…I realize I did not prohibit you from posting my letter, but your editing of same does not encourage me to send more to you. Such is life. I hold no bad feelings towards you for your “editing sin”, especially since you at least did not swear at me as you did in your first derisive note to me, so long ago. My Best Wishes & Prayers For Your Growth In The True Parents’ Love.
Take a joke mannnnnn. Do you realize I think your logic is as skewed as you think my spirit is bitter?
And it’s too long to publish, and I’m too lazy to go find his email, so here’s a portion.
Huh? So the “me” who’s typing this is a figment? I beg your pardon! If I were a figment, I could not type this! No, grass-hoper, the DP-truth is deeper, oh………. so very much, astronomically deeper, including a “Restoration Formula” if YOU will, (i.e. the YOU that is NOT a figment). Whatever “peterreyes” is smoking, he does have a kernel of “Truth” in his “thought”. That kernel, is that much of what we believe to be “OurSelf” is not “Self”, but is actually what we were TAUGHT, (by persons, but mostly by circumstances), as we grew up. Much of that “Self”, (i.e. our “conclusions” from being TAUGHT), will be found to be INCORRECT, if I start huffing jenkem etc.
How incredibly arrogant, you really have no idea on the context of that post. Peter, I imagine, might have had the thought through his meditation, he can correct me or elaborate if he sees this. I had pretty much come to the same conclusion after a period of soaking up all the theoretical physics I could find, and then analyzing and experiencing what I found during times of softened ego-states, or simply psychedelic trips, due to a more imaginative and free thought process.
Here is where I finally checkmate you sir, your overreaching claims are your weakness. If somebody claims to know the absolute truth they MUST be open, nonjudgmental, and innocent when faced with new ideas. They MUST fully consider any possibility they have not thought of themselves, for if they truly had the absolute truth, then they would have had to consider all possibilities for the truth to win over, and that absolute truth must be superior to different ideas and this must be demonstrated by the truther through a full analysis. Your casual sweeping remarks on an idea that you clearly know not the context of, shows you do not have the absolute truth. If there were an absolute truth, I believe it would include the above in a clause somewhere and I think that can be agreed by anyone who’s been pulled by different worldviews. Notice how I used the words “I believe” because I do not claim to know the absolute truth.
It is impossible to simply know that you are right over anything else that you haven’t heard of, case in point there are millions of people all over the world with hundreds (thousands?) of worldviews that differ radically from yours, yet they each KNOW that they are right and that everyone who thinks differently is wrong. They all can’t be right, and most likely they are all wrong because they all will not consider that they are wrong.
What we call “self” is a construct of the mind. It’s composed of the same stuff as the random thoughts that constantly come and go. The self is nothing but a memory in a collection of memories, a product of elctro-chemical reactions that serve a biological purpose. It is, in short, a figment of our imagination; a persistent and recurring dream.
Truth, I understand it now.
Pretty funny question coming from somebody who hides behind anonymity.
I like a lot of tldr posts that seem interesting as bookmarks to read them later when I don’t feel like hard reading on tumblr.
All of the above.
Ralph Waldo Emerson (via oceanofmind)
Sometimes that’s the only way I can learn about the world.
We are but symbols or ideas represented by the sum of our parts, and we only know our parts by the symbols that we’ve created for them. We love ideas, we buy symbols, we want to be described by symbols, we want to be identified by ideas. But we instantaneously assume our importance and value out of ego. We may be “real beings” but our definition of real is unaware of how little we know about our parts, our atoms. With what little I know about the true nature of mass, matter and existence, at this point it makes sense that a person is just an idea as much as an atom is. A person is just a more complicated idea. After thinking about that I wonder if that means our ideas, fantasies, and thoughts actually exist to same degree.
It’s tumblr official now. I had what was hopefully my last turkey on thanksgiving. I love the taste of meat but food isn’t all about taste.