Posts by Paul Rogers94

The ego essentially directs its focus outward—unlike attention centered on the self

I don't see any real distinction between so-called spiritualists and materialists—it all boils down to whether you latch onto a worldview, a paradigm, an agenda, an identity, or some myth. It’s all essentially fake. The core issue is this compulsion to cling. The mind has an inherent intent to hook itself onto *something* because it cannot exist in isolation; the mind and its contents are one and the same. As long as you're holding onto something, you think you're fine—but there's zero chance of surviving an encounter with conceptless reality (the unthinkable, the unknown)... that same reality that constitutes both his own existence and everything else. Reality doesn't need a mind to exist, whereas a mind can't exist without reality.
As for meditation, I don't see any inherent value in it regarding an encounter with ultimate reality. If such an encounter happens through meditation, it isn't thanks to the practice—it's happening in spite of
'practice' can only ever be a byproduct—a mere reflex of deeper shifts in consciousness.

They say there are plenty of saints over in Tibet who live in constant Solitude, yet somehow remain incredibly useful to humanity. How does that even work?

Ramana Maharshi: It’s quite simple. Realizing one's Sovereignty is the GREATEST GIFT you can offer the world. That’s why people call saints "useful," even when they're hiding out in the wilderness. But—and this is important—don't assume Solitude requires a forest setting.

You can find Solitude right in the middle of a city, amidst all the chaos of daily life...

People in America just don't get it—they don't realize a person living in Solitude can still be an asset to society. They have this narrow idea that being "useful" requires constant, frantic activity. When will this delusion finally end? How much longer will the American mind keep wading through the mud before it finally grasps the Truth?

Ramana Maharshi

Thomas Nelson25 said:post > #26 ☕

it's all about the environment... basically.

Physical withdrawal doesn't mean much if you aren't pulling your mind along with you—it’s all hollow. And honestly, being "socially functional" is irrelevant if you aren't actually connecting with your own mind. Whether you physically isolate yourself or stay out in the world just comes down to what's practical for you... whether you're mature enough for it. Everything else is just myth.

Joseph Bailey41 said:In a typical development scenario, that's how it goes... Grandma Branka or Aunt Lydia comes over for a visit, and so on. But occasionally, something goes sideways, and play takes on these mythological dimensions as a way to resolve an underlying conflict (most often involving a lack of acceptance from the mother) on an archetypal level. For instance, I remember a mother once asking me, "What would you do if I died?" (she wasn't sick or anything, maybe it was depression, but I didn't know how to recognize those things back then), and I instantly blurted out, "I'd just get a new mom."

Much later, I discovered that early traumas can be worked through using a technique called > resourcing. In this process, the client first vividly imagines a scene of an ideal parent with a child, then steps into the role of that imagined parent, and only after that can they truly "feel" what it is like to be the child. Through this process, the client essentially "gives birth to their own mother"—replacing the real one, who may never have been fully present or was perhaps abusive, with the parent they actually deserved to have.

Based on the archetypal childhood play pattern you just described, it’s glaringly obvious that "something is wrong"—it deviates from the norm. Your (the child's) statement about "giving birth to a different mother" isn't actually related to the psycho-engineering you're citing; rather, it's a very specific articulation of a specific lived reality... (otherwise, you'd frame the connection differently).

I’m not a fan of methods or technologies that rely on denial—that's never a recipe for success—especially when they encourage people to fantasize about an "ideal situation." In borderline cases, these kinds of methods almost certainly lead straight into psychosis. Even if you describe it as a sort of adapted CBT, the part where you inhabit the mother's role and then return to the child's role isn't necessarily bad, but there are some critical elements missing here...

...though there are certain psycho-technologies out there that can resolve lifelong traumas in just a few minutes.

