Posts by hiddenpuma75

On my own journey, I’ve encountered two different mentors who gave me two specific warnings. These insights convinced me that if you want any kind of real
PROGRESS (actual change), you absolutely need a
MENTOR (a guru, a roshi, an adept)
🥳.

1) Just like you can't give yourself a decent haircut or style your hair properly

,
it's simply impossible for a person to "pull themselves out of the deep end" entirely on their own.

****
Of course... this applies to the manifested world—to the physical plane, or what one of my favorite characters from a movie would call the density of consciousness 🙂
.
****
It's top-tier advice—or as my favorite character might put it, "this is the absolute truth."

1) Cabbage is just cabbage.

2) In the end, ONLY our inner teacher will lead us to our destination—

because that teacher *is* the destination itself. 😉

Heads up! Major spoilers ahead!!

This question is strictly for those of you who HAVE ALREADY SEEN THE MOVIE. If you haven't seen it yet, please stop reading right now! I’m about to describe a pivotal plot point that could totally ruin the experience for you.

unknown

If you haven't watched it, don't go any further!🙂

****************

🙂 unknown 😁

*********************

So, I finally sat down and watched the film.

I'd give it a solid 4 out of 5 stars.

That leaves me with two questions for everyone who has already seen it:

1) Why didn't anyone else seem puzzled or even mention how abruptly the romance between Victor (played by Tom Hanks) and Amelia—the flight attendant played by Catherine Zeta-Jones—just... ended?

2) Specifically, how do you all psychologically process that ending? How do you wrap your head around the fact that Amelia and Victor didn't end up together, and she essentially just "went back" to her old lifestyle?

The movie builds their connection so naturally; she praises him to her boss, they bond over his kindness and simplicity, and it really feels like she's falling for him. But then, without any major drama, apologies, or real explanations, she just reverts to that "player" status—the engaged guy she supposedly decided to leave behind to be with Victor.

To me, that part just doesn't add up.😕

Karen Sanchez19 said:No matter how much you try to justify it, the money mantra is still...🙂

I’m all for this principle... let everyone pay whatever they feel like and what they think is fair.🙏

I’m always genuinely impressed when someone responds in a way that sounds exactly like my own internal software would have put it.🙏

Karen Sanchez19, I truly admire you.🙏

Seriously, what are you feeding your brain that caused your neurons to reprogram your software to such a meta-neuro-synchro-turbo advanced level?

It's like your body underwent a second derivation and you just became a galactic being—

you are essentially a walking Laplace transform.😛

****

By the way,

I used to love visiting those esoteric festivals out in the Midwest.

For instance, the prices for divination there are absolutely insane (around $15 for a quick 10-minute express consultation, basically just one question).

A buddy of mine (who actually attended your session too, regarding his skills!) told me he made about $150 in pure profit over just two days at an occult fair by doing palm readings, even though he isn't even an expert at it.

He even went as far as admitting he was mostly just improvising through it.

"So, aren't you worried about any karma implications?" I asked him.

"Oh, heavens no," he replied. "I don't force them. These girls—that's what he calls his clients—they come to me because they need it, so I just provide it."

*****

I only saw it happen once with one guy (I can't recall his name),

HE USED THE I CHING FOR DIVINATION

but following the rule:

LET EVERYONE PAY WHATEVER THEY FEEL AND THINK IS RIGHT.

I found out later that this same guy (he’s from Chicago) had actually been a guest on a major network talk show during a segment about fortune telling.

This question (story) was published in the New York Times:

*****

Hello, Captain.

I wanted to ask you: can the bond between a human and an animal—if I may call it that—be so deep in terms of love and loyalty that it seems almost inexplicable? I’m not usually one for "supernatural" explanations, but what happened two months ago has really left me pondering this. Our German Shepherd, Luke, used to see my husband off at the door every single morning before he headed to work. He’d bark happily, wag his tail, and predictably hold onto my husband's hat in his mouth to present it to him. We always used to laugh about it. But one day, he simply wouldn't let him leave. He stood right by the door, jumped up at the coat rack, grabbed the hat, and completely tore it to shreds.
My husband left the house fuming. A few hours later, I got the call from the hospital: he had been hit by a car and sustained some pretty serious injuries. For the entire two months my husband was hospitalized, Luke barely ate. He just stayed in the corner of the room, silent, without barking once. It wasn't until my husband finally came home from the hospital that everything returned to normal.
Is there any connection between Luke’s strange behavior and the accident my husband had? Was he trying to warn him, perhaps even forcing him to stay home?
If this letter isn't quite right for your column and you decide not to publish it, I completely understand. Thank you in advance.
A reader from Boston

