tsuki

@MrDmitriiV Bingo!!! I'm so happy for you! In your realization, have you seen the connection between Maya-inducing thoughts and meaning?

@Feel Good Oh man, I am so happy for you Can you now see the point of my fixation about your fixation about keyboard jockeying in a different light? It is not that a situation is toxic towards you, nor that you are toxic towards situation. Toxicity coexists. It is a bridge between ego/egos. Just like any other 'feeling' (which you so poignantly declared non-existent).

@Zweistein Do you want us to leave as well, or can we take care of your place while you're gone? When it comes to @robdl's post: Fear/thought/time is sneaky. Thought itself is seeking, and yet it can seek the end of seeking (enlightenment). It does not matter whether you let it seek or not. The notion that there is a difference between pre-enlightenment and post-enlightenment is an illusion. The point of enlightenment is not to reject thought, but to transcend it. To see it as a part of something greater and let it play itself out in its limited scope. Says the master of masters. lol <~ still haven't got past the embarrassment of that post. I love to watch the ego squirm

So, despite declaring myself the master of mastery and being done with learning, I just bought the book @MrDmitriiV suggested. Let's align our languages. That's a pretty advanced ego loop right there.

I know that I will sound very arrogant here, but hear me out. Perhaps, the very thought that I am arrogant in this is the whole problem. Who knows? So, when we learn this particular thing, lets say: carpentry, we go through 4 stages and become a master. A master is the one that performs the work competently and unconsciously. He embodies what he does. There are many things that we can learn this way: singing, designing, earning money etc. Now, here goes the arrogant part: What I am referring to is that I have mastered the process of becoming a master. I unconsciously and competently learn. I embody learning. Any single stage in this graph is not even present anymore because I have become the red line. I see no difference between being a master and being a novice. I just do things I have no clue about and I always succeed. Either I have met the goal, or I have temporarily failed while I learn. Sometimes, I even wish that I had failed because I will have more opportunities to learn. Do I succeed more than I fail? I see no difference between the two. That's a funny thing coming from Marx. From the perspective of the mindworld, interpretation is change. (Thank you for reminding me of that thread @now is forever)

@now is forever The steps are: Do something you know nothing about. Let the theory-building drive saturate with examples to produce a theory. Let the theory-dismantling drive deconstruct the theory. Restart. Given enough assembling and dismantling, I could come to a conclusion how dismantling works. This way, I could create a theory of dismantling theories. It would be a bait for the theory-dismantling drive to dismantle itself. The problem seems that for the time being I've gotten too used to dismantling and nothing gets built.

@now is forever @Zweistein I'm still contemplating the connections. For now, it is difficult for me to say anything meaningful. The theory-building drive is weaker than the theory-dismantling drive and I'm left empty-handed. For now, the only thing that I learned from my conversation with @MrDmitriiV is that I'm apparently done with self-knowledge. It also seems that I'm done with growing. At least in the sense I've been growing thus far. That's a strange place to find myself in.

@Zweistein And the difference between dual and the non-dual world is... ? Are you perhaps mistaking your influence on 'other people's' willingness to love or hate? I know that you don't know. I just felt reassured which was very pleasant. Having children because of a random comment on the internet is not the brightest idea. Even if the random comment came from the most wonderful person .

@now is forever You really mean it? Thank you, we're considering it.

And you came to this conclusion only after I gave you a candy? Why didn't you tell me that you wanted a candy up front? That would have saved mommy a lot of talking. Man, you're just too much. You're so cute that my heart's gonna explode.

Is that an insult for you? Here, have a candy: Mommy was wrong for calling you racist. Mommy is sorry. Do you feel better now?

I think that the tea is ready.

@MrDmitriiV It takes a doctor to tell medicine from poison. You just said that you don't even know the difference between milk and poison. How did it occur to you that you can treat her? You're just like a regular 7 year old.

@MrDmitriiV Is that how you talk to your mother? Go back to your room and no computer for you today.

Now that's a different game. You made me into a mother and yourself into a child. I am now supposed to teach you what is the difference between the milk and poison. I was under an impression that: Who is the mother and who is a child in your story?

