Do you believe in God and why

[Sunmaster]

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

But you will defend what you believe to be true. 

Yes, I do enjoy having a good sparring match of ideas. 😉

[Tippaporn]

9 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

My eggs are not all in one basket, so to speak. I have sifted through many different sources in the past 30 years with the sole intent of validating and organizing my own experiences and thoughts. 

 

Is there a law against putting all of your eggs in one basket?  Or is it unwise? 

 

As I've stated many times on this thread:

 

Reality is what it is and functions as it does despite anyone's beliefs about what it is and how it functions.

-- Tippaporn

 

That is an original quote of mine so I'm not ashamed to take credit for it.  I'm actually quite proud of it. 

 

What we are and what reality is can be found scattered about in many baskets.  Or even in a single basket. 

[Tippaporn]

1 minute ago, Sunmaster said:

Yes, I do enjoy having a good sparring match of ideas. 😉

 

Oh, geez, Sunmaster.  Please don't interrupt me now as I'm trying to answer ALL of your unanswered questions.  I woke up extra early this morning to do just that. 

[Tippaporn]

9 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Accepting a single source or map is a double edged sword.

 

You are perceptive here, Sunmaster.  It certainly can be.  Be careful.  Very careful. 

[Tippaporn]

9 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

If the source is clear and has a proven track record of leading the seeker to the intended destination, then that's great. Hinduism and Buddhism have done that more than any other, I would argue.

 

I cannot find the passage but Seth had remarked once about westerners rejecting the western religion upon which they were raised and so went searching elsewhere  Only to settle on eastern religion as it appeared more exotic.

 

I'm not offering my opinion here, simply relaying one of Seth's sentiments.  But given that I agree that all religions contain distortions to varying degrees then I must say I can see his point. 

[Tippaporn]

9 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

You can contest that there is no destination, that we are just perfect the way we are. But are we?

 

Short answer?  Absolutely yes. 

[Tippaporn]

9 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

  Sorry, but I have limited time.  What's the old saying, "The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak."  Change that to, "The spirit is willing but the time is short." 
C'mon, this just seems like a cheap cop-out Tippa.  Sounds like something our atheist friends would say. 555

 

BTW, I'm sure you've noticed by now that I'm making separate posts for each of my answers.  Answering many questions and/or discussing many points in a single post makes the post lengths unbearable.

 

I can't believe I just said that!!!     

 

It's just dawned on me, too, that it's much more practical as now you can respond to individual points much easier and quicker.  I admit to feeling a great deal of resistance knowing that in order to reply to a lengthy post and cover all of it's questions and points would require me to sit for a good stretch of time and too often I don't have that huge block of time to commit.  Working it this way then if I don't have the required chunk of time available that I feel is necessary to produce a quality reply then I can break it up and reply to the extent that I have time available.  What's the old adage?  Divide and conquer! 

 

I credit you with bringing that inspiration to me this morning, Sunmaster.  Take a well deserved bow now.   

 

"Sounds like something our atheist friends would say.  555"

 

I cannot describe the feeling of utter contempt for the insult being heaped upon me by comparing me to an atheist. 

 

What's the "555" supposed to mean anyway? 

 

You know I'm having fun with you now.   

 

Anyway, no cop out.  As I mentioned above, I insist on always providing a quality reply.  My replies are often lengthy because I have much to say - too much to say.  And then there's the issue of time required for the quality reply I insist on.  Then sometimes I'll spend a day or two mulling over the great many thoughts which a particular post elicits.  I can't very well express them all and some aren't worthy of expressing after deeper thinking.  Sorry, but not sorry , that I give myself the time I need.

 

And yes, it also happens that the lapse in time between the post and my reply becomes so great that it just gets buried forever amongst pages of new chatter.

[Tippaporn]

10 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

My questions were:
 

To summarize:

1. The ego is the very "thing" that prevents opening up to a wider reality, because its very job is to concentrate your attention on a small part of reality. 

 

Yes and no.  Yes, if you consider the ego's current state of development, which hinges on your beliefs.  If your beliefs are that exploring inner reality is dangerous then you will command your ego to block any such explorations.  So then you turn around and blame the ego for preventing you from doing so.  It's only following your goddamned commands, fer Christ's sake. 

 

No, if you adopt much healthier beliefs which then allow your ego to function as it was meant to function.