The window in the room where retired Captain Giovanni Amadeo lived somehow became an altar for swallows.
They would arrive every morning just before sunrise, perched on his windowsill, staying there until the old man's weathered hands opened the window to scatter breadcrumbs. Then, they would fly off again. When the autumn chill set in, swarms of swallows would settle on the ledge and chirp: it was their way of saying goodbye before migrating to distant lands in the south. In the spring, they would return, settling once more on the old soldier's windowsill. There were many identical windows in the large veterans' residential building, but the birds never made a mistake: they always flew straight to Giovanni Amadeo’s window.
The swallows knew all of the old captain's habits. Around ten in the morning, he would head out to the park for a stroll, and the swallows would already be waiting for him in the grass near the bench where he liked to sit and read. When he fell ill, the swallows took turns keeping watch on his windowsill, as if they could sense their friend was suffering. And when death finally came for the old soldier, they vanished. Two days later, when his casket was displayed in the building's foyer, the swallows—who had mysteriously disappeared—returned in great flocks to perch upon the coffin. Some people tried to shoo them away, but it was useless; they didn't take flight until the casket was loaded onto the hearse.
But this incredible story isn't over yet.

Those who followed the old soldier to his final rest witnessed massive flocks of swallows sweeping across the sky during the funeral, acting like a ceremonial guard of honor.
They flew high, settling on the large cross atop the church bell tower, remaining there silently until the casket was lowered into the grave. Only then did they rise and fly away in a noisy cloud. No one ever saw them circling the old man's building again, nor did they land on the grass by his favorite bench.
So many cases like this demonstrate how animals often possess a sense of connection that far exceeds that of civilized humans.
Nobel laureate Charles Richet put it clearly: "Despite the miracles of progress, we still cannot explain the origin of certain extraordinary phenomena in human history. These phenomena are becoming increasingly rare because humanity continues to drift further away from the laws of nature..."

2006: THE YEAR THE INTERNET DIES

THE DEATH OF THE INTERNET THREATENS
THE WORLD WITH SOMETHING WORSE THAN CHERNOBYL

If today’s Internet were to collapse, the global economy would face catastrophic fallout. We could see a recession even more severe than the Great Depression of the 1930s.

