PurpleTree

The US, Russia and China unfortunately have an interest in not letting us get too strong. And we’re easily divided as there are many countries/cultures democracy and so on. But it’s on us.

Are you talking about the Islamic Republic of Francistan? hihi jk i do like France(istan)

I guess only to get out of the samsaric wheel of suffering or whatever?

Nepal is on my list for sure.

I would say the same for my country. The people are very lovely but often more on the cautious side, which can be bland at times. For example Italy is more social etc. in that way. But i’ve met Norwegians too and they were very lovely.

God your posts are so useless. Can a mod delete this crap? @OBEler

Also Europe “should” imo build a strong European army, with European weapons and jets and a strong nuclear deterrence. And imo they of course shouldn’t go on adventures abroad. Just for defence.

Double standard goes deep both ways though. There are many people (in the world) on this forum on YouTube etc. Who if China, Russia etc. do devilry they’ll look the other way. But if let’s say a Western European country does devilry, oh nooon mon dieu the west colonialism, racism, evil evil.

So maybe -2 points for social life? I agree.

Exactly. Maybe if you’re not in the « rat race » in Korea it’s better. But you haven’t even been to S. Korea and want to live there? That’s wild. Anyhow good luck

We could say that what Russia (Putin) did in Chechnya is similar to what Israel is doing to Palestine/Gaza and it wasn’t that long ago.

Yea and all the PMs are Eastern European Ashkenanzi There are also western European Ashkenazi but not PMs. For example Germany Einstein, Levi Strauss, Kissinger.

Just a fun fact almost all Israeli prime ministers have roots in eastern Europe. A lot of them in Ukraine, Belarus, Russia Many of them changed their names. here gpt If we count all Israeli prime ministers from 1948 to today, the overwhelming majority—almost all of them—have full or partial roots in Eastern Europe (including Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, and Russia). Here’s the breakdown: Prime ministers with Eastern European roots David Ben-Gurion – Born in Poland (then Russian Empire) Moshe Sharett – Born in Ukraine (Kherson, then Russian Empire) Levi Eshkol – Born in Ukraine (Kiev Governorate, then Russian Empire) Golda Meir – Born in Ukraine (Kyiv, then Russian Empire) Yitzhak Rabin – Born in Mandatory Palestine; parents from Ukraine and Belarus Menachem Begin – Born in Belarus (then Russian Empire) Yitzhak Shamir – Born in Belarus (then Russian Empire) Shimon Peres – Born in Belarus (then Poland) Ehud Barak – Born in Israel; parents from Lithuania and Poland Ariel Sharon – Born in Israel; parents from Belarus Ehud Olmert – Born in Israel; parents from Russia Benjamin Netanyahu – Born in Israel; father from Warsaw (Lithuanian Jewish roots), mother from Lithuanian Jewish family Yigal Allon – Born in Israel; parents from Belarus and Russia Prime ministers without Eastern European roots Naftali Bennett – Born in Israel; father from the U.S. with Polish, German, and Dutch Jewish ancestry (still partly Eastern European via Poland) Yair Lapid – Born in Israel; father from Serbia (Balkans, not Eastern Europe) and mother from Ukraine (so partly Eastern European) Levi Eshkol, Moshe Sharett, Golda Meir – already in the Eastern Europe list above, no exception here Numbers If we include anyone with at least one parent or grandparent from Eastern Europe: All but 1 Israeli prime minister have Eastern European roots. That’s at least 15 out of 16 prime ministers. The sole arguable exception is Yair Lapid, whose father was Balkan-born (Serbia) and mother from Ukraine—though technically that still counts as Eastern European on his mother’s side.

No not even by “those standards” though. Because most Israelis settled there a few decades ago.

For me i mostly had Godly experiences on mushrooms. And then less on Ayahua. Nn-Dmt i could never inhale enough its so gross. But one time saw the silhouette of an indian goddess dancing on nn. One time i also had a mild god experience on low dose thc gummies + keta.

