GENIUS FORUMS

Here are the:

Popular definition:
A bachelor is an unmarried man.
An unmarried man or woman may be in a close, egotistical relationship, so they are actually married.


Wise definition:
A bachelor is a complete individual, with a deep and living relationship to the Infinite, so has no need of love, and feels no loneliness or emotional attraction to things or people.




Best examples of wise bachelors that I know of:

Soren Kierkegaard
Attempted to satisfy his need for love by becoming engaged to Regina Olsen, but gave it up because of his extreme and incredibly inspiring commitment to the primitive Christianity.

Hakuin Ekaku
As a young priest, was accused of fathering a child, so he looked after the baby, until later cleared by the guilty young mother. Lived on the Buddhist system of patronage and tutelage, so had many interpersonal interactions with all types of people. Driven by a deep loyalty to teaching people to see their true, original nature.

Diogenes
Perhaps continued to have sex with prostitutes, but showed no emotional attachment to sex or people. Lived freely, openly pointing out anything strikingly foolish. Uncompromisingly willing for quite a few disciples to abandon him.

Jesus
Had a band of twelve mates/disciples, only one of which had much insight into his ideas about the Kingdom of Heaven. Publicly disowned his biological family (mother and brothers), claiming familiarity with any person who understood Him (his real parentage). A female disciple may have been emotionally attached to him. Openly declared himself as a Son of God, to the murderous outrage of the locals.

Socrates
Married, and had young children in his seventies. Paid little attention to his family, spent most of his mature life conspicuously examining the "knowledgeable men" in his locale. Committed to truth, and didn't shy away from sacrificing his family and leaving them without provision, when choosing to accept the death penalty rather than do a scarper.

Nietzsche
Proposed to a few women. I suspect he used their rejections to test his venture into solitude, because Woman represented a still impure conception of Nature. His love of intense psychological self-examination may have warred with preparing for the Superman in a relaxed and realistic way. At any rate, his enthusiastic dedication to expressing the Godless and Anti-Christian way has left us with quality literature.

Chuang Tzu
Married, but had no grief on his wife's death. Found beating a drum and singing, instead of mourning. Ideas on married life go quiet in regards to emotional attachment, as if it is something like a hump-back that one simply accepts the deformity of. Probably would have accepted IVF with the same equanimity.

Kevin Solway
De facto marriage, with two children, and lives in a different state to his adopted family. Has no qualms about discussing the hell of living in a marriage type relationship. One of the most absolutely grounded, natural thinkers in the history of the human race. Claims to have stopped flirting four years ago.

David Quinn
De facto marriage, with one child, and lives in a different house to his biological family. Very matter-of-fact towards the nature of Woman, and the importance of breaking free from Her spell. His wife, Sue Hindmarsh, is perhaps the first female thinker, so their child may be the first to have had two fathers. Dedication to awakening as many people as possible to the Infinite is one of the best examples of patience I've encountered.



That'll do for now. List is open to discussion and addition.

Feel no loneliness huh....AHAHAH don't be so foolish. Yes we may break from the opposite sex's spell whether we're men or women, but many times we still feel alone and wanting to enlighten a partner or lover. I think you're taking this asceticism thing a bit too far. If you look at the list, you'll realize that all these male thinkers, still had lots to do with women whether it be low success (nietzsche) or foolishness(socrates) or never dropping lust (diogenes). If you're going to love Nature, then you will come to understand your relation with the opposite sex as well.

No need for love......AHAHAH it's probably a biological imperative that we have a need for love, not that there's anything wrong with it.

Wow, first we say women can become men, and now bachelors can be married (as long as they're wise).

What's next, a conscious two and a conscious two don't necessarily make four? As it is, Kevin Solway will have to think of a new example illustrating truth by definition, i.e. "All bachelors are unmarried."

Kelly, couldn't we keep calling them wise people or sages? I mean, what happens when you and Sue graduate to the list, you'll also be wise bachelors?

I guess they'll be men without dicks. Similar to eunuchs.

Elizabeth wrote:Wow, first we say women can become men, and now bachelors can be married (as long as they're wise).

No, I should have made that clearer. An egotistical relationship can be called "marriage" or "a defacto relationship" or whatever we like.

I described Kevin's and David's relationships as defacto marriages, but really, neither of them are engaged in an egotistical relationship. Or at least, there's very little of that in evidence.

Kelly, couldn't we keep calling them wise people or sages?

You do whatever you think best.

As I see it, one's relationships are quite a litmus test, for how much ego one has. To interact with people, and not reciprocate emotionally, can show a deep identification with the emptiness of all things.