Kids usually focus on things that actually matter—it’s just not how their brains work to obsess over trivialities. I often ask them what they're doing when they're drawing or playing with action figures, and I haven't encountered a single instance where they aren't processing what's vital to them at that stage. It's all about the process: this is Mom, this is Dad, Mom is at the office now, or Dad lives in a different house (in cases of divorce). This little figure is Grandma Branka, and she died tomorrow (meaning they think the funeral is scheduled for tomorrow)... I've seen this pattern in so-called "indigo children," or even those highly reactive kids who push their parents to the limit from age one. Even while they are still navigating social dynamics, they often possess a much sharper understanding of relationships than their own confused parents. That’s why, quite frequently, they end up being perfectly valid witnesses in a criminal trial.

Thomas Nelson25 said:Look, let's say there actually are anarchists out there who never bothered integrating into society.
Most people end up hitting a wall later on, realizing they totally blew it, and then trying to fix things—which isn't always easy.

doubt and sacrifice are definitely part of the equation—everyone deals with it... otherwise, you wouldn't really be a human being, spiritually speaking or whatever you want to call it.

The core of asceticism is detachment from mental constructs... and it doesn't even have to involve physical isolation.

Anyone who’s ever had kids can tell you—one of the first things they do around age three or four is try to map out how the world works and figure out where they fit into the hierarchy. I’ve spent countless hours trying to decode what they’re actually getting at by watching them draw or arrange their little action figures and toys... it's all just an attempt to grasp the relationships in their environment—relationships that are often completely baffling even to us adults. Then, you get those clueless parents who act like they have zero intuition, expecting the kids to just intuitively master social rules and dynamics on their own—basically just surrendering themselves to the whims of a tiny, budding monster.

When it comes to living a solitary life, it’s not even about making some grand sacrifice—for people like them, the "sacrifice" only happens when they're forced to interact with total morons.

There’s no point in even trying—you either possess that innate drive for solitude, or you flee toward some imaginary sense of safety and salvation. You aren't reinventing yourself; you're simply uncovering who you actually are...

True solitude is only possible when you can maintain constant awareness—meaning you aren't clinging to passing thoughts, future fantasies, or old sentiments. That’s real innocence. Otherwise, we just carry the entire weight of our world wherever we go, and then "solitude" becomes nothing more than a desperate attempt at an escape.
When you actually achieve that 24/7 state of awareness, being alone becomes a natural impulse rather than a conscious choice. You can't force isolation through sheer willpower; true solitude has nothing to do with hiding out in forests, caves, deserts, or monasteries.
It isn't for amateurs.

An 11-year-old "Indigo child" belonging to an acquaintance of mine is so incredibly twisted that nobody wants anything to do with him—I actually witnessed his father (a prominent public figure who, ironically, works with gifted students) beating him right there on the street. When I asked him how the hell he could allow that, he just shrugged and said, "Screw it, I'm done." Kids feel secure when there’s a clear sense of order—when they know their place—rather than everyone just waiting for them to decide where they sit at the table or take charge because "parents don't understand them." They think the whole world should bend to their whims because they're so "special" and "misunderstood"... but without that structural safety net and clear boundaries, they act like lost souls just causing damage. So many kids and families have been wrecked by these twisted commercialized myths about Indigo children. What a joke—they aren't some mystical beings; they're just little bullies taking advantage of anyone willing to let them get away with it.

Indigo Children Ten Years Later: What actually happens to the Indigo teenagers?

wearymason4 said:...try reinstalling those GPU drivers..

Thanks—it worked, though it wasn't exactly a walk in the park. Took me two full days to figure out. Turns out you have to use the specific utility and the driver straight from the official site; for some reason, everything else just failed

I ran into this same headache when I first installed Windows 10, which is why I rolled back to Windows 7 in the first place—thought I had a compatibility issue

Just got back from a run, fired up my PC—standard setup, monitor, Windows 7 Ultimate—and the resolution is completely trashed. I thought I’d accidentally booted into Safe Mode, but nope... I know where to adjust the settings, but no matter what I do, nothing looks right. YouTube, movies, everything is distorted. Anything that should be round looks like an oval, icons are wonky, fonts are all messed up... I’ve already scanned for viruses, scoured Google, and dug through various tutorials, but I haven't found anything useful. Does anyone have an idea or a tool that can fix this, or am I really looking at a full reinstall of win

I wasn't even talking about some "unity made of diversity"—not that, and certainly not identity. I mean THAT—the exact same thing. One and the same. Total uniformity... zero difference.

