Ibn Sina

I did say that in the higher states there is no duality. The state of neither this nor that. So what are you talking about? I wrote this 4-5 times already. And doing good, having positive as opposed to negative thoughts, works. That is what your psychiatrist would recommend. It works. So what's there to argue?

Sure, but the thing is, meditation and immorality cannot go hand in hand. If you are practicing meditation, then you cannot just go on harbor bad thoughts and be a murderer., one must die. If you are a murderer, then your meditation is dead, because you have an agitated mind. So Sheel and meditation has to go hand in hand. There is the story of Valmiki, Valmiki wasn't a murderer when he was practicing his meditation. He renounced his bad life, he wore the cloak of virtue then he practiced meditation. He practiced sheel with meditation. And that is what I am saying, You cannot give me an example of a meditator saint who was also very vile, negative, cruel a murderer. One must die. Those 2 cannot be seperated. That is my point. You cannot be immoral and practice meditation and expect enlightenment with that agitated mind.

That is a very wrong conception of morality. And from my experience, morality works while the contrary has never (except temporary). I have become a very vindictive person trust me, I have become brooding, very reactionary, and egoic and also unforgiving . Was like that for years. Then I research psychology articles and it says- Forgive people. It works. One day I talked with people nicely, it worked, it felt good.. Morality doesn't mean just action. It means thoughts as well. I decided to stop myself from negative thinking. It worked. It is working for me. So that's that. And it's a continuos process, it's not like an offering to God, but having an overall positive attitude, and psychologically it works, written by psychologists.

Well, I did question that a lot, and I have already written the evidences and the research for why it works. Why do you think it doesn't work (if you think so)? Lets question your assumption.

Currently I am not outside my ego mind, but to eliminate this ego mind it is better to embrace such ideas of- ' trying to lessen the suffering of other beings. Not having ill will, cultivating love, it is not difficult unless your mind makes it so,' + practices, compared to the contrary. In the higher states, there is no this or that, all duality is eliminated, but to get there, I don't think immorality is the way, but morality + practices, is.

It's quite easy. Don't make it a rocket science. Doing good means- trying to lessen the suffering of other beings. Not having ill will, cultivating love, it is not difficult unless your mind makes it so. That is why Buddha says - Sheel + Samadhi. Doing good + Go deeper, and he says examine my own teachings and see if they work for you. Sure. Buddha talks about states of neither 'this' nor 'that, where all duality is eliminated.

I think it is quite the opposite. Actually negativity , anger, bad deeds is the way ego tries to feel good about itself. If I insult other people, if I gossip about other people, take revenge, the ego can feel big and good and that is how most people go about with their lives. Positivity actually means diminishing your ego. Feeling good for a short while is definitely not the end goal. Playing playstation can also do that. The goal of meditation is definitely the latter part of what you said.

Yes, it is the end goal. The obvious methods are- Meditation , Introspection etc. To this I am adding- Moral conduct + Practices, contrast to - Immoral/unregulated conduct + Practices

Of course it is not the goal, but from my research and experience, it is a gateway to a happier state of mind, compared to doing bad. That is how it helps in meditation. What I am saying is, if you are a bad person who does bad to others, and you feel negative, but you meditate a lot, I am saying that doesn't help but the opposite does. It's always a combination, Good deeds + Meditation. Only good deeds can become devilry as you said.

I am not saying - enforcing rules and not knowing should be done , I am advocating the buddhist method of - Sheel + Samadhi = Pragya, which means a combination of meditation with morality. If you meditate, but you are immoral, always angry, allowing yourself to go through the rabbit hole of negative thinking, then that wouldn't help you, that is what I am saying. Osho says it helps. I say it doesn't talking from my own life observations and psychology articles. Even if you want to reach enlightenment, you would need a peaceful mind, and how can that happen if you are immoral, always angry with bad thoughts? if you want a peaceful mind, then you cannot be immoral. If you want enlightenment, you will need a peaceful mind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ensō#/media/File:Enso.jpg Have you read about Enso? What is it's significance?