 

Yes, the function of the ego is to be the outer most portion of your self which deals directly with the camouflage reality you happen to be in.  But it also has the function to receive communication from your inner ego.  It's your beliefs which cut off that two way communication.  The animals don't do that.    Or do you suppose they are without an ego?  They, too, have a portion of their self which deals most directly with outer reality.  But that is purely my supposition from a sensical point of view.  Just as people believe that animals are without souls then I would think people would see them without egos as well.

 

The point that I believe you're missing here, Sunmaster, is that the ego's function is to look inward as well as outward.  As Seth says, the ego sits on the window sill looking both outside and inside.  Perhaps I'm interpreting you wrongly here but you seem to think it's job is to only look outward.  Again, you create your reality using ideas.  A belief being an idea accepted as "true."  And so it is your beliefs which determine how well your ego functions.

 

If you have further questions then I can only repeat the same answer as above but perhaps endlessly reframing it. 

[Sunmaster]

42 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

BTW, I'm sure you've noticed by now that I'm making separate posts for each of my answers.  Answering many questions and/or discussing many points in a single post makes the post lengths unbearable.

 

I can't believe I just said that!!!     

 

It's just dawned on me, too, that it's much more practical as now you can respond to individual points much easier and quicker.  I admit to feeling a great deal of resistance knowing that in order to reply to a lengthy post and cover all of it's questions and points would require me to sit for a good stretch of time and too often I don't have that huge block of time to commit.  Working it this way then if I don't have the required chunk of time available that I feel is necessary to produce a quality reply then I can break it up and reply to the extent that I have time available.  What's the old adage?  Divide and conquer! 

 

I credit you with bringing that inspiration to me this morning, Sunmaster.  Take a well deserved bow now.   

 

"Sounds like something our atheist friends would say.  555"

 

I cannot describe the feeling of utter contempt for the insult being heaped upon me by comparing me to an atheist. 

 

What's the "555" supposed to mean anyway? 

 

You know I'm having fun with you now.   

 

Anyway, no cop out.  As I mentioned above, I insist on always providing a quality reply.  My replies are often lengthy because I have much to say - too much to say.  And then there's the issue of time required for the quality reply I insist on.  Then sometimes I'll spend a day or two mulling over the great many thoughts which a particular post elicits.  I can't very well express them all and some aren't worthy of expressing after deeper thinking.  Sorry, but not sorry , that I give myself the time I need.

 

And yes, it also happens that the lapse in time between the post and my reply becomes so great that it just gets buried forever amongst pages of new chatter.

I'll answer this first.

You must know by now that I thoroughly enjoy our conversations. I've told you many times. The lengthy replies don't bother me either as they are always interesting and well layed out. But yes, you're right. Answering them in only one post can be difficult and some points lose their strength among other points.

While meditating this morning I had this image in my head. You like to poke the bears, and so do I. Well, not exactly this pic, but AI is a bit thick this morning. In my mind they were poking each other.

Btw....not sure if you were joking about the 555? 5 in Thai is pronounced "ha". This is a common use to indicate laughter.

 

Actually, I should have written "atheist trolls", not just atheists. Big difference. 
Mea culpa....

Edited January 16 by Sunmaster

[Sunmaster]

I don't have any particular loyalty towards a specific religion or philosophy. My only allegiance is towards truth, in whatever way I can find it. Whatever works, works for me.

 

When I find 2 (seemingly) opposing truths, that tells me that there must be a "higher" truth that incorporates those 2 truths. So the next logical step is to transcend the confines of the 2 limited truths and find that truth which includes both. 

Take science and religion for example. Many people are stuck on one side or the other. The higher truth in this case can be called spirituality. It transcends and includes both points of view.

 

That's the only reason I ask so many questions. I'm not satisfied with "agree to disagree ". I want to know where the disagreement comes from.

[Tippaporn]

10 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

2. Does Free Will exist? Yes and no. It apparently exists within a paradigm bound by time and space, but since we know that this reality is only one reality within a bigger reality that is not bound by those restrictions, free will becomes just another illusion. In short, free will appears to be real when we look at it from inside the dream (this reality as seen from the ego perspective), but once you wake up, it disappears along with the dream.

