Posts by hiddenpuma75

Bryan Wood49 said:If you ask me, it’s completely unnecessary!

I don't think I quite made my point clear regarding why I believe a thread about improving the forum's performance is unnecessary at this stage. 🤷

.

What you're saying doesn't actually contribute to making this forum better; it just feels like you're airing grievances and pointing fingers at everyone else. I’m not quite sure who we’re talking about here—someone? There is a specific moderator-administrator that you happen to be at odds with.

I don't really know anyone here, and frankly, I don't think anyone knows me either. Just to be clear, I’m not here to hawk any products or push any sales pitches.
I truly wish them nothing but the best. Honestly, I couldn't care less about their private lives, and frankly, I don't have any particular interest in anyone on this forum as an individual.
I'm really only interested in the actual numbers behind these ideas.
Look, I can be pretty laid back, but once I spot an error being made, I just can't help myself—I have to speak up.
They take things so personally that they end up reacting unfairly, mostly just out of spite. They’ll shut down an entire discussion just to nitpick my font choice or claim I’m using too many emojis—focusing on those kinds of trivialities instead of actually addressing the point.
It’s pretty obvious they’re just too young. This is exactly how immature, overly emotional people react when they're under the impression that what they're doing is some kind of monumental achievement.
Let’s be honest: moderation here is a total mess. But really, they only managed to make such a disaster out of it because of their own constant blunders.
Moderation has turned into its own sub-forum, and honestly, all this constant interference is becoming a major distraction for everyone here.
It’s like being pulled over by the police every single day, where they demand to see your driver's license and all those other little bits of paperwork just because they feel like it.
Your font choice is looking a little suspicious to me. You’re moving around way too much—it's making me a bit uneasy!
Law enforcement should really aim to be low-profile.Life has a funny way of teaching you that nothing is ever actually personal. But when you’re stuck between twenty-one and twenty-five? Honestly, it feels impossible to grasp that truth. At that age, you're convinced the entire world is revolving around your own little drama.
Someone truly significant.

Give me an example here—how exactly is someone in their thirties supposed to manage Taylor Swift?

Sure, that’s one exception. But just because we have one outlier doesn't mean we should throw the whole principle out the window.
Every political party has its youth wing, so it only makes sense that someone young is at the helm.
Let’s be honest—you don't see anyone leading a major political party or running the government at 21, let alone 29. Honestly, you won't find anyone in charge at 30, either!
Take a good look at the landscape: you won't find anyone under the age of 30 sitting in the Cabinet, heading up the boards of major corporations, or holding any kind of high-level leadership position. It’s just not happening.
Give it some thought.

Look, just because someone happens to be older than me doesn't automatically mean they're any wiser. It certainly shouldn't mean I have to sit here in silence just because they're supposedly the "smart one" in the room. Age isn't a magic pass for being right all the time, is it?

It’s just the natural order of things.
It’s funny how you look back on it, but there’s a definite pattern to how our brains develop. You seem to hit a stride where you're significantly sharper at fifteen than you were back when you were ten, and then by twenty-one, that intellectual growth really picks up speed again compared to those teenage years. It's like we go through these distinct waves of clarity. 😉

I was hoping an admin could clarify why the thread where we can all pitch ideas to improve the site has been locked down.

http://www.forum.us/showthread.php?t=459826

To be honest, it just doesn't seem to make much sense to me. Closing off a space for feedback feels counterproductive and, frankly, it doesn't really foster that sense of community or cooperation we all want for this forum.

I’d love to see that specific thread, or maybe a new one similar to it, reopened for discussion.🙂

I’ve noticed that the moderator Ego is running things over in the psychology section, yet they haven't actually started a single thread there.🙄

To be honest, it feels a bit unfair and illogical. It just seems like poor quality control, and frankly, it makes me question the whole process we use to select moderators in the first place.
Something about this just doesn't sit right with me.😉

(Now, full disclosure: I don't personally know this individual—this is all coming from an anonymous standpoint. I truly wish them nothing but the best in life, but we shouldn't be letting people manage subforums where they aren't even active participants.)

I am convinced that implementing these two simple rules IMMEDIATELY would drastically improve the quality of our moderation.

1. A moderator should not be anyone under the age of 30.

2. A moderator must have been a member of this Reddit community for at least two years and should have contributed, say,
(roughly 1,000 posts—numbers can vary) but the spirit of contributing to the community must be evident.

2a)
A moderator needs to be an active participant in the specific sub-forum they intend to moderate. It’s bizarre and amateurish, but it's typical of the "clique" culture here that someone like "Ego" 🙄 moderates the psychology section despite never having started a single thread there.

3. On the religion board, a moderator should not be someone who identifies as an atheist.

-------

Since points 2 and 3 are pretty self-explanatory and common sense, I'll focus my energy on explaining
the more controversial, yet clever and wise, suggestion regarding rule number 1.

I suspect that about 75% of the moderators are under 30, and I believe that is the primary reason for the poor moderation quality and the constant stagnation this platform suffers from.
Anyone who knows most of the staff could probably confirm if that's the case.

Just look at leadership roles in the real world; you rarely see someone under 30 in charge of major decision-making or managing others.
Managing people is something you have to earn. You need to accumulate the knowledge and life experience required to navigate discussions and make decisions about what others write with wisdom and subtlety.

I’m fairly certain most of the current moderators got their positions through negative selection and backroom deals.
By that, I mean they just pushed their way in through social connections and "chatty" friendships within the site.

Oh, I know the type. Ego ...is a great guy; he bought me a drink at a local pub once and is a lot of fun.
It doesn't matter that he knows nothing about religion or psychology; he's part of our little social circle.😂
Besides, we can't exactly hand out moderation duties to those stuffy traditionalists who won't grab a beer with us until dawn.

Endymion has posted 23,000 times.🙄 He basically *has* to be a moderator because he spends his entire day hanging out here and clearly loves the site.
Plus, those memes he posts in every other thread are pretty hilarious.

