smiling at strangers

[Salvijus]

35 minutes ago, bebotalk said:

what response? you actually believe that humans only have and should have one morose experience or feeling. Your pastors clearly aren't that learned, since they teach you nonsense. 

I emphasize with your frustration. It's not easy to talk to me  but you're doing well imo 🙏 

Edited February 17 by Salvijus

[bebotalk]

2 hours ago, DefinitelyNotARobot said:

 

The level of irony is superb. How are you going to call out other people for suposedly gaslighting you (when they didn't) while ACTUALLY gaslighting someone else in the very next post?

You've got to deal with your issues and stop protecting them onto other people dude. People who believe that everyone around is constantly trying to manipulate them are either really insecure, projecting their own manipulative personality, or both.

Try to do better than that.

I don't get dictated to by strangers, or people who were raised in spiritual environments that de-emphasise individual will. Her tone was manipulative by way of using imprecise language that wasn't connected to the germane point at hand. 

[bebotalk]

20 hours ago, DefinitelyNotARobot said:

Then don't. I'm not forcing you to grow as a person.

lol. more manipulation. 

Who mentioned growth? Or that I should grow? I think you're influenced by an Indian temple or something. this indirect and sublimiinal communication style as actually quite intriguing. I dont' think any person has to adhere to your points. The obligation to do such is baseless. It's you who is using imprecise English in bad contexts. hence it lends to some pathetic game. 

Edited February 18 by bebotalk

[bebotalk]

23 hours ago, Salvijus said:

I emphasize with your frustration. It's not easy to talk to me  but you're doing well imo 🙏 

I'm amused and not frustrated. you genuinely believe everybody is or should be morose and humourless. Or be perfectly erudite in speech or thought. I believe that's an unhealthy and unreasonable standard for all to adhere to. I don't see why a mix of emotions is bad. You probably concocted this worldview in a formative part of life but then despite being smart haven't even ever questioned it. And you think this abnormal standard is what everybody should adhere to, since having a balance of emotions in given circumstances which has long been proven to be psychologically healthy is bad based on your inner edgelord psychology. 

It's why you let some Indian kid chat the biggest BS out, since he's a fellow from your kind. so it's all some grand bias looool.

[bebotalk]

28 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotARobot said:

@bebotalk I wrote something out but I deleted it because I'm not going to engage with your manipulations any further. Have a nice day.

it's not me who is manipulating. I don't engage with others in that way.

[Arthogaan]

There is this weird social construct that If I am happy I should not show this too much because someone who is sad could be bothered by this, so let's all just tune down our happiness and live in a fucking meek society.

It's a ridiculous deep program. Fuck it. Bliss out in public. Smile to everyone if you feel like it. Culture of Bliss babee.

[bebotalk]

8 hours ago, Arthogaan said:

There is this weird social construct that If I am happy I should not show this too much because someone who is sad could be bothered by this, so let's all just tune down our happiness and live in a fucking meek society.

It's a ridiculous deep program. Fuck it. Bliss out in public. Smile to everyone if you feel like it. Culture of Bliss babee.

it's cringe to assume others care about one person's happiness, or that one "needs" to display it. 

[Arthogaan]

1 hour ago, bebotalk said:

it's cringe to assume others care about one person's happiness,

I did not say other's care. What I say is that there is a construct of some kind of "politeness" that I should not bliss out in public because some "serious grown up" may not like it.

 

1 hour ago, bebotalk said:

"needs" to display it. 

I did not say need or should. I said if you want to bliss out and smile then do it. If you don't then don't. 

[bebotalk]

3 hours ago, Arthogaan said:

I did not say other's care. What I say is that there is a construct of some kind of "politeness" that I should not bliss out in public because some "serious grown up" may not like it.

 

I did not say need or should. I said if you want to bliss out and smile then do it. If you don't then don't. 

a guru-derived view isn't the only acceptable view. nor is mine. 

[Arthogaan]

4 hours ago, bebotalk said:

a guru-derived view isn't the only acceptable view. nor is mine. 

What guru derived view?

Let me ask you something.

 Do you believe that if I meditated for 1 hour in the morning and now I am literally blissing out because I see the beauty of Creation anywhere, then i have all the right to smile in public and radiate that love onto others? 

 

[Ajay0]

I often remember a glance of love that a yogi gave me in an ashram with a smile . He was in a state of bliss , and even though I was a total stranger to him, it did not prevent him from expressing his inner happiness in the form of a loving smile to me. 

It was really a very beautiful moment. 

In a place with high prana energy levels, it is natural to have smiles and loving glances at each other.  The high prana levels automatically bring the mind to a nondual state. 

In eastern philosophy, nonduality is the true state as a unitary consciousness is considered to be behind the multiplicity and diversity of the material world, 

The more unconscious one is due to psychological issues or low prana levels, the more he or she is bound to be in a dualistic state due to fear, anxiety, stress and competitiveness. In such a society it is natural to be suspicious and not smile at strangers or even at known ones. 