 

Now here's an instance where a reply is not so easy and quick to make.  The question of free will is a simple one.  The answer, however, is deeply complex.  I'll pass for the time on a deeper answer and opt for an insufficient and unsatisfying simple answer.  Freedom is the basis of all existence.  The extent of free will, however, is dependent upon the system of reality in which you find yourself.  You cannot, for instance, regenerate a lost limb in this existence.  Your free will does in this reality, as in others, have it's boundaries.  You can, however, experience having that lost limb back in a dream.  Of course the rules there are different.

 

The main point, though, is, again, freedom is the basis of all existence.  And the short, short answer is that you are never without freedom, therefore you are never without free will.  All ideas to the contrary are distortions.  Whether you choose to not accept that then I would quote from the wisdom of "iIlusions:"  Argue for your limitations and they are yours. 

[Tippaporn]

16 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

I don't have any particular loyalty towards a specific religion or philosophy. My only allegiance is towards truth, in whatever way I can find it. Whatever works, works for me.

 

When I find 2 (seemingly) opposing truths, that tells me that there must be a "higher" truth that incorporates those 2 truths. So the next logical step is to transcend the confines of the 2 limited truths and find that truth which includes both. 

Take science and religion for example. Many people are stuck on one side or the other. The higher truth in this case can be called spirituality. It transcends and includes both points of view.

 

That's the only reason I ask so many questions. I'm not satisfied with "agree to disagree ". I want to know where the disagreement comes from.

 

Truth is a squirrely thing.  There can be more than one.  And oftentimes there is.  Most believe in only a single truth for everything. 

 

I can't help but using the word 'truth' when I speak or write about these things as it's the word that most use to frame things.  But rather I prefer my own quote:

 

Reality is what it is and functions as it does despite anyone's beliefs about what it is and how it functions.

-- Tippaporn

 

It provides a different framework for me.  It's not so much truth that I'm after as much as it is to know what is and how it works.  Hey, I'm a mechanical engineer/designer by trade so my interest extends to my profession in the most practical way.  Design something which does not comport with "how things work" and you've got one helluva disaster on your hands.  Boys can be girls and girls can be boys type of ideas just aren't gonna cut it. 

 

And quit interrupting me.  Do you want your answers or dontcha?   

 

Edited January 16 by Tippaporn

[Sunmaster]

4 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Truth is a squirrely thing.  There can be more than one.  And oftentimes there is.  Most believe in only a single truth for everything. 

 

I can't help but using the word 'truth' when I speak or write about these things as it's the word that most use to frame things.  But rather I prefer my own quote:

 

Reality is what it is and functions as it does despite anyone's beliefs about what it is and how it functions.

-- Tippaporn

 

It provides a different framework for me.  It's not so much truth that I'm after as much as it is to know what is and how it works.  Hey, I'm a mechanical engineer/designer by trade so my interest extends to my profession in the most practical way.  Design something which does not comport with "how things work" and you've got one helluva disaster on your hands.  Boys can be girls and girls can be boys type of ideas just aren't gonna cut it. 

 

And quit interrupting me.  Do you want your answers or dontcha?   

 

Yeah, but....

[Tippaporn]

11 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

3. A personal question. Do you practice any kind of meditation or have other ways to find the silence behind the thoughts?

 

Yes and no.  I don't meditate in the traditional eastern religion way.  Never sat in a Lotus position with my arms resting on my knees. hands upraised with index fingers and thumbs touching each other. 

 

But I do meditate on questions or finding solutions to problems.  But the method I use there in quieting my thoughts can be something a simple as petting a pussy cat or distracting my focus elsewhere for an interval. 

 

11 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

If yes, what happens when your thoughts quiet down?

 

I go to sleep.    It's funny but it's the honest to God truth. 

 

If the purpose of meditation is to connect with the rest of our self then I have to say I connect with the rest of my self often in daily life.  Information flows in both directions and I do receive that flow from my inner self often.  (My ego works GREAT!!  I luvs it!!  )  The thoughts are different and that's the tell for me.  But it's nothing special and it happens to everyone.  Have a problem?  The solution always comes from within.

 

There are multiple ways to connect with other portions of your self, and to different degrees.  I've had some rather intense experiences which weren't the result of meditation but were undeniably valid, intimate, and intensely strong connections.

 

Now I do understand what you're getting at, Sunmaster.  At least I think I do.    Which is to allow your consciousness to explore other realities, including your inner one, whilst maintaining your body here.  Consciousness is, after all, mobile.  Now at the risk of repeating myself, any such disassociation of your consciousness to connect or explore is for the purpose of enhancing your present, corporeal experience.  It is not for the purpose of escape.  I know you'll object to that statement and say, once again, that you're intention is not to escape this physical self.  But sometimes your writings don't seem to match up with that denial. 