written by Ivo Šćepanović

American scientist Hannah Kohl has been making headlines worldwide lately. Her prediction—that the Internet might actually reach its breaking point by 2006—has sparked widespread concern. To clear things up, she sat down for an interview with the Los Angeles Times to elaborate on her theories.
How much do you truly believe the Internet could die within two years?
- I’d say the probability of a near-term collapse is significantly higher than zero percent. If we want to prevent this from escalating into a total catastrophe
on a global scale, the world needs to act decisively to stop it. Honestly, the death of the Internet would hit the world harder than the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl ever did.
How many other scientists agree with your outlook?
- Experts are pretty split into three camps. One group agrees with me but prefers to stay quiet in public; the second group generally agrees but believes there’s still a window to save the Internet; and the third group disagrees entirely, convinced there isn't a problem at all. Those skeptics argue that issues like viruses and spam are easily solvable. Most experts, however, fall into that middle category.
Have scientists from around the globe reached out to you since your initial statements started circulating?
- I’ve received some very encouraging feedback from experts in those first two groups. Generally, they appreciate that someone finally spoke up publicly to try and "wake people up." I have to admit, though, the reactions from the third group weren't quite as kind—some weren't shy about calling me an "idiot professor who should be fired."
What was the primary driver behind your prediction that the Internet is headed for a shutdown?
- My goal was simply to alert people to the very real danger of an Internet collapse. It isn't just about pesky viruses or spam; it's about the fundamental architecture of the Internet itself, which is incredibly vulnerable to various internal attacks. Think of it like a frog in a pot of water. As the temperature slowly rises, the frog doesn't notice the change until the water starts boiling. If you dropped the frog straight into boiling water, it would jump out immediately. But because the heat builds up gradually, it ends up cooked. That’s exactly how it’s happening with the Internet.
In your view, who—or what—are the greatest enemies of the Internet?
- Hackers are really just the tip of the iceberg. The bigger threats are the professionals looking to turn a profit through extortion and industrial espionage. Criminals can hijack thousands upon thousands of computers using viruses to exploit vulnerabilities in commercial systems. With that kind of firepower, it wouldn't be hard to paralyze major corporations or even the infrastructure of entire nations. For instance, the entire American network could potentially be crippled by a botnet attack involving just ten thousand hijacked machines. If an attacker uses more subtle methods, a server often can't even distinguish between a legitimate user and a malicious bot.
Would banking systems also be at risk in your scenario of an endangered Internet?
- Absolutely, because our entire society and economy rely on the flow of money. By choking off that flow, attackers could destabilize entire countries. Here in the States, we've already seen instances where banks had to shut their doors for a day or two due to the threat of computer viruses—even when those viruses weren't specifically targeting them. During a scientific workshop back in April, expert Jon Mynther demonstrated just how fragile banking systems are, showing how criminals could theoretically block 26 major German banks at once.
Despite all your grim predictions, do you believe there is still hope for saving the Internet?
- It’s a bit of a toss-up. We might actually make things worse by trying to fix them. But honestly? The open Internet as we know it is on borrowed time. From the ashes of this free web, a "Secure Network" will rise. Picture virtual communities where small groups can actually talk without being drowned out by spam or targeted by hackers. There would likely be an Internet Highway Patrol to enforce the rules of the road. If you play by the rules, you’re safe; if you don't, you'll be caught. Your data stays private, and Big Brother won't be watching your every move, but they'll certainly be tracking your behavior.
If the Internet were to collapse, would the world revert to how things were twenty years ago? Or would this Secure Network successfully take its place?
- Because the Internet is either going to "die" or hit a massive wall, more and more companies are already retreating into closed networks, completely walled off from the public web. We can't just rewind twenty years—modern life wouldn't allow it. This means that if, or when, today's Internet fails, we'll find a way to survive, but the global economy is going to take a massive hit. We'd likely see a recession reminiscent of the Great Depression in the 1930s.

Born from the fear of nuclear war

Is it true that the Internet was originally designed as a way to survive a potential nuclear strike?
- Exactly. At its core, the Internet was envisioned as a military network to support the American fight against communism during the Cold War. Since a nuclear exchange was one of the primary nightmare scenarios back then, Americans wanted a network capable of functioning both during and after such a conflict.

Taylor Campbell4 said:I realized I missed a crucial point: transmission meditation doesn't clash with any other spiritual practice or meditation technique. In fact, it actually makes them even more effective.

THE WISE SAY THAT MATHEMATICS IS THE FINAL VEIL BEFORE THE IMAGE OF TRUTH

-So, if you don't mind, I’d love to see this somewhat pamphlet-style claim backed up by some actual evidence:

1) Empirical measurements
2) Expert testimony
3) Rigorous scientific analysis
4) REAL-WORLD EXAMPLES

Because, honestly, I'm pretty skeptical

about the idea that one spiritual practice can JUST EASILY AND SEAMLESSLY ENHANCE ANOTHER SPIRITUAL PRACTICE without any complications.

An interesting phenomenon here

Every time I click a link on Monitor

CNN

I end up with this:

