:
She is drinking but not paying attention to her drinking but her eyes are attracted by the camera and the only way she can drink without paying attention is to do it by rote or memory, press the drink button and the drink program in her jukebox automatically does it for her.
BECAUSE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANYONE TO UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF HER NAIL VARNISH OR SCARF, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR HER TO UNDERSTAND AND SHE HAS NO UNDERSTANDING.
BECAUSE ORDINARY PEOPLE SEEING HER DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT HER VARNISH AND SCARF IS MEANINGLESS, THEY ARE ATTRACTED BY THEM AND FIND THEM MEANINGFUL OR PERVERSELY THEY ARE REPULSED AND THINK THEIR REPULSION IS MEANINGFUL WHEN IT IS ALSO A MEANINGLESS STIRRING OF FORCE, THEY TOO DO NOT UNDERSTAND.
No understanding is needed to rehash:
Even if a person has understanding, it is not required or involved in rehashing.
What is essential in rehashing is to keep practicing or memorizing what you want to rehash until it is very slick, can be reeled out faultlessly and rapidly with no errors of reproduction and then once selected, to pay close attention if necessary to reproduce it.
Thus ballet dancers practice obsessively to record precisely what they want to reproduce and on stage they are paying attention to reproduce what they recorded painstakingly as accurately without error as possible.
Because understanding is not required for rehashing, only paying attention to accurately reproduce, if a person is rehashing all the time, he does not require understanding all the time and whatever understanding he has atrophies or dies from disuse.
The truth is most people came into this world without much understanding if any and the poverty of understanding is conducive to copying or aping others and after lifelong incessant rehashing, whatever little understanding they had in the first place becomes extinct.
ANYONE WHO HAS TASTED NON REHASHING WILL NOT REHASH WHICH IS TORMENTING AND THEREFORE REHASHING IS THE CONSTANT DEFAULT MODE FOR THOSE WHO REHASH WITHOUT KNOWING (WHEN YOU SING A FAVORITE SONG YOU ARE DEFINITELY REHASHING, YET ARE YOU AWARE?). BECAUSE NO UNDERSTANDING IS NEEDED TO REHASH AND UNDERSTANDING IS INIMICAL TO EFFICIENT REHASHING, STYLISH EMOTIONAL PEOPLE WHO REHASH CANNOT HAVE UNDERSTANDING, DO NOT UNDERSTAND, OTHERWISE THEY WILL NOT REHASH.
Rehashing is proof of no understanding:
If a person who rehashes understands he will understand that what he is saying or doing is a fake, a reproduction of what is standard to be fitted into the current situation, not composed freshly after understanding what the current situation is. If a person understands that what he said is a fake, reproduced to fit the current situation, he will not do it or he will do it knowing he is faking it. Because people who rehash do not know they are faking it, they perceive what they say is sincere and specifically for the occasion they do not understand.
NO MAN WHO TRULY UNDERSTANDS WILL REHASH BECAUSE HE WILL KNOW HE IS MINDLESSLY REPRODUCING WHAT HE HAS SAID BEFORE TO MEET THE DEMANDS OF THE SITUATION AND HE UNDERSTANDS THAT IT IS FALSE OR CHEATING SELF AND OTHERS.
IT IS ONLY A PERSON WHO DOES NOT UNDERSTAND WHO WILL REHASH BECAUSE HE DOES NOT KNOW HE IS MINDLESSLY REPRODUCING WHAT HE HAS SAID BEFORE TO MEET THE DEMANDS OF THE SITUATION AND HE DOES NOT KNOW THAT IT IS FALSE OR CHEATING SELF AND OTHERS.
People are actually constantly People are actually constantly cutting their own throats, creating stress, restlessness and distraction that are always suffering and leads to death with their constant use of force to fashion style and stir emotions.
It is impossible that a person will knowingly constantly harm himself unless he is mad. Because people are not mad yet, they must do so unknowingly. Because they cannot see themselves constantly, unnecessarily stressing themselves by using force to stretch, change speed and strength, they cannot understand.
UNLESS HE IS MAD A PERSON WILL NOT KNOWINGLY HARM HIMSELF. BECAUSE EMOTIONAL STYLISH PEOPLE ARE CONSTANTLY HARMING THEMSELVES BY USING FORCE UNNCESSARILY TO STRETCH, CHANGE SPEED AND STRENGTH, THEY MUST BE DOING SO WITHOUT SEEING AND A PERSON WHO DOES NOT SEE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND.
He is upset:
This is not the way to heaven but to more suffering later and after he dies.
ANYONE WHOSE MENTAL FORCE CAN BE STIRRED TO BE UPSET, AGITATED AND ANGRY IS IN DANGER OF FUTURE SUFFERING THAT MAY EXTEND EVEN FOR ANOTHER ETERNITY.