 

On 1/14/2024 at 11:59 AM, Sunmaster said:

Buddhism and Hinduism propose a much simpler and practical "escape". A solution that can be implemented by everyone, at any time. One that has nothing to do with science and man-made machines, but revolves around the idea that everything in the universe is consciousness. Consciousness can not be destroyed or killed. It is the building block of all there is. It was there before the "Big Bang" and will be there after the universe implodes (that remains to be seen). It is outside of time, so even talking about before/after makes little sense.
The "escape" consists in realizing your true nature by going within. To follow your own consciousness to the root of all consciousness, thus making the circle of physical birth and death redundant. Being reborn again and again is only necessary as long as there is ignorance regarding your true identity. And once you know that identity, whether the material universe gets annihilated or not, becomes irrelevant.

 

I do note that you put 'escape' in quotation marks. 

 

". . . thus making the circle of physical birth and death redundant."

 

Now that doesn't appear to be a match to the purpose of this physical existence as I understand it to be.   

 

"Being reborn again and again is only necessary as long as there is ignorance regarding your true identity."

 

Is that all that physical existence is about?  Shedding your ignorance regarding your "true" identity and thereby making your physical existences redundant?  Here's where I see distortions.    Distortions regarding the very purpose of experiencing an existence in physical reality.

[Tippaporn]

Well, that's it, Fritz, for today.  My wife needs wants desires is looking for me at the moment.  I don't like to disappoint. 

 

Your turn. 

[Sunmaster]

6 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Yes and no.  I don't meditate in the traditional eastern religion way.  Never sat in a Lotus position with my arms resting on my knees. hands upraised with index fingers and thumbs touching each other. 

 

But I do meditate on questions or finding solutions to problems.  But the method I use there in quieting my thoughts can be something a simple as petting a pussy cat or distracting my focus elsewhere for an interval. 

 

 

I go to sleep.    It's funny but it's the honest to God truth. 

 

If the purpose of meditation is to connect with the rest of our self then I have to say I connect with the rest of my self often in daily life.  Information flows in both directions and I do receive that flow from my inner self often.  (My ego works GREAT!!  I luvs it!!  )  The thoughts are different and that's the tell for me.  But it's nothing special and it happens to everyone.  Have a problem?  The solution always comes from within.

 

There are multiple ways to connect with other portions of your self, and to different degrees.  I've had some rather intense experiences which weren't the result of meditation but were undeniably valid, intimate, and intensely strong connections.

 

Now I do understand what you're getting at, Sunmaster.  At least I think I do.    Which is to allow your consciousness to explore other realities, including your inner one, whilst maintaining your body here.  Consciousness is, after all, mobile.  Now at the risk of repeating myself, any such disassociation of your consciousness to connect or explore is for the purpose of enhancing your present, corporeal experience.  It is not for the purpose of escape.  I know you'll object to that statement and say, once again, that you're intention is not to escape this physical self.  But sometimes your writings don't seem to match up with that denial. 

 

 

I do note that you put 'escape' in quotation marks. 

 

". . . thus making the circle of physical birth and death redundant."

 

Now that doesn't appear to be a match to the purpose of this physical existence as I understand it to be.   

 

"Being reborn again and again is only necessary as long as there is ignorance regarding your true identity."

 

Is that all that physical existence is about?  Shedding your ignorance regarding your "true" identity and thereby making your physical existences redundant?  Here's where I see distortions.    Distortions regarding the very purpose of experiencing an existence in physical reality.

Great post Tippa. This gives me a lot of material. :-)
I will divide and conquer like you taught me. 

[Red Phoenix]

2 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

 

I cannot find the passage but Seth had remarked once about westerners rejecting the western religion upon which they were raised and so went searching elsewhere  Only to settle on eastern religion as it appeared more exotic.

 

I'm not offering my opinion here, simply relaying one of Seth's sentiments.  But given that I agree that all religions contain distortions to varying degrees then I must say I can see his point. 

~

Your post reminded me of this saying by Lao Tze -

"the way that can be spoken is not the true way"

That quote can be explained in many ways, but instead of trying to put its meaning in my owns word (or rather how I interpret it), I consulted the Brainly website, and the answer that came up addressed it in a far more eloquent way than what I would have written. 