í}ÉrăFŇđYáw(ĂńYŇ?Ip§Ôä$B%ŠäĎEś{b˘$KDŕ`ĄZęß ä‹ď}ńqÂÇď):|œGř3 ŠľŠ5A@-šUVfeUÖw{ó}ĽqĐůĽ)’ăÎy4ťűľęáv‰ŸŇ‰DĽSą?dâIŇŃ%Ő MYS%%‘ë\ę_šc…ýŚŇ~oź1eSĄĺŞ: ďă—ú›„ý7~SS"—Ś9ŮĄ˙śäi‰;ĐT“ŞćNMR‡–4¤éŰoJÜĽÎą:gbG :Íń˙vŤçł:›‰żźIß› „eô/%Ý fI6´B![ÜIqeÚżř~"ëÔđ5“ŒęUę_Ňě[׎4ęąŢ)qŞśÓÇO12ś sG§SI‘’I#ÚięŇp,…4`—7Ě…Ps0ęűrĄécňŒ%}(Ťť$9yż÷ +â´ß¨üB>ô¤ţh¨k–:ŘékŠŚďţ@sřł÷+‰ëT€*˝6>\;ŇXVnv%]–”=öĆoé.ĎCŤNý öož:‘vY}XUh*ĐÁĘr—Ú”ęn)šÄV e :˘ËÁMÍŔM&ÓĹ|ĎţxMĺἚŰÓ”kĚ|o.m'ŸüŸY3řŐş‘ĺ˝'ľáÔ !Rň×Ů×pęř Čâ}vž÷‚p™ŇĽ6––Nl)”łŽVÚ …qe%œÖQŽw´ŻéŞŽ]USioż˛Ân_ë–ˇ{^^👋”XéxËcIQÖšd!+Tö&Ň` ŤĂ

And it just spreads across the entire page 😠

So, can some computer genius please explain what on earth this is? Why does it only happen when I try to visit CNN, a site I can't even get open right now?😕

Jose Reyes said:Abraham, Buddha, Jesus, and Muhammad all tell us the same thing: we simply aren't good enough to please God on our own.

..............
Abraham the Troglodyte, Buddha the Lunatic, Jesus the Narcissist, and Muhammad the Spokesperson—they’re all just architects of this hellish, endless, and utterly miserable battle we find ourselves fighting.
Karen Sanchez19, hiddenpuma75—none of them have actually achieved a full Awakening Predisposition.

...............

That’s exactly how hell was created, Karen Sanchez19.
It all starts within our own minds.
Coming straight from the mouths of a handful of HUGE FOOLS in our little corner of the US. 😎 😁

Our very own resident forum expert has certainly been busy lately, putting out quite a lot of writing over the last few days and even heading into this week.
It’s more than just a little; it’s actually quite a lot.

I’d like to make an announcement to our Master and everyone currently using his services.
If only we could all be blessed with the touch of a Master John—the kind of guy who can actually fix just about anything you throw at him.

He managed to sneak two massive blunders right into that bombastic presentation of his.

There are two mistakes that simply don't sit right with anyone claiming to be a spiritual teacher.

****

So, basically...

First off, we’re looking at a methodological error here. We can try to wrap our heads around it, sure, but there's no way we can just let it slide. However, the second mistake is much more serious—and that's because it's rooted in hard, cold facts. 🙂

First off:

As the brilliant Blake once told John: "To generalize is to be an idiot."

Our good friend Master John has gone ahead and lumped Judaism, Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam all into one single bucket, attempting to generalize them under one umbrella. His mistake? He’s grouping them all together based on what he considers a shared, incorrect interpretation of their core theological principles—but I’ll dive into the specifics of why that's wrong in point number two.

It’s becoming pretty clear that our good old Master John isn't exactly "well-versed" in these matters. He's definitely lost his footing on some rather slippery ground, and honestly, that's just a plain fact.

****

So, there you have it—those are the mistakes, and they’re pretty significant.

Jose Reyes is being completely unfair here. Honestly, how can anyone be so stubborn? The facts clearly show that he's misattributed this entirely.

Regarding Abraham and his connection to Judaism...
The essence of enlightenment—truly becoming Buddha Dharmi.
Jesus—specifically regarding Christianity.
Regarding Muhammad and Islam.

Yes: ''quoting

Abraham, Buddha, Jesus, and Muhammad all tell us the same thing: we simply aren't good enough to please God on our own.

***
This sentence really belongs in the "greatest shit" category. 🙂 It feels like we have this one specific topic popping up on pretty much every single subforum we visit. It’s become a bit of a recurring theme, isn't it?

***

It’s a widely held sentiment that Christianity alone clings to such a distorted theological dogma—and if you ask me, theology is nothing more than a tapestry woven from lies.

If we accept that humans are inherently flawed, then it follows that our very existence—our "imperfect birth," if you will—is part of that same broken pattern.

The whole concept surrounding the dogma of Eastern Sin is such an interesting thing to unpack. It’s one of those heavy theological topics that really makes you stop and think about how we perceive morality and our connection to the divine. When you dive into it, you realize it isn't just some dry rulebook; it’s a fundamental way of looking at the human condition and our inherent flaws. I've always found it fascinating how these deep-seated ideas shape so much of our spiritual journey.