I don’t know. I think i was always trying to look for a way out of suffering. Which in turn lead me to build up a lot of defense mechanisms. So now i saw that the defence mechanisms cause more suffering than they avoid. So I’m trying to let go of everything. Or whatever.

Seeing that the self isn’t really there and the self dropping away energetically are seemingly different things. I think it just goes seemingly deeper and deeper. Beliefs untangle and such.

But the one who’s supporting it the most isn’t BRICS but the US. They attacked the UN, ICC and Unesco because of Israel.

A hypothetical discussion between Nisargadatta Maharaj and Tony Parsons would be both fascinating and confrontational in subtle ways. While both speak from the standpoint of non-duality and the radical absence of a separate self, their styles, language, and contextual frameworks are very different. Here’s how their exchange might unfold: Setting: A modest Mumbai apartment, with incense faint in the air. Nisargadatta Maharaj sits cross-legged, smoking a bidi. Tony Parsons enters, offering a quiet nod. Nisargadatta Maharaj (NM) : You come here with questions. But who is asking? Find that one. Everything else is illusion. Tony Parsons (TP) : There is no one here asking. There is only what is happening. The appearance of questioning arises in nothing. NM (nodding slowly) : Yes… The ‘I’ is merely a thought. But until one has investigated this fully, the illusion of the ‘person’ remains. That illusion must be broken through inquiry and earnestness. TP : That presumes there is someone who can inquire. There is no path, no seeker, and no attainment. Liberation is the already-this. The idea of a journey or effort is part of the illusion. NM (slightly firm) : The fire of self-inquiry burns the false. Without earnest effort, the mind continues its mischief. One must abide in the ‘I am’—not as a mantra, but as the doorway. Then the rest drops away. TP : But ‘abiding in the I am’ is still a practice. It suggests time and becoming. That’s the dream. There is no ‘I am’ to abide in. There is only what already is—nothing appearing as everything. There never was a separate self. NM (pointing his finger) : To say “there is no self” is easy. But for whom is that clear? It must be one’s direct realization. Otherwise, it is mere words—another idea in the mind. First know yourself as the pure beingness. Then go beyond even that. TP : And yet the suggestion that someone must ‘know’ or ‘realize’ still rests on the illusory premise that there is someone to do so. In liberation, there is no one left to awaken. That was always part of the illusion. Key Contrasts : Aspect Nisargadatta Maharaj Tony Parsons View on seeking Seeker is real until realized to be false Seeker is illusion from the outset Method Self-inquiry: “Abide in I Am” No method, no path, no practice Language Dualistic as a teaching device (to transcend) Radical non-dual; no concessions Tone Fierce, devotional, sometimes confrontational Gentle, detached, uncompromisingly non-personal Conclusion : While Nisargadatta uses provisional concepts to guide the seeker to realization, Tony Parsons asserts that even the idea of seeking is illusory. Nisargadatta points to a process, albeit one that ends in the recognition of timeless being. Parsons denies any process, stating the whole setup is part of the illusion. Their conversation would likely circle around the tension between “apparent effort” vs. “nothing to do.” Nisargadatta might view Tony’s stance as potentially premature or misunderstood by many, while Tony might see Nisargadatta’s method as reinforcing the very illusion it seeks to dissolve. Yet ultimately, both are speaking about the same reality—just from different levels of the dream.

So i don’t want to be the spokesperson for radical nonduality But what they usually would say is the separate self is an illusion(and the only illusion) the body, the tree etc. is an appearance.

Yea it’s so good. The beat and the raps, flows are good And then the wordplay and facts of each philosopher are so nice. Like Methodman from Wu Tang and method from Socrates Lao Tzu Dao te Ching, get out the way Su Tzu turning on themselves using the art of war Free speech doesn’t mean just keep yapping one of my favourites is “Let’s blind these Chinese heinies with some shiny bright enlightenment” coming out the age of enlightenment in Europe, it’s just cute.

I know. But I wouldn’t even call this spirituality really. That’s why i like it.

I don’t think that’s how it works. You can’t just be religiously convinced that there’s no self. You’ll know if there’s a self or not if there’s a story and “personal” suffering and so on i guess.