 

> The meaning of this phrase is that the true nature of things cannot be fully captured or explained through words or language. It suggests that there is a deeper, more profound reality that lies beyond our ability to understand or express it through language. It highlights the limitations of human understanding and language and encourages us to seek a deeper understanding of the world beyond what we can see or hear.

 

This phrase is also interpreted as a reminder that language and concepts can only point to the true reality, they cannot capture it. It is a reminder that words and concepts are limited and that the world is full of mystery, and that it's important to avoid becoming too attached to ideas, concepts or words as they can limit one's understanding of the true reality. It suggests that true understanding comes from intuition and direct experience rather than through language or concepts.

 

= = =

 

Why this quote? 

Because all religions / teachings are by definition an imperfect way of trying to convey in words/writing what cannot be expressed in language. 

And so when choosing which Path (if any) to follow on your individual journey towards Truth, it is only natural that you will be attracted to that religion / teaching which is most aligned with you current level of consciousness.  For Tippa that's Seth, for Sunmaster it are the Hindu yogi's, sages and masters.  For me it's Gurdjieff and the Sufi sages.

Let me be clear > Imo there is no wrong or right Path, but it is the path that helps you on your journey which is the right one for you. And the closer you get to the Truth (or actual Reality as Tippa would say), the more you will recognize and appreciate the unspoken same undercurrent in all of these spiritual approaches.

 

Which finally brings me to the point that I wanted to make, that there is indeed - as Seth channeled - a tendency in Western seekers to search for truth 'far from home'.  With 'home' meaning their own cultural background. 

Every religion / teaching did emerge within a specific setting, i.e. the cultural traditions of the people they wanted to reach at that time using text/language fit and adapted for that specific setting in order to convey a glimpse of the Truth that cannot be expressed in words.

It is useful to remember that there is a rich Western esoteric tradition that is actually more fit to our cultural background than the 'exotic' Eastern religions and teachings that were established for people from a different age, time and tradition.

And this is no critique of Seekers that have chosen a non-Western teaching that coincides with their current spiritual needs, as I wrote higher: you have to be opportunistic on your journey and opt for that which helps you further. 

 

A touch of humor always helps, so here one of my favorite cartoons...

 

[Sunmaster]

43 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

~

Your post reminded me of this saying by Lao Tze -

"the way that can be spoken is not the true way"

That quote can be explained in many ways, but instead of trying to put its meaning in my owns word (or rather how I interpret it), I consulted the Brainly website, and the answer that came up addressed it in a far more eloquent way than what I would have written. 

 

> The meaning of this phrase is that the true nature of things cannot be fully captured or explained through words or language. It suggests that there is a deeper, more profound reality that lies beyond our ability to understand or express it through language. It highlights the limitations of human understanding and language and encourages us to seek a deeper understanding of the world beyond what we can see or hear.

 

This phrase is also interpreted as a reminder that language and concepts can only point to the true reality, they cannot capture it. It is a reminder that words and concepts are limited and that the world is full of mystery, and that it's important to avoid becoming too attached to ideas, concepts or words as they can limit one's understanding of the true reality. It suggests that true understanding comes from intuition and direct experience rather than through language or concepts.

 

= = =

 

Why this quote? 

Because all religions / teachings are by definition an imperfect way of trying to convey in words/writing what cannot be expressed in language. 

And so when choosing which Path (if any) to follow on your individual journey towards Truth, it is only natural that you will be attracted to that religion / teaching which is most aligned with you current level of consciousness.  For Tippa that's Seth, for Sunmaster it are the Hindu yogi's, sages and masters.  For me it's Gurdjieff and the Sufi sages.

Let me be clear > Imo there is no wrong or right Path, but it is the path that helps you on your journey which is the right one for you. And the closer you get to the Truth (or actual Reality as Tippa would say), the more you will recognize and appreciate the unspoken same undercurrent in all of these spiritual approaches.

 

Which finally brings me to the point that I wanted to make, that there is indeed - as Seth channeled - a tendency in Western seekers to search for truth 'far from home'.  With 'home' meaning their own cultural background. 

Every religion / teaching did emerge within a specific setting, i.e. the cultural traditions of the people they wanted to reach at that time using text/language fit and adapted for that specific setting in order to convey a glimpse of the Truth that cannot be expressed in words.

