No Self

Member
  • Content count

    594
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by No Self


  1. 12 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

    @No Self ok I don't think he did this alone. 

    Of course he must have a research team of scientists who actually did it for him. 

    Absolutely. His job is to find the best people and put them to work. This is an artform in itself.

    He originally made a name for himself by being one of the inventors of the PayPal system that eBay uses to enable easy international credit card transactions, then used those profits to turn his attention to making the original Tesla Roadster car. It was based on an existing Lotus model but modified as an EV. Its specifications were absolutely mind-blowing for the time and broke the stereotypes about EVs being slow and impractical golf carts.

    Then Tesla began manufacturing their own models and moving into the mainstream. The stunning success against all odds is what has caused Tesla's crazy high share price and made Musk the world's richest person. The rest of the car industry has always been averse to EVs as they do not require expensive (profitable) servicing, nor do they have thousands of moving parts to break down. The fact that they seldom offered EVs to consumers at any price is a giveaway. They would have happily taken another 50-100 years to bring about any sort of clean energy. It is very corrupt and complacent at a time when human activities are causing a global mass extinction.

    I agree that his stance regarding COVID represented a disregard for others. Most people want to either brand him a heroic savior or a ruthless capitalist, when he seems to be both simultaneously. 


  2. 13 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

    I don't like Musk. He is too much into capitalism and the whole toxic Orange. Kinda drunk it. 

    This is partly true, except he is not solely motivated by profit but the cause of achieving sustainability for humanity. He has single-handedly brought about transformation in the car industry after 100+ years of procrastination and pro-fossil-fuel excuse-making. No one 50 years ago would have imagined that in 2021, most cars and most energy production would still be powered by 19th century piston engines and filthy oil pulled out of the ground. Elon Musk is one of the few people with the vision and the power to bring change to the situation.

    It has been said that he was bullied as a child, and some of his antics are a kind of overcompensation. The cult-of-personality aspect and the elements of greed are there as well. Compared to Jeff Bezos, at least he stands for something beyond money.


  3. At the human level, escaping loneliness is a motivation. From early childhood, the greatest fear is abandonment which means death. Some of the insane beliefs that many adults hold onto seem ultimately a means of being a part of an in-group. It's human nature and one of the things that makes us so irrational, and so easily manipulated.

    To one who is enlightened, 'loving everyone' would be a result of not viewing others as separate. It seems to come naturally. Even the duality of alone/connected would be redundant.


  4. 34 minutes ago, Consilience said:

    Truth transcends gender. There are feminine and masculine facets to God though. 

    Yes.

    Women are generally closer to enlightenment because the feminine energy embodies important principles of surrender and letting go.

    But men seem to be more likely to end up alone and without distractions like relationships, which makes sincere seeking more effective.


  5. The above quote may be taken out of context.

    If someone is starting up a business, there may be a period where extreme hours need to be worked in order to get it off the ground. I know a guy who did this with a couple of bakeries he was running, and over a number of years he became very wealthy and was able to sell the businesses for a large sum. 

    If working for someone else, working extreme hours does not bring nearly the same benefit. 'Work smarter not harder' would be the advice here. The question becomes one of how the income being made is invested.


  6. 5 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

    Well, fact is that other people would suffer very much if someone committs suicide, there's no way to get around it, even if you think that morally people have the right to kill themselves. I think they do morally have the right to kill themselves. But that it causes others to suffer immensely is a simple fact, so anyone who has even a bit empathy should put that in the calculation.

    One of the most common suicide methods is safe and painless when done properly. But since you aren't allowed to mention safe methods in forums.. people choose bad methods.

    This varies enormously from person to person. There are people with no family and no friends in this world, so that factor does not apply, or only minimally. For many others, there are loved ones who would suffer and this is worth accounting for. Another big ethical issue is that there can be trauma inflicted on whoever discovers the body. 

    Can't comment on methods for the same reason, but my research was based on that of organisations like Exit International.

