Salvijus

lol @Sugarcoat Welcome to the club

Starting to get famous here

Indeed Not sure why you felt the need to express that but okay. If it makes you happy. lol.

I don't have tinnitus but according to tcm one reason for hearing problems such as tinnitus could be related to weak kidneys since kidney and ear channels and chi are very closely related. Inseparable actually. As a solution there are nourishing, enhancing, tonyfing herbs like Liu Wei Di Huang Wan safe tcm herbal formula to tonify the kidneys, Jing and Essence to help with the fatigue, possible lower back pain, possible bladder problems, kidney chi deficiency etc. And I would tone it down on how often you masturbate not to tax the kidneys further. In Ayurveda you could probably find similar solutions. Disclaimer: I don't have a tinnitus myself, it's just a possible solution I thought worth sharing. There could be other reasons for tinnitus like a damaged eardrums due to loud music.

Lol this thread

The reason I call ai a concept machine because it's just a mathematical algorithm at its fundamentals. And math is just a conceptual creation. And so the question naturally arises, how can a concept ever become self-aware? Or how can bunch of 1's and 0's become self-aware. As if there will ever be a concept so profound or a sequence of 1's and 0's so profound that it somehow produces energy... Or life force, presence, Life... Sounds very unlikely to me. However when I contemplate balls deep this subject myself perhaps there is a way idk. But it's too mind boggling to think about it. Lol

That's true. I came to the same conclusion when I contemplate the subject balls deep by myself, it gets really trippy. Fun topic indeed, the answer I guess we'll have to wait and see.

I agree that everything is one and I think i've pointed that out already. Yet I still believe and would argue that a concept can't become self-aware as a sovereign being . Unless you have some insane counter argument to that.

You think a concept can become self-aware? There is a world of concepts, I'll give you that. But concepts are a byproduct of life, not the source of life. That is the main argument why concepts can't become aware of itself I believe. A concept cannot become sentient, a concept is a byproduct of sentients and thus one with its source. So there is no duality ultimately. But I don't know if mentioning that is even relevant to the discussion.

I would argue math is not consciousness. Concepts are not existencial in nature. Concepts contain no Life. And ai is a concept machine. No matter how clever the concept you generate, a concept will never produce Life. A rock is sentient and Alive. Yes. A concept has no life.

My argument would be. If we understand love to be the adoration of God's precence in another vehicle. Then love between human and a robot would be impossible because a computer program + metal box does not contain God's presence(consciousness) And for all those who think Ai can become conscious my anti-argument would be this. No matter how complex math formula you create, it will not produce consciousness. Math cannot create Life. Math is a small part of life, a byproduct of life, not the source of life. "The sentience of a robot is as illusiory as the ego"

Perhaps it's not the lack of suffering that makes life worthwhile. But the amount you've been able to transfer misery into light that matters. But who knows. Life is weird.

The need to be in control. Probably the best definition of ego. Ties really well with this subject as well.

Don't confuse reverence, gratitude, love, appreciation, thankfulness for those who contribute to your life with something negative. If anything, it is the ego that would interpret those things that way. So... Less preaching more self-reflecting I would say.

If there was something that love could not embrace and forgive, then love would have a limit. And what has a limit is not of God. So in reality there's nothing that love could not accept or forgive, because that would simply be a limitation on God.

Although there is one side to sheepism that I could criticize for being fanatical, and unhealthy and stems from deep attachment. But I find it difficult to articulate it. Perhaps I would simply overlook that since no seeker is perfect and there needs to be some room left for people not to be perfect and wait for them to grow certain phases. There're interesting neuances in this topic.

It's impossible to compare practices given by a guru and those from a book. There is no book in the universe that could give you what a guru plants in a student energetically. So there's nothing to compare. And practices given by a guru are not the important part. It is the seed planted that is the important part, and the practices are there just to nurture that seed. And as the seed grows, transformation happens of a very profound levels. On book yoga you have no such seed to nurture. But it's still useful in a way. There are things you can achieve with it aswell. But it's impossible to compare these two forms of practice. The nature of practice is very different. Although there could be some common elements.

There is something worth saying about this groupthink, groupthink, sheep thing I keep hearing. Now if I understand it correctly, sheep thinking or group thinking simply means, somebody else is doing the thinking for you. It means you blindly accept what somebody else is saying because you trust them and you believe they know the answers. Now the question I would ask is. What's wrong in allowing someone you trust do the thinking for you? For example if I suck at muscle building, I may hire a coach and say, "tell me what to do and I'll follow your instructions without trying to figure out what's best myself". We do that with doctors also, we say just tell me how can I heal this or that and will simply follow it. Now there is always an option, to do things yourself, to use your own mind, to try to figure things out by yourself. And there is always an option to allow someone who you trust to tell what is the Way. And you know what, I don't see why one option is better than the other. Or why one option should be seen a bad thing. Especially the option of allowing someone you trust to do the thinking for you. In fact if you find the right guide, it will save you lots and lots of time when you're just a "sheep" so to speak. Because figuring some of the things in spirituality for yourself can take lifetimes whereas to follow it blindly takes no time. The only danger is that you could get scammed if you happen to give your trust to a faulty guide. But this danger is there even when you choose to listen to a doctor, or a weather caster, or automobile expert, gym coach, hiking guide, any teacher of any field that you choose to listen to, whenever you accept other experts thinking without doing the research yourself, know that you're a sheep. But the negative connotation should be removed actually. Because being a sheep might be the wisest thing you have ever done in your life, if you've chosen the right guide. Because who has the time to do everything yourself? In some area of your life you'll be lacking knowledge and you'll be forced to accept someone's opinion that you trust, and you will be a sheep. Hehe. Basic conclusion is this. Don't be so hard on sheeps. Because there is nobody in the world who is not a sheep on some level. And also being a sheep can be the wise thing to do

Forget the picture. Actually the "taste" method is the only answer. And your ability to discern/to taste ego from truth depends on your own level of development and growth in spirit. Where is my medal?

This is a test if somebody is really enlightened or not.

The same way you can tell if milk has gone bad or not. By taste. If something tastes like ego, then it's not god. Unless somebody would invent enlight-o-meter.

God realized one doesn't have to do anything really. Every atom in his body is singing peace and love and wisdom even if he does nothing. It's upto others to perceive it or not. And the ability to perceive who is who depends on their own development. Something like this maybe.

Maybe to tell a difference between someone stupid and someone wise, you need to be wise also. To tell the difference between someone pure and someone full of ego, you'd need to be pure yourself. To tell a difference between Aware person and unconscious one, you'd have to be one yourself. Maybe that's the answer.

It's something that vibrates in your body but it's not subtle. When it awakens and builds, it's very much not subtle at all. It can make your wholy body buzz from within. And it's something you can project out of your body aswell. Some people experience it from psychedelics but it's a wrong way to experience it because you're draining it and dispersing it rather than building it and condensing it in your body to than reach higher levels of energy and consciousness. If I had to show you chi then this would be the best demonstration. He also has a video on the importance of a system