YOU SEE NOTHING WRONG WITH HIS UPSET BECAUSE YOU SEE WRONGLY AND THUS DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE GRAVE DANGER HE IS IN.
And it is crazy:
What use is it to stir your mental force thus at something happening or a thought?
And for one who understands, he knows that when you behave thus you are temporarily inebriated by force.
BRIEFLY, FOR A PERSON DISTURBED BY STIRRING MENTAL FORCE AS ABOVE, HE IS FROZEN OR SUSPENDED, NOT RESPONDING TO THE REALITY THAT IS CHANGING AROUND HIM.
FURTHER IT IS TOTALLY COUNTER PRODUCTIVE USELESS TO STIR FORCE THAT IS BLIND AND CANNOT SOLVE ANY PROBLEM. WHATEVER HAS HAPPENED, IT IS WISE NOT TO STIR MENTAL FORCE AT ALL BUT TO SUMMON REASON AND UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE SITUATION IS ABOUT SO THAT YOU CAN FASHION AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE IN WORD OR DEED.
Seeing with force:
He is seeing with force, there is added unnecessary force in his seeing and he is staring, prolonging his gaze more than is necessary to accomplish the task of seeing. Although it is not evident, there is a theme or program to his seeing, there are certain things in his sight that he will see (desirable objects, pretty girls, stock prices) but certain things (eg suffering or poverty) that he wilfully ignores.
This added force in his seeing is blind and blinding and so he sees but do not sees or sees falsely, blinded by the force driving his seeing.
ALL STYLISH EMOTIONAL PEOPLE SEE WITH ADDED FORCE THAT IS BLIND AND BLINDING AND THUS THEY ARE BLINDED AND SEE FALSELY AND THEREFORE UNDERSTAND FALSELY OR DELUDEDLY.
ALL STYLISH PEOPLE SEE WITH STYLE OR FORCE PROLONGING, CHANGING SPEED AND STRENGTH AND THIS FALSE STYLE IS IMPOSED ON WHAT THEY SEE AND COLORS OR TAINTS OR WARPS IT.
ALL STYLISH EMOTIONAL PEOPLE DO NOT JUST SEE EVERYTHING THERE IS TO SEE BUT THERE IS A THEME TO WHAT THEY SELECT TO SEE, THEY SEE WHAT THEY LIKE TO SEE (WEALTH, PRETTINESS) AND AVOID SEEING THINGS THEY DISLIKE TO SEE (UGLINESS, SUFFERING).
UNDERSTANDING IS A SIMPLE MATTER OF SEEING. SEEING TRULY YOU UNDERSTAND TRULY, SEEING FALSELY WITH ADDED FORCE, STYLE AND THEME YOU NATURALLY UNDERSTAND FALSELY AND DOES NOT UNDERSTAND.
NOT ONLY ARE EMOTIONAL PEOPLE’S UNDERSTANDING FALSE, THEY ARE REHASHED. THEY HAVE VIEWS OR UNDERSTANDINGS OF WHAT THINGS ARE THAT THEY REHASH AGAIN AND AGAIN TO EXPLAIN WHAT THEY SEE THAT MAY NOT ACCORD TO THOSE FALSE RECORDED REHASHED EXPLANATIONS OR VIEWS.
They understand with force:
When you like something you see, you are in effect understanding what you saw with force that is blind and blinding and that is why you understand falsely and thus do not understand.
People perceive the gentle ways some people speak as meaningful or good, they like it and thus they can be conned to take the person into confidence.
But gentleness in speech has nothing to do with goodness, it is a fabrication anyone can train himself to perfect. You can kill someone gently just as you can kill him violently so what is so good about your gentle way of killing him?
SIMILARLY IF YOU PERCEIVE SOMETHING WITH DISLIKE (ANGER, HATE, REVULSION), SADNESS, HURT, AGITATION OR FEAR, YOU ARE UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU PERCEIVED WITH FORCE THAT IS BLIND AND THEREFORE WILL UNDERSTAND FALSELY AND THUS NOT UNDERSTAND.
BY LIKING, DISLIKING, FEELING SAD, HURT, AGITATED OR FEARFUL OF WHAT YOU SEE, YOU ARE UNDERSTANDING IT WITH FORCE THAT IS BLIND AND THE WRONG TOOL TO UNDERSTAND AND SO IS IT ANY SURPRISE LIKING AND DISLIKING PEOPLE DON’T UNDERSTAND?
NOT ONLY DO PEOPLE SEE WITH ADDED FORCE, SEE WITH STYLE, SEE WITH A THEME, THEY ALSO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY SEE WITH FORCE, WITH LIKE AND DISLIKE PRINCIPALLY.
No comments:
Post a Comment