So, basically, John's previous post was only referring to Christianity.

I’ve actually been putting some thought into this lately and even sat down to write a bit about it. My main takeaway is that Judaism, Buddhism, and Islam all stand in such sharp opposition to these untruthful Christian doctrines.

Even prominent Catholic theologians—take someone like Matthew Fox, who was famously suspended by the Vatican—make the case in his book *Original Blessing* that the whole concept of Eastern Sin is fundamentally flawed and completely goes against nature.

***
So, Buddha explicitly states that every single person is already perfect exactly as they are, and that the very essence of Buddha resides within all of us.

He’s well-known for that one striking statement of his.

There isn't a single speck of dust in existence that won't eventually become an Arhat.

It feels a bit out of place to mix Buddha with the concept of God, especially considering how our own Master approaches things. Buddhism, in its purest sense, doesn't really rely on the idea of an almighty God.

***
Both Judaism and Islam also make it very clear that we are born from God in a state of perfection. They completely reject that distorted Christian doctrine regarding what they call Eastern Sin.

****

Honestly, our dear self-taught Master could probably use a quick refresher on the fundamentals of comparative religion. It would be a huge favor to him—just so he doesn't end up embarrassing himself in front of a distinguished American audience of ladies again. 🙂

ENLIGHTENED MASTER said:By acting this way, Master John is stripping both Jesus and Muhammad of any right to enlightenment, hiddenpuma75.

Both Buddha and Jesus, along with Muhammad, are the true architects of Hell on this Earth.

It’s because they were the ones who first ignited Hell within our own souls.😕 🙄 😉

Honestly, you haven't convinced me at all; your reasoning feels pretty thin.
If you're going to make such radical claims, you really ought to present them with a bit more elegance and depth.

By the way—you're actually the one responsible for how clunky and hard to follow your posts are.

Do yourself a favor and learn how to use the quote feature at the bottom of the post to reply specifically to someone; it makes everything much clearer.

Your writing is a total mess to read because you just use basic copy-paste, making it impossible to tell who is saying what.

Jose Reyes said:You hit the nail on the head, hiddenpuma75.

But you still have these figures to account for:
Buddha
Muhamed
Osho
Tolle
and
that young lady with her "game theory" perspective

John,

it’s about time you started being more direct. Just tell us plainly what’s actually on your mind.

***
So, basically,

tell me—and tell all of us here—because I couldn't find this in my initial search through the threads:

- why and how do you maintain that Buddha wasn't enlightened (whereas you claim to be)?

***
You mentioned something about visions, Vipassana, and Muhamed's perspiration, but frankly, I didn't find those answers very satisfying.
If anything, it felt like you were just rambling about ancient masters whose light still pierces through the darkness of the ages, trying to compare them to someone aspiring to be a spiritual teacher today.

****

By the way, if I recall correctly, you asked me how I can possibly know if someone is truly enlightened... well, since you're the one questioning others, why don't you explain why they aren't?

Alright, here goes:

SUCCESS IS HUMAN PROOF

That is ONE of the criteria I use to argue that people like Buddha and Muhamed were indeed enlightened—speaking from the level of an adept who has crossed Daath (the Kabbalistic "abyss" from the Tree of Life symbolism).

Jose Reyes said:When you bring up that " glass of water," hiddenpuma75, John LikeYOU just mentioned how he’s honestly feeling a bit drained writing about the same people and the same topics over and over again.

Well, I wasn't feeling too lazy myself (even if I was a little tired!)—I spent ten minutes digging through my own old posts just to give Jose Reyes a precise answer to that one specific question regarding the sharks/ravens and hiddenpuma75, which Jose Reyes had actually posed back when he first arrived here as an Aspera.

- Well, maybe Jose Reyes could finally get off his lazy butt🙂
And if he's really too exhausted to write everything out again, he could at least point hiddenpuma75 toward, say, page 34 of the challenges where there's a more detailed explanation of what hiddenpuma75 is asking—something Jose Reyes keeps dodging because, well, he's just feeling uninspired and lazy...🙄

&&&

Jose Reyes said:Two of those points were actually directed at you, following our recent debate about that young lady's book—the one you described as ENLIGHTENED.

