batfly

There's this theory going around that we're all in hell as each other's tormentors but can't know it for sure otherwise it would diminish the overall effectiveness. I found this song, it cheered me right the F up. "My Dark Place Alone" - Official Video http://www.youtubeguide.net/ZZ_Vids/Watch.html?Vid=http://www.youtube.com/embed/lMttRr9qdyE

Get a load of this...

Dan explains WHY YOU'RE POOR Be sure to watch until the end. This is the way Billionaires think and why they have most of all the resources. They are relentless.

Close Encounters With Enlightenment https://www.youtube.com/user/BenjaminSmythe

The Meaning Of Life http://youtubeguide.net/MeaningOfLife/MeaningOfLife.pdf

Living an Unconventional Life | Alan Watts and Charles Bukowski

The ALL is MIND; the Universe is Mental "The ALL is MIND; the Universe is Mental." --The Kybalion. The ALL is Everything there is... Belief Determines Reality.

Friendship Serenade (Original Piano) "You will lose everything. Your money, your power, your fame, your success, perhaps even your memories. Your looks will go. Loved ones will die. Your body will fall apart. Everything that seems permanent is impermanent and will be smashed. Experience will gradually, or not so gradually, strip away everything that it can strip away. Waking up means facing this reality with open eyes and no longer turning away. But right now, we stand on sacred and holy ground, for that which will be lost has not yet been lost, and realising this is the key to unspeakable joy. Whoever or whatever is in your life right now has not yet been taken away from you. This may sound trivial, obvious, like nothing, but really it is the key to everything, the why and how and wherefore of existence. Impermanence has already rendered everything and everyone around you so deeply holy and significant and worthy of your heartbreaking gratitude. Loss has already transfigured your life into an altar." - Jeff Foster

Living with a Disease: EB Dean’s Parents were told not to expect their Son to live past 5. Dean is now 37 and living with EB. Deans story is brave and inspiring. Dean turns negatives into positives. This is his Story.

Cellar Door (Original Piano) Jackson Pollock - Autumn Rhythm (Number 30) https://www.google.com/search?q=Jackson+Pollock+-+Autumn+Rhythm+(Number+30)&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAWoVChMI8d-Ah73wxwIVDouSCh3jegQy&biw=1600&bih=799 Can it be done?