@MrDmitriiV I wonder about that myself. I think that it has something to do with the fact that I am being explicit about the absurdity of what I am writing. With this kind of attitude, the only reason why would you argue with me is because you want to. I think that it is pretty clear that I am not arguing back though (at least to them). That, or they simply overlooked me. Have you tried to report me yet? I would gladly learn which of the two is the case. It seems that you're having a tantrum because I am not playing by the rules that you expect me to. Why does the fact that you do not see the answer you expect upset you so much? What is the point of talking if we're going to give each other answers we're anticipating? I'm not here to cuddle with you. Perhaps @now is forever was right when she said: From my point of view, the sense in which you are a racist has to do with all of the above topics that I touched in my response. You begged me to explain to you in what sense you are a racist. You got my answer.

@MrDmitriiV Thank you and good bye. You are not trying to understand why I called you a racist. What you are doing is asking me to show you how your behavior matches your definition of a racist. These are not the same thing and I guess this is why we're having this discussion. To me, a racist is not even an insult (like @Zweistein noticed when picking my response apart). You are assuming that when a speeding car rushes towards you, you have the liberty to stay or to go. You don't. It seems like you think you have control over your life which comes from your identification with your mind. What I am suggesting is to inquire into its nature so that you could actually notice that this very discussion is the speeding car you can't help to argue with. That would require from you to abandon the position of: which is understandably difficult as I am not willing to let go of this very desire myself. It was based on logical conclusions that stem from my definition of racism. You are mistakenly thinking that your definition of a racist is any less metaphorical than mine. You seem to be assuming that some definitions are more precise than others simply because they are widely accepted. That is correct only in so far as you do not question the constituent meanings of the words that define them. Floating on the surface of 'hard facts', 'science' and 'objectivity' is fun. What I would ask you to contemplate is: why is it logical to use logic? In case you come to a conclusion that it is illogical to use logic, then it would be interesting to rethink the sentence I underlined in the quote above. Like I said: fire and ice mix very well.

Once one is aware - one can choose to surrender or resist. Once one realizes that one has a choice, one can also question whether there is a difference between the two. They seem to be paradox at first, but through contemplating they can become one and the same "thing". Surrender vs. resistance becomes surrender = resistance. (I learned that from @tsuki - Thank you!!!!). @Zweistein What is the difference between love and hate?

@MrDmitriiV I think that the meaning of the metaphor of the racist is lost on you. It's okay, you're just a 7-year old. If you ever wanted to know what I meant go back to my post where I explained it and read it carefully. It's all there. It is also linked to @Zweistein's questions about self-reflection: Let me repeat my question @Zweistein: is there anything wrong with fighting? Is there anything wrong with not wanting to see something as our own projection and emotionally defending it?

Oh, so I should instead respond with: I called you a racist because you fit my definition of a racist? Would that satisfy your inner 7 year old? Is there anything wrong with fighting? It's a naked tea party after all.

I think that the only appropriate dress code here is nakedness I think that all four of us are doing a wonderful job at that.

Yes. The other questions you asked are not as simple as this one. Racist is a metaphor (just like not wiping your feet). You are thinking in labels. Adjectives have meaning to you. You think that me calling you racist has any other meaning than the one that you project on it. I am not racist. Beige, purple, blue, orange, green, yellow, turquoise - doesn't matter. To me, it does not matter whether you are a black, white, yellow or a nazi. It does not matter to me if you are racist. Meaningfully calling people racist is what a racist does. I do not speak to you. There is no 'me' other than the one that you understand from this post. Whatever you think about me is not about me at all. You are supposed to read what you think about me and resolve that. The question: Was not a question about factual statistics of people being yellow. Nobody cares. It was a question that was supposed to nudge you into self-reflection and critiquing spiral dynamics. We are not building knowledge here. We are understanding how our knowledge is fundamentally limiting us. Read my signature. And wipe your feet!

What @now is forever says makes perfect sense to me. And don't you bully her. That's my job. You're not bullying her.

@sleeperstakes Interactions with others are a problem only when you actually believe that you are making progress with your self-development. Making progress with self-development is like trying to outrun others in a row of treadmills in the gym. Nobody can help you with your self-development. If you understand that, then there is no reason to talk about it. If you still want to talk about it, then it means that you don't have anything to talk about besides self-development. If that is the case, then you probably should think whether you should be talking at all. Is the silence making you uncomfortable? Or is it that you're projecting your uncomfortability onto others and justifying your need for conversation? Stop watching the news and learn them from 'normal people'. Stop watching weather and enjoy the weather talks.