I’m honestly not sure what I was even asked regarding the young lady.

In my view, she hasn't reached that level of enlightenment seen in figures like Ramana Maharshi or Nisargadatta.

- If we define enlightenment as that ultimate, absolute state (the kind the organization of ignorance refers to as nirvikalpa samadhi),

then, from where I stand, she isn't quite in that state.

That is to say, she isn't ENLIGHTENED in that specific sense.

Let's just call it what it is: she hasn't reached that final, irreversible stage.

- To me, she’s a bit like Gangaji, though in my opinion,

she is actually more nuanced, multifaceted, and witty than the repetitive, somewhat dull Gangaji.

***
But make no mistake, she possesses a very advanced and liberated spirit. She's someone I truly admire, especially because she has so selflessly shared her experiences and her life's work through her magnum opus with everyone here on the forum and across the web.

Jose Reyes said:Buddha
Muhammad
Osho
Krishnamurti
balsekar
Eckhart Tolle
U.G.
Hey there!
.................
You forgot about Jesus, hiddenpuma75.
_______________________________

John LikeYOU suggests we spice things up a bit and tackle this without letting it get boring.

Master, I’ve been doing some thinking and I wanted to run something by you. I’ve put together a list of certain creatures, and I’d love to hear your take on why each one of them could be considered "enlightened." Once I lay out my reasoning, I'll leave it to you to tell me exactly where I went wrong and why they aren't actually what they seem. Ready when you are!
So, hiddenpuma75, you’re finally starting to grasp something about the spiritual realm?
Let's see what we have here.😕 🙄 😉

Listen...

I’ve never been much for keeping score of who started what. Honestly, I care way more about seeing some genuine goodwill and getting straight to the point with clear answers.

But then again...

As far as I'm concerned, I'm the first one here!

I asked you!

It feels like you’re dodging my question and just throwing the same one right back at me—it's a classic move.

Look, I'll tell you what—how about you give me an answer first? 🙄

***
Look, I’ll answer whatever you want to know, I really will. But let’s make a deal: give me a straight answer to my questions first. Once we’ve cleared that up, you can lecture me all you want.

***
If I were to ask you, "What kind of water is this?"

First, hand me a glass of water—I need to hydrate before we get down to business. Once I've had a sip, go ahead and ask me whatever is on your mind in that signature style of yours! 🙂

1) And why on earth are you so hungry?
So, would you perhaps like some juice?
John isn't hungry anymore. 🙂
Honestly, the best water I ever saw a contractor drink was back when he was working out in Malibu.

****
Hey there!

Let me give you some quick answers to a few of those questions you asked above.

1)
It seems like hiddenpuma75 is really feeling it—holding onto those thoughts and truly experiencing everything right now.

If you ask me, there isn't a shadow of a doubt—he sees them as truly awakened and enlightened.

From the old days.

Lao Tzu
Buddha
Rumi
Meister Eckhart

Back in the 1900s...

Ramana Maharshi

The words of Nisargadatta Maharaj brought a sense of peace I’ve never experienced before—a true stillness that finally quieted this soul right here.

2) anyway

Just holding on to that one vital truth I stumbled upon during a dream earlier in this life.

I hereby declare.

I don't believe in anything!

Is belief actually just an outdated Aristotelian category?

Therefore:

To be honest, I don't fully subscribe to any single belief system.

-To be honest, I don’t fully subscribe to my own belief system.

-

hiddenpuma75 really gets how much higher the quality of things used to be compared to where we are today.

Maybe my assessments aren't actually worth much—they're probably just reflections of my own projections, my feelings, and all those unfulfilled karmic debts I'm still carrying around.

***
hiddenpuma75 used to believe that both Krishnamurti and Papaji were truly enlightened, but he doesn't really feel that way anymore.

About two months ago, I finally sat down and watched Papaji live on a webcast—it was actually my first time seeing him in person rather than just reading his work—and it really hit me: the guy operates on a completely different wavelength than Ramana or Nisargadatta.

Oh, please. If you think that old man is actually enlightened, you're mistaken. He’s nothing more than a storyteller spinning those old Indian fables for people who just want a little bit of romance in their lives.