...
Because 75% of this younger demographic knows each other and looks out for one another, they form informal cliques. They protect their own, do whatever they want, and shut down anyone who tries to call out their childish behavior.
The very fact that they are pushing to become moderators out of sheer youthful ambition reveals everything you need to know about the psychology behind this kind of work.
Anyone who has dealt with the injustices and absurdity caused by these types knows exactly how they run things.
Furthermore, the reality is that young, inexperienced people tend to be overly sensitive and emotional; their egos are fragile, so they get triggered by every provocation and dive into every petty argument or contradiction.

Kids simply aren't equipped to handle the profound ideas and the true spirit of this community.😉

--
In short, wisdom dictates that you shouldn't entrust anything serious to a 20-year-old college student with 23,000 posts.

That is why a baseline age of 30 is necessary.
---
I am certain none of this will be taken to heart, but that is just further proof
that this site is being run by amateurs and private little cliques that cause all sorts of problems, ultimately polluting the brilliant concept of a forum where everyone can discuss anything and everything freely.
--
Long live the forum! Long live the writers of this forum!

May the moderators and admins be shunned!
Amateurs, politicians, and the backroom manipulators of this site...

May lightning strike them!

To me, being a moderator feels completely absurd.
It cheapens the dignity of actual work and fosters this amateurish mindset.

The owner of this site makes all the money while people deal with their own psychological issues
(think adolescent ambitions, a need for self-importance, and a craving to control others)

...all while doing this job for free.😲

And man, if only they actually did a good job at it.

Most of the time, it’s just them picking on the regular users.

I don't know if you've noticed, but most of them—like 8 out of 10 moderators
are actually poor writers here on this forum.

Or to put it another way,

the absolute best writers on this entire platform are NOT the moderators.😉

-------
I’ve seen cases where moderators barely even post on "their" forums.

Some have only ever opened one or two threads.

--
Everyone knows they aren't doing a great job.

---
A perfect analogy just popped into my head.

In the world of film and art, those who fail to paint, compose, or act well
end up becoming what we call "critics" of other people's work and success.
It seems to me that most of these moderators share that exact same mentality.

Basically, it's like saying, "Well, if I can't write well, I might as well force my way into being a moderator."
---

My goal in this thread is to analyze the psychological profile of a moderator, so please don't move this or bury it in the psychology section.

--
Please notice how this topic was immediately removed from the psychology section😂 even though that's where I originally intended to start it.

Just look at how much it bothers the Emperor when someone points out he's naked.😉

Notice how the moderators don't act with any principle; they just delete, obstruct, remove, or censor anything that bruises their tiny egos.

moonfool said:My post vanished too. It was honestly one of the best things I've ever written here. Has everyone lost their minds?

No, they haven't lost it!

Consciousness is the Aleph!😲

It's actually the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet, carrying a numerical value of 111.
(In Jewish tradition, every letter has a numeric equivalent, which they use to derive spiritual insights through the practice of gematria.)

But ALEPH has layers; one of its meanings perfectly describes the role of a moderator.😲

- You absolutely have to read Borges’ short story "The Aleph"—it might just provide the key you're searching for.

- Dive into the mysteries of the Kabbalah, though telling you that is a bit like me suggesting you start studying advanced mathematics. Fascinating, but endless.

- The ALEPH is also that tiny sphere capable of reflecting the entire universe—a single point of total perception.
Think of it as a nexus where all other points in our universe converge; by looking into it, you can simultaneously witness the beautiful complexity of everything that exists.

---
So, in a way, a part of the Aleph is found in the function of a moderator.
They are often driven by ambition, because as the sage Alim suggested,
ambition is the primary requirement.

However, that very ambition eventually becomes a liability when it starts interfering with the natural flow of the forum.

A moderator can turn from an asset into an obstacle for both the community and the platform itself.

And since the Admin is arguably even more problematic than the moderators, I suppose we should prepare to strike back using chaos magic and the placebo effect—all strictly in accordance with Bell's theorem on nonlocality.

.

moonfool said:My post just vanished too. Honestly, it was one of the best things I’ve ever written on here. Has everyone lost their minds?

.

blue bird said:For heaven's sake, where did my post go?

The whole thing explains why S. decided to run that thought experiment in the first place. Honestly, what's wrong with you guys?

Back in 2004, I was already deep into exploring magic and mysticism when I 😲 started a thread with its original title:

I Ching: The Perfect Binary Hieroglyph—Or, When the Tao Whispers.

That thread stayed active for five years, and in all that time, not a single moderator ever had an issue with the title.

Then, out of nowhere and without any explanation, the moderator dustyharbor18 went ahead and changed my title to something much more basic and, frankly, banal: just "I Ching." 🙄

I asked if they could please restore my original title—since it hadn't bothered anyone for half a decade—but I didn't get anywhere.

Another moderator, Luiz, actually stepped in and temporarily reverted it back to my original version,
but then dustyharbor18 changed it right back again.

On that note, does anyone happen to have links or names for the site administrators? I'd like to file a formal complaint regarding this unnecessary title change.
(I’ve never been one to run to the admins, but this level of moderator overreach is just getting ridiculous.)

Here’s my own little example regarding spirituality, which serves as the inspiration for this whole discussion.

Just a quick heads-up to everyone following this thread: I wanted to remind you all that I was actually the one who originally kicked this whole discussion off.
With a title that was both incredibly clever and perfectly phrased.

I CHING — THE ULTIMATE BINARY HIEROGLYPH: Or, when the Tao starts whispering to you.🙂

Take a look at how perfectly that headline is composed—the choice of words is just spot on.

It’s being mentioned.

The duality of I CHING.

It’s almost like calling his structure a hieroglyphic.

It’s poetic, really—almost inspired. There’s something about those quiet moments when Tao begins to whisper.🙂

---

Just take a look at how flies and mosquitoes buzz around in the air—it’s constant, they’re everywhere, and they just won't stop bothering you.
It’s like they’re constantly nitpicking and nagging at you.

You really have to watch out for those people who take their own inner turmoil and project it onto everyone else. They’ll go out of their way to pick at you or just be generally relentless. It’s a classic defense mechanism, honestly.