God is an Atheist - STOP Giving Flying Spaghetti Monsters Blowjobs What I really don’t get, is why so many of you out there want to give blow jobs to Flying Spaghetti Monsters. I just don’t get it. You wanna shamelessly give head to Flying Spaghetti Monsters. You can’t seem to just be satisfied with the empty truth; you have to gratify an obsessive need to glorify and adulate a concept that will help you feel better about yourself and inflate your ego. But why? Maybe you think shameless veneration demonstrates humility and gratitude? Well… It doesn’t. It demonstrates desperateness and sniveling subservience. It shows low self esteem. And it reveals a deep seated unconscious desire for divine quid pro quo. That’s why you pray, isn’t it? “Please god, gimme this. Please god, gimme that. Gimme gimme gimme! Now now now! PLEASE! I’ll give you a blowjob!” And I know what you are gonna say: “I don’t do that. That’s insulting. I only pray and worship the one true god, not a Flying Spaghetti Monster! And to characterize my communion with god as a blowjob is vulgar and inaccurate.” Is it now? Well, actually, it seems to be stunningly accurate to me. And I know some of you are thinking: “Oh man Sage. Are you gonna attack religion again?” And I say, sure, why not? When in doubt, flay theism. It’s good filler material, and it just feels so fucking good. Plus, you can always BBQ all the severed strips of cleaved meat. You don’t have to feel bad because theism deserves it; being such a manipulator, preying on the obtuse and credulous masses. And what’s funny is, a lot of theists spit on atheism, and would never dare to dream of glorifying or worshiping such a bankrupt ideology, yet, ironically, the very supreme deity that they claim to idolize, and long to perform fellatio on, turns out to be the biggest atheist to ever come down the pike. “Whaaaa?” That’s right. God is an atheist. Not agnostic, not ignostic, but atheist. The original atheist. If god is god, (and who else could god be?) then he is the one and only true god, and there is no other… therefor, god is an atheist by default; as, god naturally lacks a belief in a supreme deity, because, after all, god IS the supreme deity. If you are the supreme deity, then not only is there no other god before you, but there is nothing else existent outside of yourself. Nothing exists outside of yourself but your own products and byproducts. Sure, you can dress them up in different costumes and pretend they are not you all you want, but, fact is, it’s masturbation with amnesia. It’s all puppets and props. Yay! Truth be told, it’s a bit of a harrowing truth: Absolute solitude. Yeah. It’s a hard pill to swallow, for a deity that has to contrive an esophagus to swallow it. And even just swallowing ain’t an easy function to contrive. Sound a bit lonely or depressing? Well, this is the raw reality of a supreme deity. Now, “supreme”, relative to what? Ah. Now that’s a good question. I guess to the farts god emits, as he lays around for all eternity, pondering the question of his ‘supremeness relative to whatness.’ Perhaps supreme to a divine belch that brings a whole universe into existence? Wow. Just think of it: The big belch theory. Now the only question becomes: Will the belch forever expand in all directions, or will the belch retract and collapse into itself? These are the types of questions god considers in his all-pervading, ever-present boredom. Yes, god is most certainly bored; as, what is there left to do when you can do absolutely anything? But it’s even worse then that. No limits means, no boundaries. No boundaries means no position. No position means no distinctions. No distinctions means no existence. Who would have thought that omnipotence would lead to oblivion? It’s a real shocker. So the only way for god to come to terms with his indivisibility is to willfully fracture and restrict himself. Enter mankind, the puny weakling who desperately longs for more and more power and control. In his profound ignorance, man gets lost in distinctions; swimming endlessly through a sea of complex inventory. In his thirst for empowerment, man creates a god in his own image; as, it’s an a lot more satisfying idea then the empty truth of the oblivion. So, rather then growing some balls and emulating god through pragmatic atheism, man, instead, develops garbage beliefs and then forms garbage belief systems, aka religion, whereby he can now officially worship himself via a god by proxy. Is that amazing? Or is it more of a reason for depression? It’s a diversion from the truth, so despite it’s facade appeal, it’s empty; which actually reflects the real nature of the underlying supreme deity, that is, apparently, so incredibly supreme, he is forced to cripple himself to even have a semblance of a sense of self. This is something man should embrace unconditionally, as it is, and not give in to the temptation to try and mythologize it. Man, just like god, has to come to terms with his own true indivisible underlying nature. Man is a limited chunk of god, estranged and committed into a form with a name, and then cast into a contrived setting. So for man to then turn around and earnestly worship an imagined externally existing god is a perverse delusion. It’s the equivalent to god performing fellatio on himself. And how does that sound to you? Actually, I shouldn’t have asked… as, I know many of you would probably never even leave the house if you could accomplish this… and with that in mind, you can now have a better idea of god’s whole situation. So knowing all this, you don’t have to feel at all hesitant to become an atheist. It’s not disrespectful, it’s not arrogant, and it’s not intellectually dishonest. It’s actually an emulation of god himself. If god has to be an atheist, then man should be one too. Can there be any better way to connect with your authentic self? Apr 21st, 2018

Experience this

UpDog Yoga

You're alone. You've always been alone regardless of any delusions otherwise. Solitude and Isolation is THE gift.

10:00 "God is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent." If God is, as Jordan recites, unlimited then does that make God nothing you could ever possibly comprehend nor imagine? With this premise of God, then what does that make a human, or anything for that matter? How can you, I or stuff be anything other than part and parcel to God? If the premise of God being infinity is true, then how can anything exist separate from God? God's omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence means God is filtering and limiting awareness to illusions of what we know as reality. If God is infinite then anything you see, hear, touch, taste, smell, imagine and experience with awareness, logic and or emotion is God. This would include everything, but not limited to: psychopaths, pedophiles, violence, heroes, saints, kindness, beauty, ugliness, red necks, social justice warriors, shit stains, and the perfume of roses; Not even nothing could not be God. There could only be illusions of not being God. Do these limited bubbles of awareness ever catch glimpses of the whole holiness without being ravaged by insanity? What is sanity juxtaposed with the truth of God? The lunatic is on the grass. The lunatic is on the grass. Remembering games and daisy chains and laughs. Got to keep the loonies on the path. The lunatic is in the hall. The lunatics are in my hall. The paper holds their folded faces to the floor And every day the paper boy brings more. And if the dam breaks open many years too soon, And if there is no room upon the hill, And if your head explodes with dark forebodings too, I'll see you on the dark side of the moon. The lunatic is in my head. The lunatic is in my head. You raise the blade, you make the change, You rearrange me 'till I'm sane. You lock the door And throw away the key, There's someone in my head but it's not me. And if the cloud bursts thunder in your ear, You shout and no one seems to hear, And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes, I'll see you on the dark side of the moon. "I can't think of anything to say, except... I think it's marvelous." All that you touch And all that you see All that you taste, all you feel And all that you love And all that you hate All you distrust, all you save And all that you give And all that you deal And all that you buy, beg, borrow or steal And all you create And all you destroy And all that you do And all that you say And all that you eat And everyone you meet And all that you slight And everyone you fight And all that is now And all that is gone And all that's to come And everything under the sun is in tune, But the sun is eclipsed by the moon... "There is no dark side in the moon really. Matter of fact, it's all dark."