    As for evidence, the nature of the situation is that the word of those with personal experience or insight must be taken or else dismissed. The sheer scale of the consensus around this issue from a variety of spiritual seers and individuals who have experienced 'death' (or lack thereof) first-hand is hard to dismiss. The conclusion is much the same as Keyhole summarised below; I presume he is about to be blasted for lack of evidence also.

    5 hours ago, Keyhole said:

    The main issue with suicide, is that consciousness grows - and so if you cut it short, you still have to learn those lessons.  So when you come back here, you will be presented with similar circumstances.  It is better to work through it in this life than the next.  There is a whole plan for your life that is entangled with everyone else - Indra's net.

     

    5 hours ago, Dunnel said:

    @No SelfThat has been my goal for a few months now. Whats driving me insane is that its technically possible that I can just become enlightened right now. Especially when I feel so close to getting there. Or when I feel a deep sense of bliss, but lose it a few seconds later. 

    I understand what you are saying. For almost everyone, it is necessary to get help around this issue. The right online video or the right forum comment may help since you seem on the verge of breakthrough. Or you may need to seek out someone who can give you the right guidance in exposing the falseness of the mind - including the identity of the frustrated seeker. You may have noticed that many of the greatest spiritual success stories start out in exactly the place that you are now. People with sheltered lives need not apply.


  7. 3 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

    There's 2 rational justifications I can think of:

    The suffering your suicide would cause people who know you.

    And the possibility that it can get better later in life. But it's of course not certain that it will get better. The chance of it getting better varies between cases.

    I've always railed against the argument about causing suffering to others. It implies living purely for the feelings of others. Should somebody stay in an abusive relationship to avoid hurting the feelings of the partner?

    The 'it can get better' argument is very applicable to young people. Not so applicable to 80-year-olds. People in between need to decide where to draw the line.

    One thing to keep in mind is that many suicide attempts fail and can lead to permanent injury or being treated horribly by government institutions. Other methods may be barbaric or unethical. The only peaceful and effective methods require much forethought, which is good in a way as it prevents people from making rash decisions.

    Another consideration is the research of suicide-NDE studies. Even a quick search of NDERF will enable unbiased research into the topic. Often people find themselves in the 'void' for long periods, denied the great light that normally applies to people whose lives conclude conventionally. According to Neale Donald Walsch's Home with God book, individuals who complete suicide will be reborn, back in time, into the same lifetime to try again.

    While the story of the 'unhappy me' is of course very familiar and very strongly identified with, my advice is to find out if it is true before trying to kill the body as a solution. I am not speaking of meditation as a pain-management band-aid, but the way of Eckhart Tolle, the way of Nisargadatta Maharaj, the way of Ramana Maharshi. Die before you die.


  8. I have experienced the scenario you describe.

    I needed to go to the hospital and did not have the strength to carry my backpack of essentials into the ambulance. Things like my phone charger to maintain any contact with the outside world, or much-needed moisturiser to shower in comfort. It was very frustrating. Then came the joy of returning home to clean up the blood.

    And yet, compared to the horrors of a dysfunctional family, all this is quite manageable. 

    As for ageing later in life, it doesn't bear thinking about!


  9. Just to offer a different perspective:

    Given Elon Musk's ultimate vision entails saving humanity via clean energy and multiplanetary habitation, having him emerge as the world's richest person is a radical change from bygone decades when it was fossil fuel peddlers and the like at the top. At least innovation is being rewarded and encouraged, rather than amoral ruthlessness.

    That said, I'm all for taxing the wealthy. It's very hard to do this as they will simply change locations or use other trickery. 


  10. The only way to avoid discussions like these going into the gutter is to use gender-neutral terminology wherever humanly possible. 

    Gay people have relationship problems too. I guess it will be hard to make generalisations about people of their own gender.

    26 minutes ago, SamC said:

    More nuance is needed. Some people from all genders and sexes are manipulative and toxic. Case ended. 

    Is there any person who has not been a bit manipulative at some stage? And yet, we should call out people who have a dangerous lack of empathy and will leave their victim in ruins.


  11. Try to be aware of the cognitive bias.

    Extremely ignorant people are more likely to get our attention, even if they represent a minority. We are fascinated by the social media science experiment of how low people will sink in letting their gullible brains be hacked by disinformation.