People will say it is prudent to be skeptical, unsmiling and mistrustful, but it is a good gauge for the unconsciousness levels in that society.

 

 

[Ajay0]

On 2/4/2024 at 2:56 PM, Lila9 said:

Of course a smile needs to be perceived as genuine to have a good effect, fake smiles and toxic positivity may do worse.

A genuine smile is an indicator of excellent inner health. 

But a fake smile is still better than a grumpy face, and over time it can transform to a genuine smile as well as conscious actions can evoke corresponding feelings. 

[bebotalk]

On 19/02/2024 at 0:48 AM, Arthogaan said:

I did not say other's care. What I say is that there is a construct of some kind of "politeness" that I should not bliss out in public because some "serious grown up" may not like it.

 

I did not say need or should. I said if you want to bliss out and smile then do it. If you don't then don't. 

You're free to do as you please. I didn't say otherwise. But given how spiritualists interpret rudimentary English, they'd think that's what i WAS saying. 

Edited February 21 by bebotalk

[Arthogaan]

4 hours ago, bebotalk said:

You're free to do as you please. I didn't say otherwise. But given how spiritualists interpret rudimentary English, they'd think that's what i WAS saying. 

I have one thing to say to you my friend. Love more, care less.
 

 

[bebotalk]

15 hours ago, Arthogaan said:

I have one thing to say to you my friend. Love more, care less.
 

 

spiritualists are very presumptive. assuming i must care about their views or vids.

and they take offence at such refusal, since they hate interpersonal freedom. or assume that they can influence others at all times. when they refuse to think "oh they're not interested, let me move on!" and will most likely act the same way to a hustler in the street without realising it's the same principle at hand. or they don't wish to realise it. 

[bebotalk]

i just think smiling at strangers is cringe. i don't see why people need to, though if others want to, so be it. we're all different. provided people aren't causing harm to others in public, then i don't see any requirement to smile at strangers. i personally don't need random people i don't know to smile at me, or make me feel warmer. that's my own responsibility.  it's further cringe to suggest that others will judge people for not smiling. it's oddly invasive and intrusive and needless to boot. If you're going to the shops to buy groceries then just go and get your weekly shop. you shouldn't imho worry about people in your vicinity not smiling or not. your own life, family, spouse, kids, job, etc. are more important, or should be to you. 

we've all said our opinions. that's that then. 

 

[Arthogaan]

9 minutes ago, bebotalk said:

i just think smiling at strangers is cringe.

Okay fine.

Thinking that small acts of optimisim and kindness in this divided world are cringe - thats cringe.

Spiritual journey eventually requires you to accept cringe parts of yourself.

No need to be that intelectual, that smart, that serious.

[Salvijus]

On 2024-02-18 at 0:20 PM, bebotalk said:

I'm amused and not frustrated. you genuinely believe everybody is or should be morose and humourless. Or be perfectly erudite in speech or thought. I believe that's an unhealthy and unreasonable standard for all to adhere to. I don't see why a mix of emotions is bad. You probably concocted this worldview in a formative part of life but then despite being smart haven't even ever questioned it. And you think this abnormal standard is what everybody should adhere to, since having a balance of emotions in given circumstances which has long been proven to be psychologically healthy is bad based on your inner edgelord psychology. 

It's why you let some Indian kid chat the biggest BS out, since he's a fellow from your kind. so it's all some grand bias looool.

I love you too 

[bebotalk]

On 22/02/2024 at 10:48 AM, Arthogaan said:

Okay fine.

Thinking that small acts of optimisim and kindness in this divided world are cringe - thats cringe.

Spiritual journey eventually requires you to accept cringe parts of yourself.

No need to be that intelectual, that smart, that serious.

Yes, it is cringe imho. strangers are random people, who warrant a basic level of respect of course but they aren't friends. I expect, for one, to be left alone in public and don't need people I don't know to warm to me to make me feel happy. I'm also not spiritual, but if being such means ignoring rudimentary interpersonal skills and assuming there is one way to view life, then it's not for me. I don't see either perspective as better, though I don't concur with those saying one should smile at strangers. spiritualists do tend to hate other perspectives, and have sociopathic views/conduct. 

 

[bebotalk]

7 hours ago, Salvijus said:

I love you too 

Well, I don't certainly love nor like you. I'm not bothered if you don't either, though you tend to expect others to welcome you no matter what, so it's something that can be exploited all the same.

You genuinely believe human beings don't have a variety of emotions. This was a truth long before the advent of modern psychology. You think some edgelord opinion you made up is a fact for all. 

You reckon you can arbitrarily select who posts what and in what tone. Like you obviously favour the Indian kids posting the biggest BS out since they're of your culture and/or faith. and you assume everybody else goes along with your whims and subjective views also. it's also comically hypocritical when you speak about wisdom and being smart. it's a near sociopathic arrogance stated there.  For a wise man, as you often claim, you have very weak impulse control, and thus cannot ignore things you dislike which even don't breach the stated forum rules but your own inner whims/values.