Take note.
It feels like every single time you try to make a move or start something meaningful, you run straight into the sheer inertia of the universe. It’s like the cosmos itself is actively rooting against progress, pushing back against any attempt at momentum. And honestly? Even when you actually manage to pull off something brilliant—when you find your inner Mozart—there’s always going to be a Salieri waiting in the wings to dampen the spark.

If you’re in the business of creating, there is one fundamental truth you really need to grasp if you want to succeed: always keep the big picture in mind. It sounds simple, but it’s easily the most important piece of wisdom out there.

If you want something done right, you’ve got to roll up your sleeves and do it yourself.🙂----

Just wanted to give you all a heads-up: it looks like one of the moderators is just messing around out of pure boredom.
Whether it was just a case of rushing through things or a simple misunderstanding of how the forum rules work—either way, it was definitely a bit thoughtless.
I went from having this creative, signature title to something incredibly mundane—I CHING.😠

That was a pretty reckless move—honestly, it felt incredibly unrefined and poorly thought out.

I’d like to get in touch with the moderator who edited my post.

Creative!
Special,
Inviting, isn't it?
I can't quite make sense of that one—it looks like you might have sent a fragment or a typo! If you were trying to share a thought or start a discussion, feel free to drop the full version. I’m all ears and ready to dive in once I know what we're talking about.
A rare sight indeed.
Appropriate
This thread has been around for quite a while now—

I CHING is the ultimate binary hieroglyph—or, more accurately, what happens when Tao starts leaking into everything.

It seems like you might have cut off your thought there! If you were trying to share something specific about your own experience or opinion, please go ahead—I'm all ears and ready to dive into the conversation once you finish that sentence.

Anonymous
Boring.
Stereotypical.
I am sorry.

Subject line

I CHING🙄

Can we please just revert my original title back to how it was?

And if they could stop butchering everyone else's headlines and posts without even bothering to check in with the author first.

Honestly, doing things that way is just incredibly sad and, frankly, pretty irritating.

Just a gentle reminder to everyone that the whole point of this forum is the exchange of ideas. It’s really about us authors sharing our thoughts and sparking meaningful conversations with one another.
And let’s not forget those who actually take the time to read and chime in.

It feels like the moderators aren't even mentioned around here. Honestly, they ought to be working behind the scenes—staying out of sight and only stepping in when they actually need to react.
I’m talking about massive—and I mean MASSIVE—violations of the rules here.

Just so we’re clear, I’m not here to sell you anything, nor am I trying to pitch myself.
I’m more than happy to pour my time and energy into this work for everyone's benefit.

It feels like the moderators here are mostly just getting in the way of things. Honestly, at this point, it seems like they’re doing more harm than good to the community.

--

So, regarding the moderators...
I’m asking you all—please, let's avoid using inappropriate excuses like...

Keep those headlines short and sweet. Clarity is everything.
Please, let's not bring that up.

That excuse sounds exactly like one of those pedantic little rules cooked up by some soulless bureaucrat.
She clearly hasn't the slightest clue what binary structure even means. Honestly, it might take her another thirty incarnations before she can even begin to conceive of something as brilliant as the gems found in hiddenpuma75's title.

When the Tao begins to whisper...

PS.

Attention, moderators!

Honestly, what you all are doing is just incredibly sad and, frankly, pretty irritating. 👎
That would actually make for a fascinating psychological study: examining how supporting characters struggle when they lack the agency to stand on their own two feet.
Something a little different—something truly creative.

I find myself constantly drawing inspiration from people who are just more creative than I am—those individuals who don't hold back and generously share their work with the rest of the world.

I’ve been meaning to start a thread over on the psychology board about the sheer mediocrity of our moderators, but honestly, life keeps getting in the way before I can finally sit down and write it out.
But I definitely want to.

Here’s the core of what I’ve been noticing:

Let’s be honest: the most talented writers on this forum aren't actually the moderators.

2) Honestly, I’d say about 80% of the moderators here aren't exactly known for being top-tier writers or even particularly active when it comes to starting meaningful discussions.

3) Yet, they still find a way to meddle in absolutely everything, which—unsurprisingly—leads to a lot of people complaining about them.

4) For instance, I once had someone nitpick my choice of font.
5) Then there was the person who told me I use way too many emojis.

7) Another user actually took four of my posts and mashed them together into one unreadable mess.

9) Someone else even took my great headlines and turned them into something completely bland and lifeless.

It just goes on and on.

Brenda Cook4 said:Bruna, are we looking at a bit of a mix-up here?😕 From what you're saying, I assume you mean Jiddu Krishnamurti, but the photo below actually looks like a different version of him—specifically Jiddu Krishnamurti... honestly, I was quite delighted because once I saw the picture, I realized it's of that nihilist I happen to have a huge collection of books by!

Come on, girl, let's not get all romantic about it. 🙄
You don't really have a clue about how life works when you've got everything handed to you on a silver platter by your parents.

Your "wonderful" nihilist🙄 left his wife and kids in the dust and just vanished..

And your dear nihilist isn't exactly living a nihilistic lifestyle; he’s settled in quite comfortably with some wealthy woman in Switzerland, making it very easy for him (just like it is for you) to spout nonsense about everything and anything.
He can use his fancy rhetoric to impress young intellectuals who think milk comes straight from the cow into a carton.

If you're actually looking for someone to admire, try looking at the people who actually lived what they preached. For instance, you could look at

RAMANA MAHARSHI

NISARGADATTA MAHARAJ...

or even Bernadetta Roberts

But how would you ever know that, given that your current level of "wonder" is reserved for Dawkins, UG, and rocks on Mars?🙄

steelridge58 said:I always honestly assumed the whole point of the Internet was just to link up universities, thinking that was the core philosophy and the original reason it even existed, so I decided to do a little digging into the history... (Parsifal wrote about the history here too, but he didn't touch on what actually motivated the creation of the Internet or what its true initial purpose was, which is exactly what you pointed out, steelridge58).
DARPA was established back in 1958 right after the space race kicked off between the USSR and the USA following the launch of Sputnik 1, and one of the very first projects that agency tackled was finding a way to link radar systems all across the USA. Once they pulled that off, they realized just how massive the potential was for connecting computers, so eventually, a small office within the agency managed to link two universities together into a network in 1969, calling it ARPANET, which served as the precursor to the modern www.. web, and so on...