It is useful to remember that there is a rich Western esoteric tradition that is actually more fit to our cultural background than the 'exotic' Eastern religions and teachings that were established for people from a different age, time and tradition.

And this is no critique of Seekers that have chosen a non-Western teaching that coincides with their current spiritual needs, as I wrote higher: you have to be opportunistic on your journey and opt for that which helps you further. 

 

A touch of humor always helps, so here one of my favorite cartoons...

 

 

Absolutely spot on RP! Love it!

This especially: It suggests that true understanding comes from intuition and direct experience rather than through language or concepts.

And this core concept is not just a central point in eastern (exotic) philosophies/religions, but central in all spiritual paths, including Christian mysticism, Islam (Sufi) and Jewish Kabbalah.

And this is also my main point of contention. There can be no true understanding without direct experience. Knowledge on an intellectual level should only be there to translate direct experience, not replace it. 
Because of that I always point to the importance of daily practice. 

Here I can reply to @Tippaporn's answer to my 3rd question. Petting your cats, meditating on questions (=thinking), focusing elsewhere to find answers....are not the same as meditating. They are excellent ways to strengthen your connection within and trust your intuition, but they are still in the realm of the mind and the thoughts it produces. Meditation is a process where you aim not to follow any specific thought, so that the silence behind the thoughts moves to the foreground of your awareness. It is in that silence that lies the truth.
And while this practice is not just an eastern, exotic way to find truth, I think that Buddhism and Hinduism, having explored and refined it for 1000s of years, are experts in that field. 

Edited January 16 by Sunmaster

[Tippaporn]

1 hour ago, Sunmaster said:

You must know by now that I thoroughly enjoy our conversations. I've told you many times.

 

And I've never believed you. 

 

And you know that the feeling is mutual.    You've taken a different route than I have but I can say that you know you're sh!t. 

 

Now here's a fun suggestion.  To take our mutual appreciation to another, 'higher' level.  True friendship!  How to make that possible?  Well, one way is via humour.  I'll provide an example.

 

Long ago I had a truly great friend.  He was a humongous black fellow, about 6'2" [188 cm], built like a rock (an ex American football player - probably a fearsome linebacker) though he had put on some weight since his playing days, with a thick neck and trapezoids that ran right up to his skull.  He was given the very fitting nick, Bull.  But he was one of the most amiable and funny guys I have ever met.  Since I've always been a funny guy (they called me Smilely in high school) we hit it off perfectly.  We were like chocolate and vanilla ice cream. 

 

Now we both were disciples of the old and wise adage, "If you can't laugh at yourself then who can you laugh at."  And believe you me the barbs exchanged and the ribbing between us was constant.  I once came up to him and asked him straight faced, "Bull, what's better?  Being black or being gay?"  He gave a roll of his big black eyes, knowing I was setting him up, and dead panned, "Which?"  I laid the punchline on him, "Being black.  At least you don't have to tell your parents!"  He didn't even turn his head as he was working and just said, "F you, Tippers."  And we laughed and laughed.

 

One more fine story about me and Bull.  As I said, he was humongous and probably weighed in at 120+ kg.  I had a slim build but solid as I've always been athletic.  I was more than a few inches shorter than him.  Now Bull was a stamping press operator.  Metal stamping uses oil for lubrication.  That oil eventually makes it's way to the floor and so we used something of the equivalent to kitty litter to absorb the oil.

 

Anyway, one day I happened to be out at the press where Bull was running a job.  We were bullsh!tting (pun intended) as usual and I can't recall what led to me having the idea to challenge Bull.  I told him that I, being slim and shorter [61 kg], could pick him up off of his feet.  Bull and everyone had a good laugh but I meant I was serious.  So Bull takes me up on my challenge.  I wrap my arms around him and with the best heave I had in me I raised him up off the floor.  But, given his girth I had to bend backwards.  And I bent just a little bit too far.  To the point where I lost my balance and began to tip over, with my arms wrapped ever tighter around Bull's waist as that was the only thing I had to hang on to. 

 

I hit the floor flat with Bull's 120+ kg coming down right on top of me, and ground myself into the thin coating of kitty litter strewn all over the floor.  Once down he rolled over laughing and the whole factory was in an uproarious laughter, including myself.  For the rest of my time there I was never able to live it down. 

