UnbornTao

You insult semen, you insult all of us.

Is that quote from Jesus? There's historical consensus that he almost certainly ate fish, lamb, goat, and other meats. The rest of the list above is fairly certain too. So why were you so quick to overlook it? These were some of the most deeply conscious individuals around - and that's the point. They were still people. Reality is colliding with your fantasies about what it means to be "conscious." You seem to think it entails a particular set of behaviors, a certain personality type or character, or a special way of life - maybe even the ability to walk on water or the aura of a "saint." But even enlightenment experiences don't necessarily stop someone from generating suffering in their own experience. Consider that nothing has to change for you to awaken right now, and that this is already the case for everyone, exactly as they are. A breakthrough can happen at any time, independent of circumstance or lifestyle. You could be drinking a beer and eating a filet mignon and still have an enlightenment experience. Because it's not about that. No transformation is required, because it's about what is true. Healing is a different pursuit as well. It's a bit like imagining that the clothes you wear have something to do with consciousness. But clothing is just clothing. A wool shirt might cost more than a synthetic one or itch a bit, but it doesn't change who you are. Or any metaphor to that effect.

Not sure what you mean, but then again, he did buy Pixar. And in that 1995/96 interview, he was on the verge of returning to Apple through the NeXT acquisition, which would eventually lead to him becoming CEO and turning the company around. The guy wasn't a charlatan. Sometimes it's about the communication itself and the dynamic being pointed to.

For sure, it was about the Chiquita Banana girl, I found it funny,

For sure, the ARM chips are excellent in certain use cases. The battery life, weight, and silent operation are all great. On the other hand, it's essentially the same product Steve presented back in 2008, just much improved (the Air model). For example, Apple's AI efforts - not just in innovating, but in having a decent AI assistant - have been quite poor. Don't you think Jobs might have come up with something new or more exciting than just iterative changes to what's already available? Heck, they even dropped the Apple Car project. There seems to be a certain sense of complacency or conformity that seeps into long-term creative endeavors, if you will. It's as if the original vision or "soul" of the product can get lost along the way. The dynamic is explained in the video Natasha shared above.

Nailed it. Yeah, and even beyond those products, they haven't really innovated much. The Vision Pro is the only so-called original consumer hardware product the company has produced in decades. And so far, it hasn't been particularly successful or groundbreaking.

What if the original writers were to come back, and the culture of the former company were restored? It's probably a pipe dream, but it makes me wonder whether it's just audience burnout and corruption. For example, could current-day Bethesda make a great Elder Scrolls game, considering that most of the employees from the older titles no longer work there?

I think these haven't been shared yet: Another one:

Great! macOS: some things good. Windows: some things not so good. No homo, but who can say no to Shaquille?

You guys are missing out on oregano... I've achieved Absolute Catness Consciousness.

I understand, I like it as well. It's consistent, seamless, efficient, and it stays out of your way, unlike Windows... at times. It can even look nicer, too - partly because its user interface is fairly coherent. And honestly, who isn't gay these days?

We like creating cosmologies and models, but they differ from what is actually true - which is unknown most of the time. In a highly subjective, socially constructed world, it is incredibly difficult to pinpoint what is taking place accurately. We are not even clear on what's going on in our own experience, much less in that of others. Grand narratives inevitably miss the reality right in front of you, because they are abstract, conceptual overlays that we invent and impose onto things. It is tempting to do that, relatively easy to adopt, and sometimes useful, but they are untrue.

Belief is more insidious than we realize. It's not to be resisted, but rather recognized, in my view.

Being comical is distinct from being funny.

I see, I'm not very fond of them. Protector of pineapples...

Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads.

What if some aliens are ant-like and their vehicles are tiny?

Jesus also ate meat (and fish.) Throughout history, there have been enlightened warriors in certain regions, such as China, who literally killed in battle. Sun Tzu was a military strategist. Ramana died of cancer. Chögyam Trungpa was an alcoholic, and Nisargadatta smoked heavily. Osho and Adi Da were involved in various scandals. Some apocryphal texts portray the young Jesus as temperamental. What I'm saying is that whatever is true is true now, and that's what enlightenment gets you. However you live your life is already how you live your life. How you behave is how you behave. I am separating fantasies and images of "enlightenment" from the reality of it. This is not to say that our actions lack consequences, or that we should be careless in how we live. Ultimately, though, this specific topic of diet is a matter of preference - a value judgment - that is up to the individual. It doesn't touch the truth in any way. Which is why bringing "the absolute" into these conversations is not useful, the way I see it. Handle relative things on their own terms. One way to frame this issue could be: What does a healthy diet consist of? Answering questions of this kind can take many forms, and different criteria could be used, even in how the topic is framed. Regarding compassion, remember that Gautama, after his massive enlightenment, initially chose simply to retreat into the forest to live out the rest of his life. A nearby monk asked him to teach, and he replied, "Why? Nobody will get it." The monk said, "Somebody will." He replied: "True. Somebody will." (Something like that). Based on this possibility, he dedicated his life to teaching. We imagine that such massive awakening would produce an extraordinary form of compassion, yet his first impulse was not at all to help or teach others, but to live out his life and die. Why was that? Compassion might not be what we think it is. It is an interesting subject to contemplate.

Was particularly interested in his focus on quality storytelling. In some cases, a gradual decline in quality seems to occur over time, as seen in media franchises such as Disney (in general), The Simpsons, the Star Wars films, or the Elder Scrolls games. It seems that something is (perhaps "inevitably") lost in that process. Could be called devolution, or complacency?

"This guacamole thing sure tastes better than hemlock."