Secret Behind The Numbers 3, 6, 9 Tesla code Is Finally REVEALED! Nikola Tesla did countless mysterious experiments, but he was a whole other mystery on his own. Almost all genius minds have a certain obsession. Nikola Tesla had a pretty big one! He was walking around a block repeatedly for three times before entering a building, he would clean his plates with 18 napkins, he lived in hotel rooms only with a number divisible by 3. He would make calculations about things in his immediate environment to make sure the result is divisible by 3 and base his choices upon the results. He would do everything in sets of 3. Some say he had OCD, some say he was very superstitious. However, the truth is a lot deeper. “If you knew the magnificence of the three, six and nine, you would have a key to the universe.” – Nikola Tesla

Back into the neighborhood of Rene Descartes: What is the association of Cartesian Dualism and solipsism? Cartesian Dualism and Solipsism https://sagebodisattva.tumblr.com/post/170157546014/cartesian-dualism-and-solipsism-so-jumping-right So jumping right back into the topic of solipsism, we once again return to the wiki documents on the subject to provide a point of reference. This time, it’s the association with Cartesian Dualism to solipsism. Of which, the wiki documents states, quote: “There is another option: the belief that both ideals and “reality” exist. Dualists commonly argue that the distinction between the mind (or ‘ideas’) and matter can be proven by employing Leibniz’ principle of the identity of indiscernibles which states that if two things share all exactly the same qualities, then they must be identical, as in indistinguishable from each other and therefore one and the same thing. Dualists then attempt to identify attributes of mind that are lacked by matter (such as privacy or intentionality) or vice versa (such as having a certain temperature or electrical charge). One notable application of the identity of indiscernibles was by René Descartes in his Meditations on First Philosophy. Descartes concluded that he could not doubt the existence of himself (the famous cogito ergo sum argument), but that he could doubt the (separate) existence of his body. From this, he inferred that the person Descartes must not be identical to the Descartes body since one possessed a characteristic that the other did not: namely, it could be known to exist. Solipsism agrees with Descartes in this aspect, and goes further: only things that can be known to exist for sure should be considered to exist. The Descartes body could only exist as an idea in the mind of the person Descartes. Descartes and dualism aim to prove the actual existence of reality as opposed to a phantom existence (as well as the existence of God in Descartes’ case), using the realm of ideas merely as a starting point, but solipsism usually finds those further arguments unconvincing. The solipsist instead proposes that his/her own unconscious is the author of all seemingly “external” events from “reality”, unquote. Alright, so back into the neighborhood of Rene Descartes. In case any of you were wondering; “Cartesius” is the Latin form of the name Descartes; hence, “Cartesian dualism” is a reference to Rene Descartes’ idea of dualism. So; with this in mind, an alternative option exists? What does this imply? Another option? Only: an option of what? What the hell are they talking about? The option of a BELIEF that both ideals and reality exist? Oh, you mean an alternative abstraction? A different story to tell ourselves about the stream of sensory perceptibles? THAT option? Oh. Yeah ok, whatever. The concept that both ideals and reality exist. Interesting. But how does this relate to solipsism? If anything, this is a move AWAY from solipsism, not a move towards it. Awareness is the only reality. Concepts, and objects are existential factors, but are merely varying layers of illusion. A dualist is actually a detriment to the truth of solipsism, as solipsism acknowledges the implications of non-duality… so to embrace dualism, with distinctions of quality in illusion as proof of some kind of separation in illusion, is a counter productive exercise. Distinctions of mind and matter? They don’t really mean mind though. Not in the sense of awareness. They mean it in reference to the thinking function. So, more aptly stated: they are discerning distinctions of abstractions and matter, and this is only possible from a deluded stand point. Matter is an aspect of mind, and abstractions are an aspect of mind; so to seek to prove a difference between matter and abstractions, by referencing different appearances of the exact same thing, is worm eyed and short sighted. Accordingly, if there cannot be ‘separate’ objects, or entities, that have all their properties in common, then it follows that everything contained in sense perception is one and the same, as everything in sense perception share the exact same core foundation. Indeed, “qualities” are illusory. Just as in a dream, delusion facilitates the belief that dream concepts and