On one hand, from the perspective of an observer, and on the other—it’s exactly the same thing...

Even diversity is nothing more than just a mere expression of that ONE...

Joseph Bailey41 said:If this thread were titled "Respect," the discussion would look completely different. Honestly, I'm not even sure if anyone would be asking these questions. In the common sense of the word, it's hard to put "humility" and "self-respect" in the same sentence. And while there aren't any real boundaries between our inner and outer worlds except for the ego, that doesn't mean they are identical; it means they form a single whole. Some parts of that whole are simply more beautiful or pleasant than others, and I think closing your eyes to that fact is just denying that connection. The world isn't some shapeless, singular blob; it's a complex entity made up of distinct yet interconnected parts. No one would argue that there's no difference between a leaf and a root, even though they clearly belong to the same tree.

Honestly, what can I say? That’s just your twisted take on a post you clearly didn't grasp at all. I could go through your sentences one by one—since every single one points to a complete lack of understanding—to explain why you do this to everyone, but I’m not getting dragged into your psychopathic little games. At the end of the day, it's just manipulation and a desperate plea for attention... as sincere as it gets. Believe it or not, it's nothing personal.

That term is weighed down by all sorts of biases and preconceived notions—everyone has their own skewed idea of what humility actually means depending on their perspective. If you’re looking at things from one level, everything seems unified; if you're at another, all you see is chaos and diversity. Those two perspectives are fundamentally irreconcilable—there's just no way to bridge that gap.

Humility isn't about groveling before others or being a bootlicker—and it certainly isn't "letting someone else dictate your will." Humility is the realization that everything is interconnected (it looks the same from this side as it does from the other). It's a natural reflex to the sheer miracle of existence and the fact that we can even be conscious of it. On a relative, more grounded level, we could simply call it self-respect and respect for everything that exists.

The posts in this thread would sound a lot more coherent if we just swapped out the word "humility" for "respect."

Humility stems from insight, whereas respect is a matter of will—and ultimately, respect serves a practical purpose: it makes coexistence a whole lot easier.

Joseph Bailey41 said:Fair point. You aren't his press secretary. Then again, he isn't a spokesperson for anyone but himself and his own ego—acting like he's the smartest guy in the room. Honestly, we've seen this act so many times it's getting a bit tiresome. Can we get back to the actual topic?

Very well—as if you were merely interpreting your own reflection: a timid persona using arrogance to mask deep-seated insecurity, reducing everything to shallow metrics that measure nothing at all—someone whose life's peak is sniffing chamomile tea. Perhaps a little humility might actually do some good in your life once in a while.

Joseph Bailey41 said:I actually find a lot of value in sharing experiences, especially with people who are a few steps ahead of where I am. I once asked a practitioner of Northern traditions living in San Francisco for advice on how to perform a specific ritual (soul retrieval). She gave me some guidance but also pointed out how vital it is to set aside dedicated time for integrating that experience—and mentioned that having a support network helps, too. She was spot on; it took me several months just to make sense of what had happened. Since then, I’ve actually scaled back my practices a bit, just to give everything enough breathing room to settle.

In my view, experiences don't carry much weight unless you can actually "embody" them—meaning you apply those insights to your daily life and pass what you've learned on to those who might need it, like people who are a few steps behind you. That approach is pretty much the opposite of what you're describing, which is why I suggested we're on different paths. I wanted to say that without being overly blunt about our differences.

Sure, there's definitely value in communicating an experience, but interpreting it requires someone who is—let's say—further along the path than you are. They have to validate it. Most people encounter the truth first, and then they go looking for a guru later just to get that validation.