Posts by Paul Rogers94

Joseph Bailey41 said:Alright, so that specific group doesn't do the whole sex thing. I assume others do, though. In my opinion, Tantra without sex feels pretty pointless. 🤷

An encounter with Kali beats sex any day

Joseph Bailey41 said:Thanks. I just started watching the video—the guy is making some pretty heavy comparisons to Manson. 😬

E: It’s a great film, though I haven't quite made it to the part about eating carrion yet. He’s drinking out of a skull and smearing himself with ash (which actually seems useful for keeping mosquitoes away... I've honestly thought about trying that) and eating food left for the deceased (I'll pass on that one, since I don't eat flowers). So far, the only thing that really grossed me out was him scooping water from an Indian river. That’s just nasty to me. Honestly, it would probably kill me. Probably kill most Americans, too.

Everyone wants an Aghori to eat a piece of meat from a funeral pyre because it guarantees liberation after death. They basically become these seasoned, professional cannibals that everyone wants to witness hovering around a corpse—and they get paid for it. It ties right back to what you said about "consciously breaking taboos." They’re essentially dismantling the whole concept of attraction versus repulsion. Everyone's sipping whiskey, having deep mystical experiences, knowing some otherworldly secrets... they carry this strange, forgotten, atavistic tradition within them that lives entirely on its own, almost like a parasite.

Joseph Bailey41 said:I have to admit, I haven't heard much about the actual scavenging part. I do know about meditating (or even having sex) in graveyards (like an open-air crematorium) and smearing oneself with the ashes of the deceased, but not because those spots hold some special energy. It seems more like it's because those places are taboo, and Left Hand Path tantra can basically be boiled down to the intentional breaking of taboos. If I've got that wrong, please set me straight. Ideally, send over some links regarding this necro-cannibalism stuff, otherwise we might just be talking in circles.

Aghori Babas Living With The Dead

Aghora: At the Left Hand of God: Robert E. Svoboda



Aghori Sadhus 🙂

Thomas Nelson25 said:What actually counts as authentic Christianity... just some folk legend about an archetypal Messiah?

I'm not convinced the source lies in any sort of tradition—it's found in gnosis (direct experience of truth). Jesus and Buddha likely never even existed as historical figures; they are merely external symbols of the Self (what we truly are—Atman), dramatized through the stories of Christ and Buddha. They serve only to point toward the fact that everyone is, at their core, a Buddha or a Christ. That said, one has to discover this personally—there is no such thing as collective salvation. If you take the Crucified as a literal person and worship him, then you're just practicing idolatry; but if you recognize the Christ (the Self) within the Crucified, then it’s something else entirely.

Let Thomas and Augustine worry about me—they don't need to bother—but I'll concede this much: some form of original Christianity holds genuine wisdom. There's no denying that. But it was completely butchered by various Thomists through their "thoroughly detailed" elaborations... This institutionalized version of Christianity just twisted interpretations to suit its own needs—all in the pursuit of wealth, power, and dominance. It led directly to the Great Schism and eventually to the pure darkness we see today, where they just breed more mindless sheep to secure their "credibility" and the perks they enjoy... begone, Satan.

Amy Bennett said:Maybe, but I’m just commenting on the posts I’ve seen right here. I’ve seen Yakuzza around before; he’s basically like an old friend. I don't really get why you're bothering me with this.

Well, you might be right about some things, but for most, you’re wrong—like with Ryan Wilson2.
Sure, he’s labeled a "Satanist," but that isn't what people think Satanism actually is.
Don't forget, you once told me I was spreading "Luciferian poison" 🤣—basically saying you detected Satanism in me, too.😈

Right, because Satanists are definitely lovely people, and I’m just clearly oblivious to it.

I remember telling you that, and I still feel the same way. You have your moments where you're alright, but the issue is your syncretism.

One thing is certain.
99% of Christians, including yourself, have a totally caricatured view of what Left-Hand Path followers are actually about.

Not at all; they have a perfectly accurate description. The Left-Hand Path essentially boils down to rejecting God as the Absolute—it’s an attempt to unseat God from His throne in order to put man in His place. It settles into breaking moral norms and religious dogmas because, for them, man is the measure of all things. That’s why they seem so hazy, arbitrary, and chaotic—they ultimately promote disorder and a lack of reason. Catholics don't have a wrong impression of those people. If they have any misconception, it’s probably just that Catholics don't have a bad enough impression of Left-Hand Path followers regarding the total degeneracy we see today.

These people are subversive elements that society needs to be purged of. They are dangerous, not just on their own, but because of everything they touch. That’s why, among other things, they never produce anything truly good. Societies are built on the Right-Hand Path—the "true hand," as people might say in certain circles. Members of the Left-Hand Path are nothing more than parasitic subversives. This is because they are in conflict with the Truth, in conflict with Reason, and in conflict with everything that comes from God. Consequently, their movements can never build anything lasting, because they follow chaos, and chaos is evolutionarily maladaptive. Death and fire are their eternal fate, because they have rejected the very source of life.

