Chewy, meaty & philosophical... Here?

[Luna Bliss]

21 hours ago, Ceka Cianci said:

22 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

That reminds me of a question I had for you...why do you say you're not a Buddhist, and what inspired you to read so much about it?

First is.....

Your story reminds me so much of my path, and I imagine it resonates with many others -- trying to find one's way within some system of growth or self-actualization (be it a religion or philosophy) and realizing it's too limiting via numerous extraneous beliefs and rules that don't feel right or make sense, with some of them even being downright abusive. It's annoying to me that religions often pile so much crap on top of the essential teachings -- unconditional love -- and then defend their rules to the death, in some cases.

I'm drawn to religions which acknowledge there are many ways to the center, and they are simply offering their way if you choose to follow and it resonates with you, with the firm belief that it is only one way among many.
I only want to focus on unconditional love, or what our OP's book is calling "a heartfelt yes", which for me is the self-evident truth of the structure of reality, and so my only goal.

I like the path I'm on now -- one of the many paths of Yoga. There are beliefs about the nature of reality (for example, reincarnation) but they aren't foisted upon you, and I'm free to incorporate ideas from other religions. The goal is to lessen the concerns of the self/ego/what we identify with so that a joining with a larger reality is possible (unconditional love, the "heartfelt yes", or what some call "God", or Agape love). They offer intensive techniques to achieve this goal which require much time and dedication. There's never any 'ego shaming' as with so many religions, and in its place is a structure to experience a greater reality if one chooses to let go of some of the many ego concerns which stand in the way of experiencing 'a bigger picture'.

Edited September 13, 2020 by Luna Bliss

[Silent Mistwalker]

11 hours ago, Ceka Cianci said:

Honestly, the real reason I don't let myself become tied to any one thing is from reading and understanding and relating to The Four Noble Truths, which lead to the eight-fold path and middle way, which is balance.

I was letting go of something at the time that I was so attached to, that it put my life at a stand still.. So I'm not about to go down that road again..hehehe

For me, I don't look to the religion for things, but look at what caused the birth of them.. The religions usually are not around when the ones that inspired them are walking around..

Those people were not inspired from them when they were walking around, so I try to sift as much of what sounds like man made manipulating bullcrap out, to try and find as much useful core and truth as I can.. There is the source and then there is the grape vine..

This is also one of the huge reasons I don't favor any political parties, politicians or medias.. I have seen all sides using lies and hate and manipulations more than ever before through their teeth, as a means to an end, rather than using the right ways,such as truth and honesty. I'm better off grabbing a National Inquirer and getting more truth than I could from any of the others.. hehehehe

The moment someone say's to me about a subject I may not be up on, That I should care..That is when my spidy senses start tingling.. I'll research and investigate for myself first before I let someone manipulate me into anything anymore..

If I walked away with anything from what I learned from then to now, it's that my feet are firmly to the ground and my body and mind are strong enough that I don't need to lean one way or the other  for support.. They will just throw me off Balance..hehehehe

Sometimes, you and I are like two peas in a pod. Sometimes.

 

*whaps you over the head with a rolled up Enquirer my grandmother used to read. Who also, thanks to the Enquirer, believed Nixon to be gay and therefore refused to vote for him. No other reason other than the Enquirer claimed he was gay.

Now stop reading the gossip rags! lol

Edited September 13, 2020 by Silent Mistwalker

[Lancewae Barrowstone]

13 hours ago, Akane Nacht said:

is it possible to have original thought? 

It's not only absolutely possible, it is the definition of human evolution. 

Look, let me explain. Since the fullness of reality is beyond our limited senses, there are simply things we can never know about this sea of existence in which we live — then it’s axiomatic that we are truth-starved beings in a grand unknowable universe.  Just like the ants beneath our feet, hugely truth-starved beings just so, are we. 

Let junior gato run a quote search on those words. Hah. 

Being truth-starved, we seek.  Seeking we can find small trails. That's pretty cool, if you can find them. 

Edited September 13, 2020 by Lancewae Barrowstone
add

[Lancewae Barrowstone]

18 hours ago, Gatogateau said:

You probably think you're being droll.

It's plain my distinction evades you. 

Maybe your brain will learn to distinguish in more detail later on.  On second thought... meh, probably not. 

[Gatogateau]

31 minutes ago, Lancewae Barrowstone said:

more silly ad hominem 

 

Edited September 13, 2020 by Gatogateau

[Gatogateau]

13 hours ago, Akane Nacht said:

that's an interesting thought, though not original.

is it possible to have original thought? 

🤔

if so is it possible to express it in its full originality in language which is commonly understood yet nuanced by individual understanding?

I think, therefore

I'm confused..

This is why I like poetry. If you don't really understand what you just said you can simply call it Art.