My software keeps suggesting that certain followers, like those studying under the great masters, tend to...

Andrew Cohen and Gangaji.

They aren't enlightened!

They’re nothing more than fairy tales, if you ask me—let's just call it what it is.

Are we looking at advanced, active, or even just "news-driven" managers? Or perhaps more accurately, are we talking about those spiritual coaches who try to lead from the front?

But let’s be honest—they are light-years away from reaching that level of profound depth, simplicity, and sheer conviction you find in the teachings of a Maharishi or Nisargadatta.

To be fair, I’m not saying Balsekar is quite as enlightened as his teacher Maruti was—that's a tall order—but he definitely operates on a much higher level than Papaji, Cohen, or Gangaji.

***
Just a heads-up: I’m typing this out live without any editing... so please, let's hope Em doesn't resort to his favorite little trick...

That habit of nitpicking a single word just to spin a whole web of sawdust around it.

PLEASE, try to understand the spirit behind what I'm saying rather than getting hung up on my exact phrasing.

***
Look, I made a point regarding what Em asked me, yet despite promising to do so, he hasn't provided the simple glass of water I was looking for.

***
By the way—I’ve gone into great detail elsewhere, including my breakdown of those 16 crucified saviors, while Em wasn't around. My stance remains: I don't believe Jesus or anyone else under that persona actually existed. Instead, it's a compilation of myths from Persia, Greece, and Egypt.

It is an IRREFUTABLE FACT THAT PERSIAN, GREEK, AND EGYPTIAN MYTHS WERE WRITTEN BEFORE YEAR 0in ways that are identical to the Gospels. To me, the fact alone proves that the so-called evangelists were simply copying ancient tales!

And this is all backed by clear evidence presented by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy in their essential work

The Jesus Mystery👍

(The Amazon links and Yahoo groups are fantastic resources for this topic.)

Jose Reyes said:Especially considering the fact that this MASTER has repeatedly left you SHORTENED OF ANSWERS.🙂 😠

1) Honestly, that’s just not fair. You know perfectly well that whenever you sent me a private message, I gave you a quick, straightforward answer, and you even thanked me for them at the time.

2) Motivation is everything!

If I missed anything you asked, I promise it wasn't intentional!

It was simply because I was working a lot this summer, so I was only checking the forum superficially and without much drive every now and then.

3) If there is still anything you want to know regarding the software coming from the Great Master🙂 hiddenpuma75
just ask.👋

As an international master,🙂 hiddenpuma75 will be happy to answer you and settle his debts—essentially bringing his KARMIC ACCOUNT back down to zero.

By the way, I’m surprised that such an enlightened being—who went and announced himself as Master John—actually remembers that some cyber persona named hiddenpuma75 owes him answers...

I had assumed that an enlightened being like Jose Reyes lives entirely in the NOW and doesn't hold onto any old debts from the past.🙂

(Please don't tell me that you're allowed to do whatever you want!) ha ha (I'm literally laughing out loud while typing this)

Jose Reyes said:Maybe you need one more little lesson to finally get the point.😛 😳 😠

1) It’s not just about me—it’s about everyone!

2) You still haven't actually answered my two specific questions.

3) I am never claiming that an enlightened being has to fit into some pre-made mold!
So please, stop trying to pin views on me that aren't mine.

My intuition tells me that every free, realized being is truly UNIQUE—special in their own way—and they simply CANNOT be imitated.

They are unique in the same way there is only one Einstein, even though there are thousands of PhD physicists out there.

Or how there is only one Mozart, while there are countless other poets.

And I believe anyone should be able to do whatever they want (provided they aren't causing suffering to others).

4) However, I *do* maintain that you can't claim certain eccentricities for yourself while denying them to others. For instance, you can't look at Osho, Adi Da Samadhi, Krishnamurti, or UG, and then say they aren't enlightened while claiming John is!

5) I’m still sticking to my simple question that you dodged:

By what standard did you measure and decide that

Osho, Krishnamurti, Balesar, Papaji, etc., are NOT "enlightened beings"?

And why?

6) Give me five examples of public or semi-public enlightened beings who are currently living here in America or anywhere else in the world. Do you even know anyone today who is truly enlightened?

Jose Reyes said:Master John will be more than happy to address any questions you might have.😎 🙏

Personally, I’d be curious about a few things,

based on the various criteria and signs of enlightenment typically found in the literature...