Just because someone thinks differently than a Christian or doesn't care for Christianity—doesn't make them a Satanist. 🧐

But honestly, that logic is flawed—and that goes for Christians who aren't Catholic, too.

...and all because "right" means right in English and that's just how Americans say it.

A glaring example of a crusader mindset—fried and hollowed out by Catholic demagoguery. Honestly, we need a new Inquisition; we should just shuffle everything into a concentration camp for Catholicism. Man, where did those happy times go? When anyone who wasn't "pleasant" was sent to the pyre? An ecstatic sight for any true believer—the only sight where joy is actually welcome.

Elizabeth Castillo87 said:Generalizing again, huh? I know plenty of Catholics who are absolute life-of-the-party types. It’s a shame you’ve only ever had bad experiences.

Where did you get the idea that I have "bad experiences"? I’m a proud non-believer—I don't have any specific history with Catholics, nor do we have anything in common. That said, I do know one priest based out of Rome who occasionally crashes at my place for a night or two... apparently, he finds it more comfortable than the seminary, where they make everyone share a fridge and head to bed by ten. My experience with him has been perfectly fine. He comes over, but his profession stays strictly on the other side of the threshold. If we ever actually discuss his work, it's only because I take the initiative—I just happen to be interested in getting the inside scoop first-hand.

Elizabeth Castillo87 said:Pure generalization.

Generalizing isn't even an option here—this whole thing is just a grotesque fantasy about salvation and redemption through suffering. Everywhere you look, there’s someone nailed to a Cross, bleeding out and staring you down with this accusatory gaze: "It's your fault; I'm here because of your sins." I don't recall ever volunteering to be crucified for anyone else's mistakes, let alone having them save me from anything. I have zero need for salvation, nor do I feel the need to be "rescued" from anything—I certainly don't consider myself born in sin or inherently sinful in any capacity. (The tactic is simple: convince you that you're guilty, then offer to bail you out.) Everyone is guilty just for being born; everyone should be ashamed of existing, scattering ashes, and humbly begging for forgiveness from a bunch of ancient, sleazy old bastards. An American Catholic will forgive anything except someone else's pleasure. Generations of sheep have been raised to have every ounce of joy castrated out of them—Catholics feel guilty at the slightest hint of happiness and immediately bolt to church for penance. Consequently, they won't allow anyone else any form of joy or enjoyment because they've been stripped of it themselves. That’s why all that repressed joy and pleasure leaks out in such twisted ways from the darkest corners of the subconscious—manifesting as a sort of sadistic pedophilia that serves as the invisible foundation of the entire structure. If that weren't the case, the whole system would collapse instantly; Catholicism would tear at the seams and simply cease to exist.

Elizabeth Castillo87 said:You’re laying it on a bit thick, don't you think? You're totally overgeneralizing here.

Oh yeah? Which part exactly was an exaggeration?

There’s nothing more sinister than the Catholic priesthood—a group that serves as the ultimate personification of depravity, from the Pope down to the very last priest. They are godless, greedy, arrogant, perverse stains on society. Their entire existence boils down to a sadistic obsession that stems directly from their twisted doctrine; they are a pathetic lot doing nothing but spinning excuses for their sordid history. They act as if they hold some divine authority just by being Catholic, regardless of the fact that they constantly contradict themselves. They say one thing, think another, and do a third—that is the core of their "righteousness." Where is the humility, the poverty, the love? Where is Christ? (If He actually showed up, He’d likely end up in a mental asylum; He would be treated exactly how the Pharisees treated Him back in the day). And where is God? Catholicism is essentially a form of atheistic Satanism, and that darkness is mirrored perfectly in their followers.

casualtiger2 said:What does it even mean to "see and read yourself"?


Jiddu Krishnamurti
The anti-guru guru—a guy who spent his entire life trying to use philosophy (basically, using thought) to show people how dangerous thoughts, divisions, and illusions can be, not to mention our social conditioning.
Whether he actually pulled it off is anyone's guess.

"I maintain that truth is a pathless land, and you cannot approach it by any path whatsoever, by any religion, by any sect. That is my point of view, and I adhere to that absolutely and unconditionally. Truth, being limitless, unconditioned, unapproachable by any path whatsoever, cannot be organized; nor should any organization be formed to lead or coerce people along a particular path. ... This is no magnificent deed, because I do not want followers, and I mean this. The moment you follow someone you cease to follow Truth. I am not concerned whether you pay attention to what I say or not. I want to do a certain thing in the world and I am going to do it with unwavering concentration. I am concerning myself with only one essential thing: to set man free. I desire to free him from all cages, from all fears, and not to found religions, new sects, nor to establish new theories and new philosophies."

PS
Seems like Sylvia Plath had a pretty tragic life, huh?