(I'm being a purposefully pedantic feline just to be a brat...  )

First, you'd need to define "original." Then you might want to determine if you're in the Empiricist clan with Hume and Locke, or maybe align more closely with the Rationalists, like Kant. You might then say that an original thought would require having a synthetic a priori statement, according to the rationalist, but Hume and his ilk would say "not."

This is why I prefer Eastern philosophies.

and catnip  <-- which enhances the truism you noted, "I think, therefore I'm confused"

 

 

Edited September 13, 2020 by Gatogateau

[Gatogateau]

1 hour ago, Lancewae Barrowstone said:

Let junior gato run a quote search on those words. Hah. 

Just so that we can get the pesky truth out (see what I did there?): This oh-so-clever fella who seems to have had his Wheaties peed on, rather than comment upon anything of substance has just been pitching ad hominems at me. He called me teh stoopids for quoting Vaclav Havel's "Keep the company of those who seek the truth; and run from those who have found it."   Since it was used correctly and in context, I can only assume old Lance's distress is caused by my lack of attribution. My bad. I usually do cite the author on the rare event that I use a quote. I didn't use a quote search. Havel's statement is one I read many, many years, ago and it struck me as soon as I read it. I have kept it in various hard copy forms IRL. I try to live by it. That quote has been on/off my SL profile and Forum sig lines for about as long as I've been in SL. It is currently my main avatar's (Seicher Rae) sig line and has been for many months.

Why this person keeps harping on my use of a quote, any quote, is beyond me (I haz theories, that go back about a decade). 

I have zero effs to give about the grade-school taunting this person is doing, but since that quote has meaning for me, and has for a long time, I just want to state to the ozone that it wasn't a random quote, used randomly, or used randomly out of context.

(and why this post has defaulted to italics that won't revert to plain text is just another mystery of life)

 

Edited September 13, 2020 by Gatogateau

[Rowan Amore]

Some bullies use fists, others use words. Either way, same thing.  

[Gatogateau]

I can't believe this thread is up to nine pages! And despite the odd bit of sniping here and there, it has been fun. We've gone from silly & quipping (yay!), to music posts (yay!), to weirdly complaining that the author of the book was cited & that there was an author, and that the author was unoriginal, a PhD, and just a general poopy pants. Cool? We've discussed agape and Eastern philosophy, touched on religion, and pondered be vs do.

So, living in love? To revisit the OP, the last sentence, "You don’t have to gain evidence of success or find somebody mind-shatteringly wonderful in order to be able to live in love." Not being in love as in a romantic relationship, although that could be part of the expression. Is it divine? Can atheists practice it? Do they want to? Is it even possible, for anyone, to live totally in a state of love?  Can it be practiced, or is it just a manner of being? Can it just be a manner of being or does it have to be practiced?

Some people find themselves approaching a holiday season, a new year, a time of reflection, giving and seeking forgiveness, renewal... Is any of that applicable to living in love? 

Does living in love (if that is the goal) mean never arguing? Or does it require social justice, and acting to make changes? Does it mean you can't dislike someone, or can you dislike someone but with love?

Is this all just pointless mental masturbation?  

 

 

[Gatogateau]

8 minutes ago, RowanMinx said:

Some bullies use fists, others use words. Either way, same thing.  

Which is kind of ironic, but then again it is the Internet, in a thread about the topic of living in love.

And honestly, it is just shocking, shocking I tell you, that considering how cute and fuzzy and warm and purry this kitten is, that not everyone wants to scritch my chin!

[Rowan Amore]

4 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

Which is kind of ironic, but then again it is the Internet, in a thread about the topic of living in love.

And honestly, it is just shocking, shocking I tell you, that considering how cute and fuzzy and warm and purry this kitten is, that not everyone wants to scritch my chin!

Maybe they've had a bad experience with kitties or possibly an allergy.  Then entire thread was fun and interesting up until.......

[Gatogateau]

6 minutes ago, RowanMinx said:

Maybe they've had a bad experience with kitties or possibly an allergy.  Then entire thread was fun and interesting up until.......

/me hands out face masks! 

Thanks for the reminder of this distinct possibility.

I hope the thread continues to be fun, there's always got to be that one person, ya know? But it has been pretty grade-school annoyance, and I do so like to have something else to talk about with others that isn't a game or a music post (which are fine, not a dig at those, but variety is nice).

Edited September 13, 2020 by Gatogateau

[Lancewae Barrowstone]

44 minutes ago, RowanMinx said:

Some bullies use fists, others use words. Either way, same thing.  

Yes, and frankly, this thread portended its own "flame war" even predicting what on pages it should begin.  Then, it is suggested further on, with, "/me takes a long toke, passes it to someone else in the dorm room and settles down into the role of devil's advocate."   So, it's all fine, no real bullying going on here.  And yes, ad hominem reared it's face at, "...I roll my eyes at your superiority gig," from the OP.  Ok.  I'm game to play. 