I am usually a loner. I have only key friends, but I don't have many friends. Sometimes I worry, am I at a disadvantage here? May be it depends on what is being done. If I was a politician sure I would want to have many friends. But I am studying to become a doctor. Do you think I need many friends?

My opinion- I think that it is not an easy thing to be successful both spiritually and materially. And the reason is, if you are working on material success then you will have to meet ( not necessarily make friends with) people who are materially inclined. 99.99% of my fellow colleagues are materialistic. They have never meditated for a minute in there lives, they laugh when any talks about Buddhism comes in. They can't understand even the concept of the seperation of the body and the self. I was so astonished, how could one be so ignorant ( Avidya). There is so much resistance going on. On the one hand, I have my room where I have the pictures of Buddha and Krishna, and I have my peaceful life, on the other hand there are so many materialistic people once I get back to med school, which is actually hampering my spiritual life although it is improving my materialistic life. This is one of the reason I feel that I have not developed so spiritually. I think to develop spiritually, one should spent time with spiritual people, one should join sanghas, monasteries, societies, cults etc etc etc, I think it is quite important. I think it is difficult to develop spiritually if 80% of the day you are exposed to materialistic people and 20% of the day you spent time with the spiritual, this is what is happening to me.

"A conspiracy theory linking the US army to the coronavirus now has official Chinese endorsement" https://qz.com/1817736/china-fuels-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory-blaming-us-army/ My opinion- Let's not take any such conspiracy theories with any seriousness, of course the chinese government will say anything and promote any idea that favors their own agenda, doesn't mean that people will/have to buy it, , of course unless we are talking about a country like North Korea. As for whether China has been a 'criminal' with regards to its people (as told by my cousin who said that China is making such claims so that it can blame all the oppression and suffering it has caused to it's people, to other countries like US , in order to decrease the burden of it's own sin) , I wouldn't think so, I say it is debatable. China is doing a good job, just because there is a lack of freedom and there is severe oppression of any dissidents, doesn't mean China is inhumane, I'd say China can stick to it's political philosophy, not all nations need to be capitalistic and be as free as the Americans, if you want to do well in China, do your work and obey the government. Of course, by the United Nations standards or American standards it can look like suppression, China I think is just more controlling and rule enforcing (and it's not like the rules are inhumane or anything), so it might suck a little from an American pov, but I wouldn't say it is evil.

@Average InvestorThanx for the book recommendations

Thanx for the long list of things that I 'might' be lacking, haha. I can use it as a checklist. But here's the thing, there are many many people that like me. The girl is the ONLY girl ever who has behaved to me this way (i.e angrily, but there are other people who have behaved in other unpleasant ways ( not angry at me, but things like- trying to show off, trying to be a center of attention etc which ofcourse I don't like)) ( in university i.e, in schools there were many bullies who where rude for no reason) If someone else is rude to me, it's not always because there is something about me that is bad, if you have not done anything wrong and still if some (not all) people treat badly to you, it's not always because you did something wrong. And this is the problem with your post, you seem to keep pointing out that people behaving unpleasant to you is because of you. I often type in Google "Why are people rude " In many ( all) psychology articles, they write- "It's often about them, it's not about you". As I said, I do have friends ( few key friends, many friends/ aquaintances) I don't have a problem with people getting to like me, I repeat- I don't have a problem with people getting to like me whether it is guy or a girl. The problem is people pissing me off and I leaving them. In my life there has never been a single person who ever ran away from me because I did something wrong to them. I am the type of guy who won't even get angry at people unless they get angry at me for no good reason or try to take advantage of me. I am not a doormat. I agree with your advice that yes, I should be more tolerant. But I disagree with your advice that people are rude to me because there is something wrong about me. There are many pleasant people who like me. I am going to hangout with my friends just after I finish typing this. There are dramatic people like the girl who got angry at me ( which itself doesn't mean that she didn't like me. I just became a way for her to tease, to vent out her anger. Even the next day she came to tease me. That doesn't mean I don't have a pleasing personality which you seem to be pointing out over and over, or she disliked me. Just because someone is angry at you or teases you doesn't mean they dislike you.). It's that I don't like girls behaving that way. And it's not my fault or it's not that I should improve my personality in some way, it's that I don't like girls behaving that way, and if she wants me to stay it is she who has to change her personality, not me, or I will leave her. . Even if I was Justin Bieber and she was his girlfriend she would still nag him. That doesn't mean she finds JB less atttractive, less magnetic, less lacking in the personality traits that you mentioned. So no, I refuse to believe that people being unpleasant to me is because I have faults in my personality. If people were leaving me, then I would say I have faults, but people do not leave me, people are unpleasant to me. And I don't think there are methods to make ALL people behave nice to you. If there are , then you can write them. But I don't think there are. There are ways to make people get attracted to you, which for me is not a problem. But I don't find ways to make people behave the way I want them to behave which itself is something that I don't want. The only way is to be a fascist leader. As I mentioned in the above post, my only problem is 'tolerating people'.