    By being aware of this, the problem can be seen as less serious than it appears; indeed, it also leads us to be conscious of where our own attention is going. All of us have a grossly distorted vision of reality. "You don't see things as they are, you see them as you are."

    Also, watch as the ego is energised by its superiority over the flat-Earthers. Their egos are in turn energised by the non-mainstream exclusivity of their cults. It's a miserable cycle.


  12. 2 minutes ago, trenton said:

    At the very least, maybe fewer officers would have been sympathetic.

    By the time it loses nuance in the hands of rioters, BLM is an anti-police, or even an anti-society movement (with nuance, it is a police accountability movement). Republicans claim to support law and order, even if this coup is not exactly the finest example of that. But the respective backgrounds make a difference. Then there's the ease with which this could turn into a civil war.


  13. 3 minutes ago, Ryan R said:

    Say trump was exactly as he is, but for the last year he had completely reversed course on his environmental policy and was actively pushing, hard - with multiple executive orders, the Green New Deal. Would he have won your vote? Would you be an outspoken advocate for him and/or his lies? Would you take up arms for him?

    This is a great question and one I've pondered myself. And, yes, I think I would vote for him (aside from not being from the US!). Why would I care if he was unfaithful to his wife if his actions were saving entire rainforests? Would I care if he is a gutter-mouth if he brought the corruption of the fossil fuel lobby to its knees? Not really; he would merely be a weapon in a legitimate battle. That's the same reason some people support him even though they know he is a douchebag.

     

    Would I support lies? This depends on the circumstances. During Nazi Germany, there were people who secretly kept Jewish people safe from execution and they lied to the authorities. Considering all politicians lie anyway, I'd have an open mind to supporting one with a proper green agenda.

    Taking up arms? Well, no. And we should not assume that 74 million people are taking up arms, or even supportive of what is happening. They merely have strong grievances with the Democrats so side with the other option.

    11 minutes ago, Ryan R said:

    I suspect this just isn't so, but if it is I do hope they chime in because I am very curious to learn of some of these unique outlooks!

    Just to give an example, some might feel that there's a need for radical change, and Trump represented a bull in a china shop (quite literally given his stirring up of issues with China's uncapped dominance). It might be a kind of 'accelerationism'; bringing about major change by throwing a grenade into the old system. Or maybe some of them just believed that a businessman would prevent the escalation of national debts, as he said he would. These are just some examples. Why people stood by him even after it became clear he was a conman is another question entirely; faux news ecosystems probably have a lot to do with it.

    16 minutes ago, Ryan R said:

    being a single issue voter is the height of lacking or caring for nuanced understanding and action in politics. No offense

    No offense taken, and I will gladly change course if a compelling argument comes along.

    Let me put it this way. I live in Australia. Indigenous people lived here for up to 60,000 years doing minimal damage and living as one with nature. European settlers have bulldozed most of the country to oblivion (as with the rest of the world) in a matter of a couple of centuries, and we are one of the worst countries for mass extinctions of animals. So that's what happens when the environment is not respected. It's about our own survival, but also compassion, respect, decency and humanity. I can't think of a more important cause than this, and the remainder of society, including its economic systems, should be shaped around it. Gun debates, etc., fade into oblivion when there's such a huge elephant in the room. That's my current political perspective and I try and live by it.


  14. It is a scientifically proven fact that today's pop music is generally all alike, compared to, say, 30 years ago. The simple reason is that pop music is a product with an intended purpose, and the optimal solution has been refined into a generic formula.

    Why do most bicycles since the 1880s look exactly the same? Or most smartphones since the original iPhone?

    Heavy music expressing dark emotion offends some. Deeply emotional music makes others uncomfortable. Non-synth music lacks an 'edgy' vibe. Sophisticated instrumentals can require appreciation. Non-sexual lyrical content bores people. Songs that are too long fail to provide instant gratification. Etc., etc. Everything with real character gets weeded out of the mainstream.

    So we end up with a generic formula, to be repeated from here to eternity. But at least it doesn't offend anyone.