dream objects differ in their attributes. Lucidity, however, shows this distinction to be a complete fantasy. This is to forget the fundamentals and get stuck on the surface. This would be the same type of mindset that might similarly jump to an assumption that ice and steam are different. “But Sage, ice and steam are a different ball of wax then matter and the abstractions.” No, it isn’t any different. It’s a metaphor, but we can liken abstractions to steam and objects to ice. The only difference in this, is the mistaken belief that there is a difference. The whole idea of “difference” is a falsehood. Differences set up polarity, and polarity is varying degrees of sameness. This is the age old lesson of non-duality. Yin and yang are the symbolic representation of dualism, but to believe in the seemingly oppositional differences of the yin yang is to consider the configuration from the most absolute shallowest perspective. Non-duality is wisdom attainted from the meta perspective, and attaining this wisdom entails not letting the mind get inattentive by the incitement of illusion… and whether it’s a buzzing fly, or falling bombs, the game is the same: Illusion facilitates delusion by snagging the attention through varying extents of distraction. Once the mind is distracted, it is in a position of acquiescence to externals. Once a mind is submissive to externals, it is disempowered, and hence has fallen into mental slavery. When the mind can finally discern this all this, the overall deception of illusion becomes laid bare. Rene Descartes’ confusion and subsequent conclusions regarding this issue highlights the difficulty of the overall discernment. Ideas and matter are not a dualistic polarity. Concept and object are identical aspects with the appearance of a difference. Thus, the proposed dualism here is really just a false dichotomy, and hence, the principle of the identities of indiscernibles is a tool of misapplication. Descartes made a distinction between his physical body and ‘the person’ Descartes… but what the hell is a ‘person’, anyway? An object? An idea? The body only exists as an idea in the mind of the ‘person’ Descartes, but isn’t the thinking function itself also just an idea? The fault here is the assumption that there’s gonna be some one true only existing identification found that we can then slap a label on and call the ‘actual reality’. Hence, the idea of a ‘person’… only, there isn’t any person existing anywhere. Remember: ‘Descartes and dualism aim to prove the actual existence of reality, as opposed to a phantom existence, using the realm of ideas merely as a starting point’… but, is that an actual existence? The realm of ideas doesn’t seem very actual. This would be more abstract then actual. And this is why, despite cogito ergo sum, Descartes must have unconsciously chosen to assume some sort of basic template of objective materialism; as, the “self” that he decided could not be doubted, and differed from his physical body, was assumed to be the thinking function. It’s: “I THINK, therefor I am”, right? Hence, ‘thinking’ is set up as the only aspect know for sure to exist. Only, why get caught up on the thinking function? That’s not the true identity. And to set up some disparity of existing factors based on an erroneous identification strays away from the truth. With lucidity, you can’t grab ahold of the magical red balloon as the undisputed reality and then declare all else to be dubious aspects to be doubted. The magical red balloon is no different then anything else in the equation. And then the statement: “The solipsist instead proposes that his/her own unconscious is the author of all seemingly “external” events from “reality”…? What solipsist? What his/her? What unconscious author? And moreover, what reality? Reality is what is actual, and there is nothing actual about the transient stream of sense perception illusion. Reifying an external is not in line with lucid awareness. With lucidity, there is no need to find an identification… as the true identity of the empty self isn’t represented as any kind of manifestation in dream phenomena. So Descartes was sort of on the right track with his inquires, but stumbled when he settled down on the thinking function as the undoubtable existing truth. The question must be asked: What is the context of the thinking function? Enter the expanse inflating container that gives platform to all existential manifestation. Enter pure awareness.

What are you trying to tell me? That I can dodge face eating rats? No; I’m trying to tell you that when you’re ready, you won’t have to.

Enneagram seems more like: Personality Types: Lion, Otter, Golden Retriever, and Beaver https://weirdblog.wordpress.com/2007/02/22/personality-types-lion-beaver-otter-and-golden-retriever/

@Toby Sort of like World of Warcraft only not as complex... https://creately.com/diagram/example/im6k5ag72/World of Warcraft

@Toby Which 1 to 9 would employ Socratic Irony during a discussion? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enneagram_of_Personality