Tolerance for people's drama and irrationality has always been an undeveloped trait of mine, I admire those people who are able to tolerate such people. If you could tell me some ways/practices/exercises I could do to be more tolerating of such people, that would be helpful. Once there was a girl who I used to talk with. Then for some unknown reason, she started to get angry at me and talked with me rudely. I thought "Did I do something wrong?" I hadn't. It's not just an assumption but something that I really thought deeply about. She was acting out of her emotions. Kind of like nagging. "No, I am not the guy who tolerates 'that' kind of women" I thought and left her.

I have usually been a loner as I dislike all the drama that comes with having many people, I notice the deep contrast between me having my chilled life at home drinking coffee reading medieval history vs me listening to people trying to show themselves how cool they are. I am generally a pleasing personality so its not that people are repelled by me, but I myself avoid people to avoid their baggage. I need to strike a balance between, avoiding the drama of people vs having people for good oppurtunities.

What are Leo's view on Music? What is the metaphysical purpose of music ? I think there is some deeper reality to music. Hinduism says that the world generated from 'Om'. Christianity says the world came to be when God spoke the words 'Let there be light'. I find music to be something mystical, that gives life meaning, true meaning. As Neitzsche said "If there was no music, life would be a mistake."

( The post title is from an article in Daily Wire) To be honest, I kind of enjoy this song. But I have noticed it has has offended many people and also I feel that this song is wrong in some level as it potrays men as having it better than women. It has been said that Taylor Swift was all fine and good until she went into politics. I kind of resonate with the thoughts of Ben Shapiro. He said it's a piece of crap. LOL. If you watch Serena williams vs Naomi Osaka match, you will see that Serena played the mom card, victim card etc and even used her identity as a wman to even influence the refree. Pathetic. And look at Taylor Swift here. It also looks like a shade against Tom Cruise. She is talking about the 1% man, but attacks the whole gender.

Finally all I can say is, if ever there was a time when men felt suppressed by women, they would come back to power in a heart beat and The power which women might feel they have in areas like 'dating', 'entertainment' , 'porn' is not power per se, it's a pseudo power, it's power clothed by male attention. The only way woman (as a whole, not talking about Angela Merke) will ever get a shot at power (I mean the real thing, not the million followers of Kim Kardashian) is if God somehow changed human anatomy and turned it into like that of Bonobos insteads of Chimps. Peace! ( Back to work)

Such a weak arguement. Okay, back to work I go. P.S- I didn't say Men do not whine, I said Men do not whine about not owning the dating , fashion industry etc like women whine about not getting their place in finance, buisness etc. Side note If you think men shouldn't whine then you are sexist btw.