  15. 9 minutes ago, The_Alchemist said:

    So why wouldn't you help others aka yourself?

    Note the underlying assumption: something is wrong and something needs to happen. Hence every religion and political system is born, and the conflicts between them.

    From the perspective of a master, the world is perfect, including the journeys of hardship being undertaken by many beings. They feel compassion and will naturally help others when appropriate, but do not have any messiah complex.

    A similar question was once raised by Neale Donald Walsch: why did Jesus not help all beings at once, not just the select few who crossed his path? The answer: to do so would be to violate a sacred law of the universe, to let each being walk their path.

    Eckhart Tolle has commented that some enlightened people are destined to dedicate their lives to various causes that will involve directly helping others, while for others, simply being on Earth while radiating the essence of the Self is a meaningful contribution in its own right.

    self realization RAMANA.jpg


  16. The most enlightened people today might not have any sort of public following so are probably living unremarkable lives in places like India. Trying to find them is a very valid pursuit, though.

    If only he were still with us (in the body), I feel Ramana Maharshi would take the prize. We have a good crop of teachers today (Rupert Spira, etc.) but nobody else but Ramana manages to bitch-slap my ego into oblivion as soon as they open their mouths. :D 


  17. We tend to attract what we fear. I would not recommend holding any of the thoughts in the OP.

    At a deeper level, events happen in line with a higher purpose. Someone becoming blind becomes the reason somebody else can establish a career as a carer, or even finding technological means to restore sight.

    That said, being educated about safe practices, advanced driving courses and what not is not a bad thing. Then accept. Vulnerability is the nature of the human condition while we are here - which isn't all that long.


  18. 4 hours ago, Ryan R said:

    1. I find it fascinating that there appear to be people on this forum who believe themselves engaged in enlightenment and Self-actualization work, the work of raising seemingly personal consciousness, yet they support trump.

    The most dangerous thing is black-and-white logic where by Trump=bad, me=good. You'll notice this is just a polar opposite of the Trump cultists' outlook that Trump=good, Democrats=bad, equally devoid of nuance or openness to opposing perspectives. If we are to be enlightened in any sense, this is not workable.

    People can have many different reasons for voting. They may be single-issue voters (pro/anti guns, abortion, environment, etc.), they may be conforming to the culture that surrounds them, or they may have some other unique outlook.

    The same way that there have been hundreds of documentaries telling the story of WWII, there could be hundreds of perspectives of looking at this presidency. The word 'Trump' essentially has no meaning, yet it triggers people as if it did.

    I'm a single-issue voter, as I think the environment is an issue that is literally billions of times more important than anything else in politics. It also represents serving the wellbeing of all beings on the planet. As such, I'll quietly admit that Trump is an absolute scumbag from this perspective. However, I will always go out of my way to seek common ground with the opponent - such as opposing the cancel culture, 'woke' bullshit, fiscal irresponsibility, aggressive identity politics and other failures of the left - in the hope of coming together to create a saner world.


  19. 6 hours ago, Willie said:

    That’s among the list of possible descriptions, sure. It’s not the one I’d choose.

    It's not easy finding a description that both factions would agree upon. 

    3 hours ago, Arcangelo said:

    Yeah it's incredible how TV desensitize you. We are seeing people dying and we call it a show, season finale, etc... WTH?

    It is perverse indeed. My comment refers to Trump's background as an entertainer, and the escalating drama that he has built into every stage of the shitshow that is now reaching a final crescendo as we speak. 'Elect a clown, expect a circus'; no truer words have been spoken. But an addendum: some clowns kill.

    6 hours ago, Jodistrict said:

    By getting caught up in the story, aren’t we missing the deeper dynamics at work?   

    This is the conversation we need to be having.

    In other words, most regular people are facing the same problems, such as financial hopelessness, but the right has managed to obfuscate debates about supporting the less fortunate with its anti-socialist battle cries, instead channeling people's rage into the current cult-of-personality extremist movement. (And the usual comment about social media algorithms heavily promoting right-wing extremism, despite ad hoc censorship, applies.)

    When people are too stupid and gullible to vote in favour of their own interests, do they deserve what they get?