So, it really doesn't hold up to say that the Internet is inherently an anarchic idea in its essence and spirit (like Parsifal suggested in his first post... or if we look at the roots of anarchist thought—if those roots lie in an idea of power where the consequences wouldn't be felt by the person holding, or trying to grab, that power... which seems pretty obvious when you look at the actual origins and the driving motivations that allowed the Internet to develop in the first place).

Of course, I can't quite bridge that gap with us—the everyday users dealing with all the perks and headaches 🙂 regarding connectivity, communication, and access to information and such—but when we step back and look at the very beginning of its development, we see that the fundamental concept of networking was really about control and the power that comes from it. (?)

But look, we shouldn't focus on who originally kicked off the internet or what their motives were; instead, we need to look at how the net actually EVOLVED
That’s exactly my point. Look at what it is in the USA today!
(It’s pretty obvious that "the Net has a Budweiser nature" 🙂—meaning the web essentially "evolved on its own" and escaped the grasp of those initial, short-sighted ideas.)

The Internet functions as an "entity" that possesses all the hallmarks of a SELF-ORGANIZING SYSTEM where order exists without the need for control, authority, or centralization.

We see harmony emerging naturally, without the massive overreach and coercion we often see when the government apparatus is abused.
In reality, nobody truly owns the internet, and no single entity can simply switch it off. 🙂
(Anarchism is fundamentally right about this, and it deeply challenges our assumptions regarding ownership. As the internet proves, mutual cooperation
and generosity can thrive perfectly fine without any notion of "ownership," specific owners, or a thousand different laws.)

(And honestly, that is one of the grand, bold, and clearly achievable ideals of anarchism. 🙂

"Quote:"

Brenda Cook4 said:Parsifal—look, I’m asking you, please, just come back to my post and give it the serious attention it actually deserves.

What absolute truth? What Jesus? What kind of achievement are we even talking about here? It’s all just the flip side of the same coin. Everything is conditional and causal, plain and simple. We’re just trapped in the same endless loop—a loop that’s fueling your passionate attraction to some imaginary "absolute truth," or even worse, feeding into a belief in some eternalist idea.

What’s all this fuss about splitting consciousness? Honestly, it feels like we're overcomplicating things. To me, it’s just a technical way to describe how a phenomenon works—it's a functional breakdown, nothing more. The real issue here is that you're treating consciousness as if it has some kind of mystical essence, when really, it's just mechanics.

You’re really out here theorizing and philosophizing like that, aren't you? It’s one thing, but then you go even further—veering straight into speculative mysticism. Honestly, what problem are you actually solving with all this talk about absolute consciousness, or love, or "becoming"? It feels like you're just shifting the goalposts. You move a tiny fraction of an inch away from the point, and suddenly, there's nothing left to explain.

Becoming and vanishing... it isn’t about evolving or merging into some kind of eternal consciousness. Think about it this way: when a fire burns out, where does that flame actually go? Does it drift left or right? Does it sink down or rise up? Does it head north or south? It doesn't "go" anywhere. It just ceases to be.

So, I’m really trying to draw your attention back to your take on eternalism—specifically that whole straightforward slice of phenomenalism you use to explain how things work:

If things existed eternally, they’d essentially be frozen in time. Think about it—if an object had a permanent, unchanging identity, it couldn't actually *do* anything. There would be no movement, no growth, no shifts in state. It would just be a static, lifeless concept, totally stripped of any actual presence in our reality. On the flip side, you can't just claim that things pop into existence out of thin air as brand-new phenomena. If an effect is completely disconnected from what triggered it, then it isn't really caused by anything at all; it’s just a random glitch in the universe. That leaves us with dependent arising. It’s the only logical way to explain how one thing leads to another without falling into the trap of eternalism or pure randomness. It bridges the gap. It's like a feedback loop where everything is intertwined. As Nagarjuna points out when discussing the relationship between an actor and their actions, the cause relies on the effect just as much as the effect relies on the cause. We don't have any other way to truly pin down how these things connect.

Why on earth are you putting words in my mouth?
To be honest, I’m still pretty much in the dark when it comes to what absolute truth actually is, let alone who or what this "Absolute" might be.
The only thing I can say for certain is that I am aware. 🙂

.

The issue is that you're attributing the very essence of hiddenpuma75 to consciousness itself.

Wait, hold on! The problem here is that you're attributing things to me that I neither wrote nor actually believe.
I honestly have no clue what people mean when they talk about "essence," and frankly, I couldn't care less. I’ve heard of essential oils—I’ll occasionally toss a drop or two into my bathwater if I'm feeling fancy—but I highly doubt we’re talking about the same thing.
I’m more of a hands-on practitioner.
I’m really only interested in what’s right in front of me—the things I can actually touch, feel, and prove to be real. 🙂
Essence, purpose, the absolute, God, spirituality... honestly, none of that really interests me. I don't have the slightest clue what any of it actually means, either.

You really love to dive deep into the theory and philosophy of things, don't you? You have such a distinct way of looking at the world.

I have to say, I feel like your posts are easily the most complicated and confusing ones on this entire board. If you ask me, you’re definitely the one who writes with the most difficulty—it all feels so dense, unclear, and just plain muddled.
I can follow what others are saying, but I have to admit, your writing style is a bit of a challenge—I actually had to read through your post twice just to make sure I didn't miss anything!

"Quote:"

Or even worse, you end up spiraling straight into speculative mysticism.