What offends me is that ( It seems to me, as written by people like above) what I can do and cannot do is influenced by what my ancestors did. Okay, my ancestors, rightfully, admirably, honourably, were great warriors. Men fought in the past, it was a violent world back then and hence men, of course, had the power. But times have changed. We do not live in such a male dominated world. When it comes to war, Men >>>>>>>>>> Women, and any one who say otherwise can go to hell. That is why rightfully people preferred sons over daughters. But the current society of- Buisness, Art, Science, Modern Medicine, Technology, Programming, Gaming, , Fashion,it's a beautiful world hands down, does not necessarily favour men like the past. Instagram, Fashion, Facebook etc is ruled by women, many ugly girls have more followers then many attractive guys, just because men follow them due to their sexual needs. There is nothing inherent great about such women, it's just that young healthy men have a good sex drive and unlike women have nothing to lose with the hunt, which makes them follow such women hence increasing their value. But there's nothing great about women just by owning a vagina. But still, they do rule such platforms due to owning that thing and men having nothing to loose while they having everything to loose when acting like men. So it's quite foolish to do all this shit. There are areas ruled by women due to their own ability. There are areas ruled by men due to their own ability. Men aren't successful in finance because of some 'male prievalge' just like male football is not better than female football due to some male privilege. You don't see men whining about not having followers like women do, or whining about why they are not ruling the dating market. It's because they don't whine, they have better things do, they work hard, get the good job, get to the top of the corporate ladder, and women whine 'MALE PRIVILEGE!'. And I cannot be judged due to my ancestors did. I have never had any male privilege in my life. The friends that I have made, all the success that I have got, is all due to my hardwork. While if I was a women, I would be getting more social success because I own a vagina ( Of course, not in a million years would I want that). Other fields like science , buisness etc, is basically a genderless anyone can win, while war , sports is male dominated. The day I will support feminism is the day I feel I have been privileged in any way. Of course, I come from a backward society where still people do prefer men, but I am talking it from the modern 1st world country point of view, from the modern market and political scene (You have powerful women like Hillary Clinton, you have Elizabeth Warren just completely owning Michal Bloomberg.) For the current men of 2020, the guideline is- get up, show up, work hard, compete with men, and don't forget, compete with women too. The current modern society of Europe and US, is more or less an egalitarian society when it comes to the sexes at least. And feminism, is ofcourse, an injustice to current men as it seems like the girl in the post that I highlighted, women seems to be channeling their anger of 1 million years of suppression to the current boys and men. We are not a million year old. I am just 22 years old. I have never done anything bad to women. So why are you putting your anger of hundred years of suppression on to me. Yes, I am sorry that your gender was suppressed, but so are many animals in the animal kingdom. Nature is a nasty place. Violence is the default mode. And slowly intelligence and spirituality is making our society more peaceful and that too is due to in large part because of the generousity and ingenuity of men in the past. It is generous men who are giving women their previlege, it is generous men who helped the women suffrage, not women. Men could have easily took charge and still kept women as their maids. But they became geneous. And now you are hating men? Worse, you are hating the current 20-40 year old men because of their ancestors did? Back to what I said- Get up, Show up, Work hard, Compete with men, Compete women.

Truth bombs after truth bombs

I have a friend of mine who is a constant entertainer ( makes continuos effort to make people laugh, get himself on the spot light basically). While I kind of dislike such spot light. It's not that I can't make people laugh and get myself on the spot light ( the evidence is me entertaining people in parties etc when I am in the mood for having fun), it's that I don't make the effort and I seriously don't like the continuos desire to get myself on the spot light, like many people do (ESFP, ESTPs etc). They continuosly make an effort to create entertainment out of the smallest of things, which I find nuisance, the present moment, without any sort of distractions, pure silence, that is blissful enough then all the noise that they are making. I feel that these people are as unspiritual as one can get. One of my friend said- "Our culture itself is such that, if you say you like white, then someone else must contradict you and tell you that you are wrong , and that black is better then white" I say to him " I can tell you, that there are at least 5% people in this world who are not at all like that". He says "May be". I look at Eckhart Tolle, Buddha, Osho, Krishnamurti etc, almost none of them are continuos entertainers and noise makers. They are silence lovers. May be there are spiritual people who are continuos noise makers, but I don't see much. I think most developed spiritual people are boring from a ESXX / ENXX point of view, which is something I find admirable.