Hope it wasn't too distracting. 

And btw, the purpose of the "comment search" suggestions was to buttress the fact that originality of expression (which stems from thought) is alive and well, and found everywhere.  Ok, not everywhere, maybe even hardly ANYwhere. But, oh well. 

Edited September 13, 2020 by Lancewae Barrowstone
add

[Madelaine McMasters]

On 9/12/2020 at 12:58 PM, Ceka Cianci said:

First is, I just don't lay claim to any religion or group or want to be focused in one area ever again.. It was really rough falling out of belief with Christianity, But that taught me a huge lesson in looking for similarities in other areas..It's also a huge reason why I'll never be a democrat or a republican or in just any political party.. They are always trying to blind us and keep us blinded.

I've probably been atheist since birth, though I was raised in a nominally Catholic household. Dad, ever the pragmatist, "converted" from Lutheranism to marry Mom. He sent me off to Catechism class with the admonition "Remember Maddy, Man makes God in his own image", after showing me countless images from around the world of Christian "Gods" who looked very different from each other, but very much like the people who created the images. Meanwhile, every Sunday on the way home from mass, Mom would say "I have no idea what the priest was talking about!"

I don't recall my parents ever quoting anything from the bible. Dad often quoted Confucius and sounded like a Buddhist. Mom simply lived by the Golden Rule.

Continued exposure to the Catholic church brought me to the conclusion that adults were telling fairytales to themselves, just as my family did when in our little puppet theater. There was a difference though. Our fairytales made sense and felt moral. The absurdity of our play was as intentional as the hypocrisy was satirical.

I went along to get along until college, when I found myself at a Saturday evening mass for students, during which the priest asked everyone to imagine they were "point sources of light". He then launched into something that sounded like Buddhism on weed. I got up in the middle of that mass and walked out. If he couldn't be bothered to stick to his own religion, why should I?

 

Edited September 13, 2020 by Madelaine McMasters

[Gatogateau]

34 minutes ago, Lancewae Barrowstone said:

Yes, and frankly, this thread portended its own "flame war" even predicting what on pages it should begin.  Then, it is suggested further on, with, "/me takes a long toke, passes it to someone else in the dorm room and settles down into the role of devil's advocate."   So, it's all fine, no real bullying going on here.  And yes, ad hominem reared it's face at, "...I roll my eyes at your superiority gig," from the OP.  Ok.  I'm game to play. 

Hope it wasn't too distracting. 

And btw, the purpose of the "comment search" suggestions was to buttress the fact that originality of expression (which stems from thought) is alive and well, and found everywhere.  Ok, not everywhere, maybe even hardly ANYwhere. But, oh well. 

Oh ffs. Yes, I *quipped* about the standard phases that threads go through on the Forum. That wasn't an injunction for you to do it! Pretty sure you're the only one who read it as anything other than a quip. Again, playing along with, quipping about the sitting around a dorm room, doing the stereotypical philosophizing? Seriously? You're quoting that. /me hands you a pinch of a sense of humo(u)r to get you going. Even if you don't find me adorably humorous, that doesn't stop one from being able to identify "light-hearted" when it hits you over the head.

Your writing "style" of obfuscating, turning a subject to a tangent while pretending to stay on topic, the personal attacks out of the blue, the purposefully quoting things out of context, rewriting (or trying to) history, and just your general trollishness here, would be mildly intriguing to figure out wtf your problem is or why your problem is, if I cared enough to give more than a passing glance of thought regarding it. Which I don't.

And, "mom! he started it!" :

Ok, enough of you. Whatever your deal is, continue to spew or don't. You don't need me to do it. It is patently obvious what is going on here. ZOMG you don't like me for some reason! :::sobs::: I'll live. Just another person to put on block and have my reading of the forum change not one iota because nothing of content will be omitted! hugs and kisses dude, it's all about love. ♥

[Lancewae Barrowstone]

Oddly, you didn't attempt to expand on my concepts, but rather to roll your eyes, label them, and then express frustration.  That's when anyone can see you are not serious about discussion.  You seem to want to pretend.  But that's ok.  I accept you.  I support you in your growth.  But don't think you fool anyone.  

[Gatogateau]

45 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Continued exposure to the Catholic church brought me to the conclusion that adults were telling fairytales to themselves, just as my family did when in our little puppet theater. There was a difference though. Our fairytales made sense and felt moral. The absurdity of our play was as intentional as the hypocrisy was satirical.

/me nods in recognition of your post, and I pulled this piece out because it is similar to my early experience.

I got kicked out of Sunday school when I was young because upon being told that "if you don't believe in Jesus you will go to hell" I asked why God would do that to all of the people who never had a chance to even hear about Jesus. It didn't make sense and it didn't feel moral, not that I would have used those terms then. I put it as "It isn't fair!" Never did get an answer. Church was never the same after that.