I honestly have no idea what you're talking about.
Honestly, I’m just out here selling the simple stuff—you know, like basic pantry staples like dried beans.
If there's one thing I can say about my life, it’s that everything else is just noise—the only thing actually worth anything is my consciousness. 🙂
You guys are so lucky to have actual supermarkets. 😛 You guys are really going after Miller.
I have a huge stash of canned goods, but let's be honest—it’s definitely not exactly what I’d call "health food." 😁

What specific question were you actually answering when you hit that state of absolute consciousness, or love, or becoming one with everything? Because honestly, that feels like just a shift—you’re only a tiny fraction away from the actual thing, and even then, there isn't much more explanation to follow.

I’m still wrestling with this one: I honestly can't say for sure whether Consciousness itself is absolute.
And honestly, I’m completely lost—what even is "the absolute," and who is this person everyone keeps talking about?🤷
All I can say is that I’m staying mindful and keeping my eyes wide open.
I'm looking to connect with anyone else who finds this kind of stuff interesting so we can swap stories and share our experiences.
It seems to me that none of you actually appreciate something as simple and classic as a good bowl of chili.
Are you perhaps too embarrassed to let one rip?? 🤣

So, I'm trying to point out your leaning toward eternalism—or rather, that narrow slice of phenomenalism you're using to explain everything:

Look, I'm just pointing out that you're far too clever for me, and we really aren't a great match for this forum 😁
I’m just a regular guy—a total salt-of-the-earth, blue-collar person, both literally and figuratively.

In any decent book, you won't find words like

-eternalism
-phenomenalism

To me, that sounds like pure philosophy—the kind of stuff for people who enjoy traveling from nowhere to absolutely nothing.
🙂

Things cannot exist eternally and thus remain unarisen; if they possessed an eternal identity, they would be stripped of change, action, and all phenomenality, rendering them metaphysically meaningless. Nor can there be a causal structure where things are merely temporal phenomenal creations; if the effect is discrete from its cause, it lacks a connection to that cause and remains effectively uncaused. Dependent arising, which accounts for causation without relying on either eternalism or simple phenomenalism, stands as the only coherent theory. As Nagarjuna says regarding the relationship between agent and action, a cause proceeds depending upon its effect, and the effect proceeds depending on the cause. "We do not perceive any other way of establishing [them]," he says. .

My grandfather, Nisargadatta, that lady, and even Buddha—none of them talk like this.
And those people knew exactly what they were saying; they spoke SIMPLY.
You feel the vibration; it washes over you and brings a warmth to your heart.🙂
I don't quite follow what you quoted, and honestly, the author writes just like you do. It's heavy food—the kind of thing that keeps a person wide awake at night.

"Quote:"

mistybison As specified by hiddenpuma75: The human mind possesses self-awareness; it isn't the other way around.

That’s something we just don't know yet.
We don't have a single shred of evidence to suggest that's actually the case.
The only thing we can say for certain—the one piece of undeniable proof we actually possess—is that we are conscious.
I honestly can't say for sure whether it's "what" or "who" serves as the true source of our consciousness. It's one of those big, unanswered questions that keeps me up at night.
I can't say that I know, personally.

"Quote:"

So, are we really saying we have the free will to decide whether to set out on the path, actually walk it, and ultimately reach our destination? 😉

Taj So, basically... Everything you added after that was really just your own take on my original point.
Don't try to put words in my mouth.
I feel like I'm being clear enough, though I suppose I tend to rely a bit too heavily on asking questions and using complex sentence structures. So, basically... It’s coming from you.
This is the core of the matter, and I'm putting my own words behind it— It seems to me... .
I wasn't the one jumping to any deep conclusions here—that was all you.

Honestly, I couldn't care less about the semantics of it all—the "meaning" of a word, the concept of free will, or any of that philosophical jargon. It just doesn't interest me.
The only thing I’m absolutely certain of—the one thing that’s truly undeniable—is that I am aware.
That’s just not your thing, is it? You’d much rather focus on everything else—diving deep into the contents of consciousness and firing off a thousand questions instead.
And even "a few" actually means quite a bit...
That’s really the deciding factor right there, isn't it? Once you hit that point, everyone tends to head off in their own direction.

"Quote:"

What if we had never even heard of these "spiritual teachers"? What if we were just living our lives in some remote village deep in the Amazon rainforest, with absolutely nobody ever pointing us toward a "path" or showing us the way? Is it actually possible that the right to spiritual growth is reserved only for educated, literate Americans who have the capacity to read accounts of someone else's enlightenment? It makes me wonder if we’re suggesting that salvation is similarly restricted to those who have specifically heard the teachings of Jesus. 😢

Look, why are we circling back to this? I feel like I already gave you an answer to that up above—whether we’ve heard it before or not doesn't really change the point.

To be honest, I don't really have a clue what spiritual development is actually supposed to be, nor do I care much about the whole "path" to it. It’s just not something that interests me.
To be honest, I have no idea what salvation even is. And frankly? It’s not something I’m particularly interested in.

There’s only one thing I truly care about, and honestly, it's the only thing that actually matters: what is the one single truth that exists?
(It seems like you might have sent an incomplete message or perhaps just a quick "me" to get my attention! I'm here and ready whenever you want to dive into a topic. What's on your mind? That’s certainly how it looks! :)
And that right there? That is what consciousness actually is. 🙂

"I choose to leave everything else behind as unnecessary baggage... and, frankly, unproven."

"Quote:"

mistybison said:It seems my previous points were misunderstood. 🙂
All "knowledge" is essentially just "faith in knowledge." It remains relative and subject to change, much like anything else in this material world. Even if one were to achieve "liberation"—assuming such a thing is possible—one could never truly say, "I know," because doing so would create an internal contradiction. 😉

Do you believe it is necessary to trust in the experiences, insights, and instructions of others just to be considered someone on a "spiritual path" toward enlightenment? If so, is there really any distinction between a believer following the teachings of Bernadette or Jesus (who also taught that the Kingdom of God is accessible to all and provided a roadmap to get there)? Does being spiritual mean having faith and working toward its fulfillment? Or does it mean simply existing within a comfortable web of ideas we've constructed for ourselves? Perhaps it is something else entirely.

How can you possibly know what something is like if you haven't actually experienced it? You're essentially just building up this mental concept of something without ever having had a taste of it.