 

Anyway, as I see it the best way to alleviate any testiness about points we may disagree upon would be to remember 1) this ain't life or death therefore so what? and 2) "If you can't laugh at yourself then who can you laugh at."

 

So do you want to go first or do you want me to?  Since you're not around to answer (which means you lose ) then I'll take the first shot at ya.  "Your ego wants a divorce due to abuse and lack of sex and asked if it could stay with me for awhile until it finds someone who can appreciate it." 

 

Your turn.  Now don't hold back and hit as hard as you want.  Now if I can take 120+ kg bearing down on me then anything you could throw at me shouldn't be a problem.   

[Red Phoenix]

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

... Your turn.  Now don't hold back and hit as hard as you want.  Now if I can take 120+ kg bearing down on me then anything you could throw at me shouldn't be a problem.   

> Game - Seth - Match

[Tippaporn]

8 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

> Game - Seth - Match

Very, very clever, RP.  I like it.  I like it a lot.  What's the old adage?  "Laughter is the best medicine."   

[Tippaporn]

44 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

And this is also my main point of contention. There can be no true understanding without direct experience. Knowledge on an intellectual level should only be there to translate direct experience, not replace it. 
Because of that I always point to the importance of daily practice. 

 

Sounds like a lot of woo to me. 

[Sunmaster]

Challenge accepted! 
 

[Tippaporn]

24 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Sounds like a lot of woo to me. 

 

Come now, Sunmaster.  That was me telling you the equivalent of the "What's better, being black or being gay?" joke.  I'm ribbing you.  Poking fun.  Of course I don't think it's woo.  I'm purposely poking fun to say 1) none of this is life or death serious and 2) lighten up and have fun. 

 

I posted that anecdote to illustrate an ideal relationship I had with another in that we were so loose with each other that nothing between us was ever taken too seriously, though we did talk about serious issues.  But any disagreements we had over serious issues never even got close to producing heated arguments, with all of their accompanying ugly feelings.  Bull and I could talk about anything.  Anything at all and we would always maintain respect and love for each other.  (No, we weren't gay.)

 

Man, I would love to replicate that ideal again here. 

 

Edit:  Just saw your above post.  Hope I didn't jump the gun on the "sad" reaction to my quoted post.  You're game, Sunmaster?

 

Edited January 16 by Tippaporn

[Sunmaster]

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Come now, Sunmaster.  That was me telling you the equivalent of the "What's better, being black or being gay?" joke.  I'm ribbing you.  Poking fun.  Of course I don't think it's woo.  I'm purposely poking fun to say 1) none of this is life or death serious and 2) lighten up and have fun. 

 

I posted that anecdote to illustrate an ideal relationship I had with another in that we were so loose with each other that nothing between us was ever taken too seriously, though we did talk about serious issues.  But any disagreements we had over serious issues never even got close to producing heated arguments, with all of their accompanying ugly feelings.  Bull and I could talk about anything.  Anything at all and we would always maintain respect and love for each other.  (No, we weren't gay.)

 

Man, I would love to replicate that ideal again here. 

What makes you think I took it seriously??
I was laughing out loud and rubbing my Vulcan bear paws in anticipation!

[Tippaporn]

Just now, Sunmaster said:

What makes you think I took it seriously??
I was laughing out loud and rubbing my Vulcan bear paws in anticipation!

 

Okay, I jumped the gun as I posted before seeing your last post.  You posted before I was able to edit.  Reread for the edit.

 

But excellent.  Now we can have the benefit of discussing what's near and dear to both of us and rather than walking on egg shells over disagreements we can have some real fun while we're at it, too. 

[Tippaporn]

Quite a post by RP, though!  As if he were refereeing.  He did throw me a red card, the bastard.  

[Sunmaster]

3 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Okay, I jumped the gun as I posted before seeing your last post.  You posted before I was able to edit.  Reread for the edit.

 

But excellent.  Now we can have the benefit of discussing what's near and dear to both of us and rather than walking on egg shells over disagreements we can have some real fun while we're at it, too. 

It was a pretend sad face. 
Vulcans can not be sad...

Edited January 16 by Sunmaster

[Tippaporn]

Just now, Sunmaster said:

It was a pretend sad face. 

 

Aha!  Feigning seriousness to fool me.  Well, it worked.  Good on you! 

[Tippaporn]

BTW, RP let me know elsewhere that he's a bit busy now so not around much.