The real question is whether the others were any more successful. By the way, they used to call his near-identical counterpart U.G. Krishnamurti an "anti-guru." U.G. was born into a Brahmin family, and from early childhood, he was constantly badgered by these self-proclaimed sages who would gather at his parents' house. He knew Jiddu, attended a couple of his lectures, and apparently, the mutual intolerance there went both ways... He even sought out Raman, whom he dismissed as someone who just lies around reading comic books. UG seemed like a pretty interesting character, though.🙏

Thomas Nelson25 said:So, what actually is true love?

(Maybe better to ask... from a woman's perspective... vs a man's)

And regarding jealousy... how do we explain why most "normal" people act that way then?

Then you've got the folks outside the norm—it's all over the map, from polygamy to asexuality, to those pathological relationships, or even that intense "artist" type of infatuation... or if I'm not mistaken, things like Tantra or spiritual stuff, where they view it as some kind of path to enlightenment.

The only real love is impersonal love—it has absolutely nothing to do with whether you're looking at it from a man's or a woman's perspective.

A viewpoint without a fixed perspective is still just a viewpoint.

As for this whole "positive thinking" thing—it’s really just about denying the negative and cherry-picking the good. Beyond that, nothing actually changes. Reality stays exactly what it is; you’ve just put on some rose-colored glasses.
I don't believe for a second that denying reality leads to anything positive...

I haven't the slightest clue

My memory is a bit hazy—it feels like I first heard about her at some Mao Zedong rally—so I decided to do a quick Google search. I typed in "king and cannibals" 🙂

Joseph Bailey41 said:Luck or Bad Luck

An old man and his son were working on their ranch out in Montana. They had just one horse to their name. One day, that horse broke loose and ran off.
“That’s terrible!” the neighbors would say, shaking their heads. “What a disaster!”
“Is it luck? Is it bad luck? Honestly, who can say?” the old man would simply reply.

The following week, the horse wandered back from the mountains, bringing five wild mares along with him.
“Now that is some serious luck!” the neighbors shouted.
“Luck? Bad luck? Who knows?” the old man replied.

A day later, while trying to break in one of those new mares, the son fell hard and broke his leg.
“What a misfortune!” the neighbors lamented.
“Luck? Or bad luck?” the old man asked.

Then war broke out. The army rolled through town and drafted all the healthy young men. Since the starčev son was injured and couldn't serve, they left him behind.
“Luck? Or bad luck?”

Once there was a king who lived for the hunt. One day, he headed out into the woods with his retinue to track some wild deer. After wandering through the brush for a while, the king and his crew spotted a buck standing in a clearing. One of the servants got flustered—his finger slipped, the gun went off, and by some stroke of terrible luck, the king took a bullet right in his right thumb. Once they made it back to the castle and the king had recovered, he issued a single command: bring him the servant responsible for costing him his thumb through such sheer stupidity...

"Do you have anything to say for yourself before I hand down your sentence?" the King asked.

The lackey gets a little too bold and replies with a humble shrug: "Look, Your Majesty—even if I did cost you an arm and a leg—I have to tell you, you honestly never know what's actually worth having..."

The King lost his mind—furious beyond belief—and sentenced the servant to life in prison. Some time passed before the King headed back out into the woods for a hunt with his entourage. While trekking through the forest, they were ambushed by a tribe of cannibals. The savages snatched up all of the King's attendants, leaving him alone. However, they let the King go once they noticed he was missing a finger—apparently, they took it as a bad omen... So, the King retreated to his estate and immediately ordered that the servant be dragged straight out of the dungeon.

"When those cannibals finally spared my life, I remembered what you told me. You were right—dead on. I need to ask for your forgiveness, and in return, you can name your price," the king said to his servant.

His assistant shot back: “Don’t even worry about apologizing—I’m not asking for anything. Honestly, if you hadn't thrown me in solitary, I probably would've tagged along on that hunt with you... and I’d be dead by now. That cell might have felt like a punishment, but it actually saved my life.”

David Avocado: Wolf in Critical Condition after Apparent Accidental Crystal Chakra voodoo Overdose

Current reality is the direct response to that "inner voice." The problem is we get too tangled up in our own ideas about how things *should* be—and how they *shouldn't* be. To me, that's just forcing reality to fit a mold...

Papaji (in conversation with Godman)

Just a tedious two-hour revenge flick filled with some pathetic quasi-artistic flourishes—mostly just filler to stretch out the runtime. Some lumberjack's girl gets snatched by a bunch of goth bikers, so naturally, he goes on a rampage. I guess being a "lumberjack" is supposed to imply he has enough muscle to take down a twisted cult... right? Pointless movie.

Akasha: The most Mysterious of The Five Elements | Sadhgur

"I’m actually glad you’re confused. It’s better to be lost than to jump to stupid conclusions."

"If you're constipated, it just means there's still something left inside you."

Sadhguru

🙂