"Quote:"

Do you really think it’s necessary to rely on everyone else's experiences?

Not at all! I truly believe that someone else's experiences should only be treated as guideposts.
We walk our own paths. We achieve our own goals.Only if we actually give it a shot.
We can't even get off the starting line or actually experience anything if we spend all our time throwing a thousand questions and obstacles in the way like you do.

"Quote:"

So, does it actually make any difference whether you’re a believer in Saint Bernadetta or Jesus? I mean, Jesus explicitly said that the Kingdom of God is within reach for everyone, and he even left us a roadmap on how to get there. It makes me wonder: does being spiritual truly mean being a person of faith—someone who actively works to manifest their core beliefs? Or is spirituality just about settling into a comfortable web of ideas we've spun for ourselves, feeling cozy within our own intellectual cocoons? Or is it something else entirely?

You forgot to mention those followers of the faith who believe we’ve all already reached enlightenment and can just sit back and do nothing. It's that specific kind of belief system that hits you with a thousand questions the moment you actually try to step out of the cave.
It feels to me like you practice that faith with incredible intensity.

To truly experience—to actually live and breathe—what you set out to achieve, mere belief just isn't enough. In my eyes, there is only one way to make it happen: you have to step out of the cave.

To the sun! 🙂

Kenneth Peterson5 said:@shamantrixx,
Look, if "I" am not actually the one thinking my thoughts—if instead those damn thoughts are the ones doing the thinking *to* me—then free will belongs to the thoughts, not to "me." In that scenario, there isn't even a conscious "self," just a bunch of thoughts that think they're "me," being aware of this supposed single identity.

@parsifal
If "I" don't control my own thoughts, and those thoughts are actually driving the bus, then yeah, "I" definitely don't have free will. But here’s the kicker: if I don't have free will, then all those deep questions I ask myself aren't even *my* questions—they’re just questions that were posed *to* a single "I." So, that whole idea of "Is doubting your own consciousness just a process within consciousness that proves you're conscious?"—well, that's also just a question being thrown at a single "I." It basically means the "I" isn't self-aware; it's just the thoughts running the show, being aware of the "person" they're using to exist.
.........

(If life were some straight line, we could always look at the past to predict the future—you know, find the cause and pinpoint the exact result.
It’s really only in the last 50 years or so that we finally realized life is non-linear, which is why we can't ever be 100% sure what kind of mess a specific cause is going to trigger.
)
Nowadays, we even know that chaos itself is deterministic, meaning a single cause can spiral into incredibly complex, totally chaotic behavior. Honestly, that chaos almost proves free will exists, because even when chaos unfolds, it does so freely, even if it follows certain rules.
Which leads to this: if God created the world, He left room for independent thought—for free will, basically. It’s like that old saying: man proposes, and God disposes.
..........

Lately, these kinds of thoughts have been circling my brain like vultures. But whose thoughts are they, really? Whose are they? Is it even possible they belong to me? 😕😁

Come on, admit it—that sentence sounds like something straight out of a heavy literary novel. I wasn't saying it was bad, just that it was a bit muddy. There were way too many layers to the construction.

Look.

The "I" doesn't exist. It's just a concept.
Free will doesn't exist either. Just a concept.
Meaning doesn't exist—another concept.

The only thing that's undeniably real is your consciousness, mine, and everyone else's simple, raw awareness.Why shouldn't we just stay right there—within it, with it, surrounding it? If it's the only truly valuable thing we possess, and the very reason we EXIST, 🙂

Consciousness comes first. It is undeniably real.

Then comes the "I," free will, and the whole search for meaning.

Those things might be real, or they might not; 😉 in other words, they're distractions.

Let's just stick to pure existence—to the fact that I AM. 🙂

.........

Lately, I've been having these kinds of thoughts drifting through my head. Whose thoughts are they, anyway? Are they really mine? 😕😁

Don't give them any attention. 🙂
If they keep coming, just bypass them, much like you'd walk past strangers on a busy street in New York.
You don't stop to stare at every person you pass or interview them to find out who they are and what they want.
You just keep moving.🙂

mistybison said:The contradiction lies in starting with the premise that a person chooses to 'want' or 'not want,' while simultaneously claiming free will doesn't exist. If there is no free will, choice is an illusion and one simply exists as they are in any given moment. However, if we can work toward becoming an 'oak' instead of just an 'acorn'—then free will certainly exists.

If we aren't TRULY enlightened here (and it's obvious to both Milton and Priscilla that we aren't

while Buddha and the clerk at the local corner store—Nisargadatta and Aunt Bernadette—are), then all this philosophizing is just spinning our wheels compared to how the world actually functions outside this little bubble of a forum.

But what if it isn't?
What would become of our (non)enlightenment if we had never heard the stories of that clerk or his aunt?
You see that, in the end, everything comes down to FAITH. 🙂 (And just like that, we are back to the beginning of the topic. 😛 ) Many people embark on a 'spiritual path' because they believe someone else has walked it before and reached the destination. But consider these possibilities:
1) No one has actually achieved 'liberation,' but rather just one of many possible mental or physical experiences attainable through training and effort—experiences that are never final, as one experience always leads to another.
2) People have achieved 'liberation,' but not through their own striving; instead, it simply 'happened' to them, like a glitch in the matrix of their holographic program 😍 which they then interpreted as 'enlightenment' and began teaching others about.
?
There are endless possibilities, all of which should be considered; we can test them all, but clinging to them creates limitations. 🙂 It is much the same with all these theories of consciousness. They are all fascinating, but if we discard them all—what remains? Any entanglement in ideas is similar, whether they are scientific, religious, spiritual, or philosophical 'truths.'

It is clear there are two schools of thought... one saying the acorn is essentially the oak, and another that rejects that idea.

I believe there are far more than just those two schools. 🙂 There is also the school that rejected the entire debate regarding acorns and oaks altogether. 😉

I intend to eventually take the time😛 to pull out the high-quality posts and split them into two separate threads—one on the meaninglessness of philosophy and one on consciousness (which was my original plan anyway). 🙂Right now, we are in the middle of a site reorganization, so I will handle it once that is complete.