Religion never felt "right" to me (any religion). I've been avidly anti-religion for a long time. I'm "spiritual" always sounded like a weasel word cop out, and oddly, so did agnostic. I labelled myself "atheist" for a long time, but that didn't feel right either. I put together a hodgepodge of "what I believe" things together based on my own studies (much like other people have described as their own experiences here in this thread). I figured, no one really knows and we all find out if we guessed right when we die. Maybe.   Recent turns of events have seen me take yet another fork in the road.

Love = God, but God does not = a dude on a cloud, is gaining some traction. As they say on Facebook, my relationship to this whole notion of God/Love is "complicated" now.

I also don't think that Love (the "big" kind) requires religion, belief in any God, etc, and that your mother's way of living the Golden Rule is a lot more genuine of Love than a lot of hypocritical Bible thumpers and faux New Age love&peace types that just mouth the words. 

 

[Gatogateau]

10 minutes ago, Lancewae Barrowstone said:

Oddly, you didn't attempt to expand on my concepts, but rather to roll your eyes, label them, and then express frustration.  That's when anyone can see you are not serious about discussion.  You seem to want to pretend.  But that's ok.  I accept you.  I support you in your growth.  But don't think you fool anyone.  

I'm sorry I hurt your feelings so much, that you felt compelled to lash out.

It is clear I hit a nerve, and I'm sincerely apologetic that it affected you so.

Edited September 13, 2020 by Gatogateau

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 hour ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

If he couldn't be bothered to stick to his own religion, why should I?

Maybe he realized the Catholic way isn't the only way? Maybe he realized he could reach more people if he opened his mind more? but you're right. None of the organized religions can stick to their beliefs when it comes to themselves. Everyone else has to toe the line but they (not just Catholics) get forgiven every day. 

Screw that.

[Gatogateau]

10 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Maybe he realized the Catholic way isn't the only way? Maybe he realized he could reach more people if he opened his mind more? but you're right. None of the organized religions can stick to their beliefs when it comes to themselves. Everyone else has to toe the line but they (not just Catholics) get forgiven every day. 

Screw that.

/me nods

There are some religions, as a whole, and others with radical subgroups, that have a zero tolerance on anything that isn't from "their" teachings. Years ago in my business, I suggested to someone that they might enjoy yoga and it could help the muscular issue they were dealing with (this was in proper context of my training). I was informed that yoga, because it came from India, and Hindus, was a devil worship practice, etc. etc. I thought the person was going to require a bath in holy water by me just mentioning it.

Other religions are much more tolerant, and even suggest reading and learning from everywhere. Take what works and leave the rest. In those services it wouldn't be an issue, or unusual, for the sermon or teachings to be a mixture of philosophical ideas.

[Rowan Amore]

It's not always what is said but the obvious undertone with which it was said.  I've found that, often, when people use such a condescending tone, it hides a deep insecurity.  Using words to try to flaunt your perceived superiority is the internet version of kicking sand in someone's face.  Either way, it's rather sad.

Edited September 14, 2020 by RowanMinx

[Gatogateau]

2 minutes ago, RowanMinx said:

It's not always what is said but the obvious undertone with which it was said.  I've found that, often, when people use such a condescending tone, it hides a deep insecurity.  Using words to try and flaunt your perceived superiority is the internet version of kicking sand in someone's face.  Either way, it's rather sad.

I thanked you response emoji'd you for this, unless of course you are referring to my amazing elocution, my incredibly sharp insights, my actual (not perceived) superiority in all things... if you were referring to that I'd probably have to flounce.

 

[Rowan Amore]

6 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

I thanked you response emoji'd you for this, unless of course you are referring to my amazing elocution, my incredibly sharp insights, my actual (not perceived) superiority in all things... if you were referring to that I'd probably have to flounce.

 

Nope, it wasn't you.  I just decided not to quote certain people since seeing the words once was quite enough.  Plus, I love fluffy kitties. 

ETA..especially intellectually superior ones.  😀

Edited September 14, 2020 by RowanMinx

[Silent Mistwalker]

2 minutes ago, RowanMinx said:

Nope, it wasn't you.  I just decided not to quote certain people since seeing the words once was quite enough.  Plus, I love fluffy kitties. 

ETA..especially intellectually superior ones.  😀

Even the ones that spit fire.

Thankfully, she isn't an acid peeing faerie.

 

[Maryanne Solo]

Ponder/chew on these:
More 💩 =
Gored
Bored
Snored
Flawed
Oh Mai Gawd. 🙄

A puzzle -> 🤨 +🌴 = ?? 🤔

 

Edited September 14, 2020 by Maryanne Solo