1) Someone claiming to be enlightened isn't actually enlightened.

2) An enlightened person wouldn't dismiss someone else's realization or belittle other teachers.

****

From what I can see, M—just like you—seems to be breaking both rules here. It's like how a company would never turn around and say their competitor is a bad brand; you'll never hear an Audi rep claim Mercedes is a junk car.🙂

Jose Reyes hasn't offered an explanation or commented on why, for instance, he claims these figures aren't enlightened:

Buddha
Muhammad

Osho
Krishnamurti
Balsekar
Eckhart Tolle

So, I think M needs to clarify a couple of points:

1) In his view, who *is* enlightened, and what makes them so?

2) Which of these famous names are not, and why?

The movie is 👎

pathetic

fluffy

slow, boring, lacking dialogue and depth

clueless

THE MOVIE HAS ZERO DRAMA OR PLOT....

****

REMEMBER THAT Dead Poets Society, which is a truly brilliant film, was actually an Oscar contender...

Dead Poets Society is such an energetic film

full of heart 🙂

dialogue....lessons....drama ....

whereas this movie is basically a 2% imitation....

****

To give you an idea of how disappointed I am, just consider this: every single movie I rent from the video store and rip to my hard drive ends up freezing during playback...

but it didn't even cross my mind to bother ripping this godforsaken terrible movie.

Sandra Wilson68 said:The existence of the Self isn't up for debate. Even Descartes pointed out how it can be proven by saying, "I think, therefore I am," and consciousness itself will always be a valid subject for philosophical deep dives.

.

Sandra...

It’s actually great that you’re bringing this back to consciousness. That’s exactly how I approach things, and focusing on awareness has helped me find answers to so many of my own questions.

However, I have to say that Descartes' famous statement is actually factually incorrect—something any of us could easily argue.

The right way to put it would be: I EXIST, THEREFORE I THINK.👍

In other words, consciousness comes first, then thought follows.

Or, to put it another way:

...I can observe my hand, which means I am not my hand.

I can observe my thoughts, which means I am not my thoughts.

And since I can reach a state of pure consciousness without any active thought at all, I realize we should say: I EXIST, THEREFORE I can think. Essentially: I exist, and thus, I think.

Beyond that, I’ve discovered—with a surprising amount of certainty—that my own existence, my Self, is

THE ONLY THING IN THIS ENTIRE UNIVERSE THAT I CANNOT DOUBT.😲

Because doubt itself requires awareness. I can't doubt my own existence because the very act of "doubting" confirms that I am conscious.

I've realized that there isn't a single mental maneuver I can pull to deny this consciousness or even doubt its presence. That realization is the greatest "intellectual capital" both mine and yours.

To me, the simple fact that I am aware is the most incredible miracle in the world.👋

shadowgardener12, do you actually realize that Mahatma Gandhi reached the absolute peak of both "servitude" and "power"?

He lived such a humble life in his ashram...

1) Have you ever sat down and watched that stunning film about Mahatma Gandhi? It took, what, twenty years just to prepare?😲

2) Or have you actually read the biography, My Experiments with Truth: Part I?👍

I’m honestly a bit puzzled by the way you're writing about Mahatma Gandhi.😢

Every single time I watch a scene from that movie, I find myself getting choked up.

He truly was a MAHA—a great
ATMA—a soul.

I mean, do you even grasp that through his massive universal principles—specifically Nonviolence—he brought the British Empire to its knees and forced them to leave without a single war?

It’s no wonder Einstein remarked that future generations would struggle to believe a man like him ever actually walked the earth and lived the way he did.

And did you know that Martin Luther King Jr. kept a photo of Mahatma Gandhi right in his office?

Both men were taken by assassins—victims of people driven by ego, greed, and pure ignorance.

I’ve come to realize there’s a sort of universal spiritual principle when it comes to the relationship between substances and the soul:

-anything you can trigger chemically, you can also reach through spiritual practice.

When we go the chemical route, we’re essentially trying to hijack time itself—and all that comes with it is the massive risk of addiction or losing our grip on reality.

With spiritual techniques, though, we pursue those higher states of consciousness much more gradually. It’s a slower process, sure, but it’s natural and far more stable.