But let's be honest—it isn't quite that simple. Some people are just wired to evolve.
It feels like you’ve artificially split everything into two extremes just to limit the options, all in an attempt to avoid taking the plunge. By constantly questioning every move, you’re essentially undermining anyone who actually wants to dive into the deep end and step out of their comfort zone.

Quincy:

But what if it isn't? What would our collective state of "enlightenment" even look like if we had never been exposed to that one salesman and his aunt with all their endless stories?

If we didn't have this place to hang out, we’d probably just be sleeping all day or spending our lives endlessly typing away in some lonely cave.
Anyone who ever catches a glimpse of an exit from this digital cave we’re all stuck in? They’ll never forget it, and they’ll spend every waking moment trying to find their way out. That’s just how this game is programmed. We've got all sorts of characters in here, too.
It feels like your whole persona is hardwired to loop through endless, trivial questions just to avoid actually stepping out into the real world. Meanwhile, I seem to be programmed to tell everyone exactly how much I want to get out there and experience it all.
And that’s that.

Quincy:

It feels like, when you strip everything else away, it all eventually boils down to FAITH. 🙂

Look, I wasn't even trying to dispute that! I truly believe there is a whole world existing outside the "cave" of this forum, yet you and many others seem determined to cloud the issue, preferring to stay tucked away in here and just keep posting. I only take issue with your claim that you and all these other armchair philosophers... You know. If there were no hope to hold onto—if everything you’ve achieved was truly the end of the road—I’d be in trouble. But my belief is that while your knowledge is incredible, it’s the faith that actually carries us through. It takes both.

Quincy:

But what if we look at it this way: 1... 2... 3... ?

You can ask a thousand questions if you want, but at this point, none of them really matter.
The only thing that actually matters is why you’re choosing to stay holed up in that cave.

The reason is simple.

There are really only three reasons why anyone would ever want to leave the cave and step out into the light.

First off, it’s all about having empathy for the struggles of others. Honestly, people like that are few and far between.
Let’s be honest: you, me, and everyone else reading this are just as callous and hypocritical as anyone else. We see someone else's suffering, and frankly, we don't let it move us one bit.
The proof is right there in how we can just sit here, blissfully enjoying our lunch, completely unbothered while thousands of people elsewhere are suffering through starvation at this very same moment.

If we were truly enlightened—and I’m certainly not talking about those people who pretend to be while just looking down on everyone else—we would actually feel the weight of other people's suffering. 😉
It’s not just about what we say—it’s much deeper than that. We aren't just failing to speak up; we're actively pushing others around and being disrespectful. 👎

The second reason? It’s our own suffering.

Thirdly—and this is actually the positive part—there’s the element of scientific curiosity. It’s that deep-seated drive to find answers to the big questions: Who are we? What exactly are we made of? And where on earth are we all heading?

----------------------------------------

This whole game—this entire stretch of history—is really just a clash between those who say yes and those who say no. 😉

Brenda Cook4 said:Even though one could challenge your "cogito" at this level too (for instance, how do you know you aren't just a simulated character in a computer program? But let's set that aside for now)—you are stopping at an absolutist and eternalist concept: you've placed everything into one "absolute" realm of existence—in this case, some eternal consciousness, a single One playing many roles.
(Regarding the beating of the heart, blood flow, and metabolism in the body, I assume you're somewhat familiar with anatomy😬—specifically that the motor system dictates voluntary actions, while the autonomic system handles non-voluntary processes like vasoconstriction, pupil dilation... blah blah... as well as knowing that besides consciousness, there is also a subconscious...)

Everything that becomes is conditioned—everything is relative. Nothing possesses its own inherent nature, and that includes consciousness. Being and non-being are just two sides of the same coin. Without "being," there is no "non-being."

Everything that is conditioned and lacks its own inherent nature is what we call empty. When things or phenomena are empty, why speculate about the finite or the infinite, or one versus the other? The infinite is just as much a phantom as the finite. One phantom cancels out the other.

When Nadia speaks of emptiness, she isn't describing some ultimate reality or preaching nihilism; she's describing the principle of relativity and providing the best explanation for how all phenomena are conditioned.

To treat emptiness as a "thing" is ridiculous. Emptiness isn't a thought, but the absence of thought; it isn't a theory, but the absence of theory. It seems simple... and it is. There is no transcendent realm waiting to be revealed, no ultimate knowledge we need to achieve, and no spiritual powers we can possess. The only thing we can do is liberate ourselves: by understanding the true nature of things. Selfhood isn't a real, existing thing; it only exists at a limited level. When the sphere of thought vanishes, "you" vanish too. A shift in perception. That's it.A truly enlightened individual won't kickstart the whole cycle of suffering just because they think they’ve grasped some ultimate truth.

There is no such thing as a heaven of absolute consciousness. Think about it: if something has an inherent essence, it shouldn't be subject to change, right? But the moment you perceive change happening, you're essentially witnessing the absence of a permanent self-nature. Honestly, clinging to that idea isn't much different from any other religious dogma—or even those rigid materialist views about a fundamental physical substrate. Nirvana, much like the phenomena we experience, doesn't exist as a standalone thing. They are merely isolated constructs, brought into being by a mind that insists on drawing lines and creating distinctions.

That’s beside the point. The only thing I truly possess—and the one thing I cannot doubt—is my own consciousness.

...just as you would have to acknowledge that beyond consciousness, there is also a subconsciousness...)

That is pure speculation regarding some "subconscious." Honestly, bravo to you!! You've managed to do what no one else ever
-has split consciousness into pieces.🙏 It seems obvious to me that there is only ONE simple, undivided, everyday consciousness, regardless of gender.

Everything that comes to be is conditional—everything is relative. Nothing possesses an inherent nature, and that includes consciousness.

That is nothing more than your own conjecture, much like a chick inside an egg guessing what the world looks like on the outside.
Since neither I nor anyone else here actually KNOWS the true source of your consciousness—meaning you haven't actually experienced it firsthand—it all remains mere guesswork.