So, it is quite right to use bachelor to mean an orientation to Reality, or at least dedication to becoming oriented.

I mean, what happens when you and Sue graduate to the list, you'll also be wise bachelors?

No, just bachelors.

Graduation is a good word to choose.

You see, it hasn't anything to do with one's biological sex or physiological. It has all to do with one's character, the extent to which one is an individual.

The list isn't anywhere near complete....


-

Faust13 wrote:If you look at the list, you'll realize that all these male thinkers, still had lots to do with women whether it be low success (nietzsche) or foolishness(socrates) or never dropping lust (diogenes). If you're going to love Nature, then you will come to understand your relation with the opposite sex as well.

A thinker always has "lots to do" with women, because that's his job description. Who else can become a man, but what isn't?

Relating to the opposite sex as a manifestation of Nature completely precludes love (need) for it.

Loving Nature means knowing everything lacks intrinsic existence. Loneliness comes from believing that things really can be lost or gained, so there's no love of Nature in loneliness.


-

Click here for my gallery of bachelors.

I've added Arthur Schopenhauer, because of his determined aim to uncover the nature of Woman.

So I am extending the definition of Bachelor, to include all individuals who make a sustained effort to analyse and break the spell cast by Sweet Loving Woman. That's enough to get onto the bottom rung.

There are quite a few more that we can stick in, now. Like, Dave Sims, Matheolus, Esther Vilar, Rich Zubaty, Oscar Wilde, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Jonathan Swift, Sigmund Freud, and that guy who created the "Woman are Retards" video.

-

I remember Esther Vilar. I read her book back in the 70s. Is she still around?

Kevin placed a link on Vilar's entry in Wikipedia, to his more personal site about Vilar. It contains some quotes from "The Manipulated Man". Click here.

It was reprinted in 1998.

-

The gallery is updated, though I think some more explanation is necessary.

For instance, I included Dostoevksy because of his insights about feminine psychology, and somewhat because his main characters struggle to come to grips with why they feel compelled to let love manipulate their reasoning powers, although they rarely succeed. For instance, The Idiot who tries to help a crazy prostitute type, but ends up becoming insane because of his attempts; the religious maniac in Crime and Punishment, who is like karma that dogs him into exile; his bitter struggle to communicate why he suffers to a gullible and desperate prostitute in Letters from the Underground; and the folly of rivalry within Brothers Karamazov.

Jonathan Swift's description of married life back among the Yahoos is enough to get him an entry.

Undecided yet about Sigmund Freud.

-

Kelly,

Kevin placed a link on Vilar's entry in Wikipedia, to his more personal site about Vilar. It contains some quotes from "The Manipulated Man". Click here.

Awesome, Kelly. Thanks.

It was reprinted in 1998.

Really? Had no idea.

.

Good list. (I thought Jesus was cryptic about his 'real parents,' saying he was "Son of Man," not 'God.' Anyway, he'd had relations with women, but his boy-teen years are missing from documents.)

I like Rembrants painting of Jesus. I guess it is much more realistic than the one's I saw when being bought up as a Catholic child.

Nordicvs wrote:Good list. (I thought Jesus was cryptic about his 'real parents,' saying he was "Son of Man," not 'God.'

According to Thomas, he said he was not born of woman, which is right. He also said who his true "mother" was:

"Whoever does not hate his Father & Mother as I do cannot become a disciple to me. And whoever cannot love his Father & His Mother as I do cannot become a disciple to me. For my mother gave me falsehood, but my true mother gave me Life." Thomas: 101


And that his Father was Reality (If you see my Father, then you see me):

"Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. John 5: 19

Anyway, he'd had relations with women, but his boy-teen years are missing from documents.)

There's no doubt he had relations with women.

But what sort are you referring to?

-

Kelly Jones wrote: According to Thomas, he said he was not born of woman, which is right. He also said who his true "mother" was:

"Whoever does not hate his Father & Mother as I do cannot become a disciple to me. And whoever cannot love his Father & His Mother as I do cannot become a disciple to me. For my mother gave me falsehood, but my true mother gave me Life." Thomas: 101

And that his Father was Reality (If you see my Father, then you see me):

"Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. John 5: 19

Right. Haven't read the New Testament for a while, forgot that last bit from John.

There's no doubt he had relations with women.

But what sort are you referring to?

-

The hunka-chunka sort. Marriage? Maybe...he's what? Thirty when his real life starts, so who knows...