It's speculative in the same way that certain phrases are speculative—like saying "Jesus loves you."

Maybe Jesus really does exist and loves us all, but until a person experiences that for themselves, it's just an empty story. It's the same as talking about a subconscious or claiming an acorn is actually an oak tree.

ACHIEVE SOMETHING. EXPERIENCE the love of Jesus, grow from an acorn into an oak, and then you can talk about it!
Those who have actually achieved it describe it with absolute clarity.

They stand apart from philosophers because they offer a wealth of evidence that is impossible to ignore.😉

mistybison said:Even with this belief or realization, you still insist there is something one MUST and SHOULD do: look inward, sit in silence, practice self-reflection, and constantly advise others to do the same.😉

I am sorry that this discussion has drifted off-topic and that there isn't currently a way to revert to the original point. However, this thread didn't start with the vulgarity seen in your previous one, nor was it moved from another subforum for being inappropriate. Furthermore, I won't allow personal stories or private chatting here, much like what happened in your last thread where you led the way (which was quite exhausting to moderate). I also hope this doesn't turn into a two-person dialogue between a "teacher" and a "student." There is a specific "Academy" for all of those things. Please refrain from spamming the thread with these kinds of comments, as I will continue to remove them.😛 😁

Let us proceed. 🙂 Who knows where this discussion might lead, though perhaps we will eventually circle back to the beginning.😉

Now I finally understand how it felt when Coca-Cola was shouting

IT’S UNFAIR! IT’S JUST UNFAIR! 😢

Whenever I try to keep my own thread alive, it just gets swallowed up by the endless flood of chat.
Yet, when I see other threads behaving exactly the same way, they seem to stay perfectly afloat.

IT'S UNFAIR 😢

mistybison said:Even with this belief or realization, you still insist there is something one MUST and SHOULD do: look inward, sit in silence, practice self-reflection, and constantly advise others to do the same.😉

I am sorry that this discussion has drifted off-topic and that there isn't currently a way to revert to the original point. However, this thread didn't start with the vulgarity seen in your previous one, nor was it moved from another subforum for being inappropriate. Furthermore, I won't allow personal stories or private chatting here, much like what happened in your last thread where you led the way (which was quite exhausting to moderate). I also hope this doesn't turn into a two-person dialogue between a "teacher" and a "student." There is a specific "Academy" for all of those things. Please refrain from spamming the thread with these kinds of comments, as I will continue to remove them.😛 😁

Let us proceed. 🙂 Who knows where this discussion might lead, though perhaps we will eventually circle back to the beginning.😉

Even though we both speak English, let's stick to it so the rest of the world can follow along! 😍It looks like we’re just not on the same wavelength.
They say repetition is the mother of all learning, so let's give this one more go—this time from a few different angles.

Haven't I mentioned a few times now that I try to be generous and act with a bit of humanity?

"If you want in, you're in—no pressure."
"If they don't want to, they won't—and besides, the fruit will ripen on its own." Honestly, where is the sense of obligation or necessity in that?

2)

Maybe I didn't express myself very clearly before, so let me try to approach this from a different angle and take a softer, more indirect route to get my point across.

Since I’ve noticed that knowing what a grain of sand is doesn't actually make you an expert on the desert, I wanted to point out that true understanding isn't some final destination—it’s more like a theoretical philosophical position. Simply "understanding" something isn't enough to grasp the practical reality of how things actually work, like knowing exactly how a pepper grinder operates or the intricate details of someone's daily chores. 😍
Sometimes I find myself wishing I could take the wisdom shared by Buddha and express it with a bit more grace—something more vivid, more poetic, and perhaps a little wiser than my own clumsy attempts at words.

All our posts on this forum about this world are a lot like little chicks that...
"Inside the egg, it’s just a chaotic swirl of potential, preparing for the world it's about to enter."

Or to put it simply—plain and simple.

If we haven't truly reached enlightenment by now, then we’re clearly doing something wrong—and I think even Milton and Patricia would agree with me on that!

If Buddha and the guy behind the counter at a local corner store are actually one and the same—like Nisargadatta and a neighborhood shopkeeper—then all this deep philosophizing we’re doing here is just spinning our wheels. It would mean everything we discuss in this little bubble is pretty much meaningless compared to how the world actually works outside this egg.

And that’s exactly why I say—

Who wants to sit around playing philosopher and saying, "Well, I've finally made it, there's nothing left to chase," only to wonder if there’s actually anything more out there? Honestly, let them have their moment.
Honestly, if someone doesn't bite when that bait is dangled in front of them... well, they're just missing out.
It’s pretty obvious there are two schools of thought on this... one side argues that an acorn is essentially just an oak tree in waiting, while the other insists that the actual journey from a tiny nut to a towering oak is far too long and impractical to be considered a direct connection.

I just keep coming back to this point: you can't just call any piece of wood "acorn." There are definitely some shady sellers out there trying to convince people that it doesn't matter, acting like we’re all just one big happy family of wood types!

With all due respect—that’s just pure, unadulterated pig politics. 😛

----
I’ve started to notice a troubling pattern on this forum lately: there are a ton of counterfeit $10,000 bills being circulated under the guise of legitimate currency.

I’m only here to talk to people who have actually been in the business of forgery—or are currently working it.
(forgive me for the falsification) 😁 It’s all about having a sense for agriculture—specifically when it comes to growing oak trees. You need that intuition to tell the difference between genuine substance and someone just spinning empty tales. There's a massive gap between actual results and those people who constantly brag, "I did this, and nobody else understands my genius." I'm talking about distinguishing true realization—like knowing exactly how peppercorns are ground, understanding the craft behind spinning black wool, or seeing how an acorn actually transforms into a mighty oak—from mere hot air. 🙂

Who's in? If you're interested, just say the word.
It’s pretty simple: if someone doesn't want to, they just won't.

i

There’s no blame to be found, but there’s certainly no praise to be given either.

To each their own, I suppose.
It’s a vast, open expanse.

Cheers!