Nordicus wrote:The hunka-chunka sort. Marriage? Maybe...he's what? Thirty when his real life starts, so who knows...

I doubt it strongly.

Remember that he was known in his area, as the Nazarene. To have attracted a set of young blokes as disciples, is serious business. Twelve blokes don't drop their livelihoods (fishermen, a physician, and suchlike) to spend time with a run-of-the-mill local married bloke, even if he is smart, friendly, and a good carpenter.

Also, to have attracted so much attention as a healer, and as a kind of loner wise man, merely through word of mouth, he would definitely have entered the spiritual path as a youth.

The parables he used demonstrate the kind of familiarity with nature that a walker has. He was a roamer, liked spending a lot of time by himself.

-

Kelly Jones wrote: even if he is smart, friendly, and a good carpenter.

Don't you think that Jesus wouldn't be just a good carpenter, but he would have totally mindblowing insane carpentry skillz?

I mean, the other carpenters can barely bang out a cross, if they put their mind to it, and here's Jesus busting out this sweet credenza all with nice inlay work and filigree and so on.

I mean, the dude could change water into wine, for fuck's sake, and he was totally an amateur at winemaking. He could raise the dead. Imagine what he could do with a nice piece of mahogany.

And when Satan is tempting Christ in the desert, he's offering Jesus this just unbelievable burled big leaf maple, totally unknown in that part of the world. Satan going, "Dude, look at that grain! Come on!"

But Jesus is strong. "Nay, verily, not even for that. For this is as dross, compared with my Father's heavenly lumber."

Because Jesus hasn't just seen the wood from the original tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil from the Garden of Eden; his desk is made out of it. He knows wood. His Dad invented wood.

You've been thinking about this, haven't ya? What have you made lately?

I was doing a little woodworking on Saturday, actually, but that doesn't mean I'm a Christian or anything. (I routed out a space in a guitar body to mount a pickup.)

I was just kind of riffing on a passing thought.

Riff away, my man. That was hilarious.

Kelly Jones wrote:Click here for my gallery of bachelors.

I've added Arthur Schopenhauer, because of his determined aim to uncover the nature of Woman.

So I am extending the definition of Bachelor, to include all individuals who make a sustained effort to analyse and break the spell cast by Sweet Loving Woman. That's enough to get onto the bottom rung.

There are quite a few more that we can stick in, now. Like, Dave Sims, Matheolus, Esther Vilar, Rich Zubaty, Oscar Wilde, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Jonathan Swift, Sigmund Freud, and that guy who created the "Woman are Retards" video.

-

oscar wilde married, but then he did regret it I think. Socrates married, and he didn't really regret it. Kelly, what about two-income marriages, is economics your only objection to marriage? do you think that all married women are irresponsible and don't pull their own weight?

[quote="Kelly Jones]A thinker always has "lots to do" with women, because that's his job description. Who else can become a man, but what isn't?[/quote]

what?

Relating to the opposite sex as a manifestation of Nature completely precludes love (need) for it.

What? because the opposite sex is a manifestation of nature, love/lust is a biological imperative.

Loving Nature means knowing everything lacks intrinsic existence. Loneliness comes from believing that things really can be lost or gained, so there's no love of Nature in loneliness.

just because nothing inherently exists, doesn't mean you can't lose something. What about monkeys? they need love, and so do other social animals.

Faust13 wrote:oscar wilde married, but then he did regret it I think. Socrates married, and he didn't really regret it. Kelly, what about two-income marriages, is economics your only objection to marriage? do you think that all married women are irresponsible and don't pull their own weight?

You've missed the point completely.

I explained my definition of bachelor in a post to Elizabeth. For your convenience: a bachelor cannot rationally justify engaging in an egotistical relationship.

Faust13 wrote:KJ: A thinker always has "lots to do" with women, because that's his job description. Who else can become a man, but what isn't?

F: what?

A bachelor can't ignore the correlation between brain and character. He can't see any point to being illogical, nor any point for "womanly" behaviour. Namely, being illogical and pointlessly silly.

Since he can't see any point for "woman", he naturally steers others away from "her" mentality.

KJ: Relating to the opposite sex as a manifestation of Nature completely precludes love (need) for it.

F: What? because the opposite sex is a manifestation of nature, love/lust is a biological imperative.

The reason love and lust is dismissed as illogical by the bachelor, is because he understands Nature to be completely perfect, and needing nothing.

How then could he desire, when things don't intrinsically exist?

How could he be bored with Nature, since Nature has never come into existence?

KJ: Loving Nature means knowing everything lacks intrinsic existence. Loneliness comes from believing that things really can be lost or gained, so there's no love of Nature in loneliness.

F: just because nothing inherently exists, doesn't mean you can't lose something. What about monkeys? they need love, and so do other social animals.

Have you never thought about the relationship between needing love and fear for one's survival?

What exactly is this self, that you think can die? Isn't it inseparable from everything else?



-

Kelly,


If you're talking about ego, may i tell you that it is impossible to get rid of it. And, egoism is only rational when the person accepts his non-freewill but is grateful to nature for endowing him with good qualities. Couldn't a relationship be used for enlightening your partner?

Not all relationships are 'pointless and silly' ie enlightenment purposes, common intellectual/artistic interests? I know that most relationshps look 'silly' or womanly, but perhaps you can influence a woman to not be those things, and instead to be a real adult. I recommend everyone to go to this site, http://www.heartlessbitches.com then you'll see where i'm coming from.

People desire love it's biological isin't it? once again you don't need something to intrinsically exist to desire it. Nature has never come into existence????

Just because my physical body is inseperable from everything else, i would consider everyone to be spiritually alone in the universe. individually we are literally standing alone, but nature apparently made us to be social animals.

Faust13 wrote:If you're talking about ego, may i tell you that it is impossible to get rid of it.

If you like.

It seems a bit of a waste of time, though.

egoism is only rational when the person accepts his non-freewill

I don't accept that freewill is other than an illusion, yet egoism is not rational to me.

but is grateful to nature for endowing him with good qualities.

Where there is egoism, there are no good qualities.

Couldn't a relationship be used for enlightening your partner?

No. An egotistical relationship is by its nature strengthening to the ego.

Not all relationships are 'pointless and silly' ie enlightenment purposes, common intellectual/artistic interests?

If two people are in an egotistical relationship, and both aim to become Buddhas, then they will place freedom of thinking above the egotistical relationship, and the latter will transform into a relationship between two people who have no love for each other. In other words, it will die from lack of desire.

I know that most relationshps look 'silly' or womanly, but perhaps you can influence a woman to not be those things, and instead to be a real adult.

If your aim is to help everyone become perfectly enlightened, then the best thing you can do, is encourage them to be highly logical thinkers and to love truth with all their heart, soul and mind.

I recommend everyone to go to this site, http://www.heartlessbitches.com then you'll see where i'm coming from.

I find it dissatisfactory. It is as if the author/s had a realisation that a female can fix her own toilet, and be generally independent, but then backed quickly away from the ramifications of this.

The site is generally overwhelmed by flaunting sexuality, in quite a sadistic way. For instance, egging on a sexually aroused male until he departs in self-hatred, is run-of-the-mill female behaviour. The aim is to present herself as "alpha breeder".

Urging other women to join the club is clearly a sign of sexual competitiveness. A true individual never joins a group.

People desire love it's biological isin't it? once again you don't need something to intrinsically exist to desire it.

Love hides Nature. Nature creates love, but that doesn't mean love is wise.

Nature has never come into existence????

Because Nature is not a finite thing that can start and stop.

Just because my physical body is inseperable from everything else, i would consider everyone to be spiritually alone in the universe.

You'll need to provide some definitions for these terms, and an explanation.

individually we are literally standing alone, but nature apparently made us to be social animals.

Nature has made me to be an anti-social human.



-

Kelly Jones wrote:
I doubt it strongly.

I don't; according to dogma, he was put on Earth to experience life as a mortal man, to sweat and dream and puke and work and get constipation and all the rest, and that always includes women, sooner or later, in some way, and almost always in the hunka-chunka sense. If the dogma was wrong, then he was a normal dude who went through life (up until his 'real life') and experienced it as other men did.

(Again, there's no way to know for sure, and we're left to deduce and speculate---since all that was taken off the record. Why? Why would Christians remove his earlier life? What possible reason would girly prudes do this if not for the fact that he had either been married or slept around a bit? Makes no sense otherwise: they were polishing his 'divinity'---if he'd been a virgin his whole life, it would have definitely been left in by Christians.)

Kelly Jones wrote:Remember that he was known in his area, as the Nazarene.

Yes, later---not in his teens or early twenties. Seems to me that they (Christian priests) carefully groomed Jesus in the holiest possible manner, and so obviously omitting girlfriends or a possible ex-wife would be prudent to maintain his immaculate status.

Kelly Jones wrote: To have attracted a set of young blokes as disciples, is serious business. Twelve blokes don't drop their livelihoods (fishermen, a physician, and suchlike) to spend time with a run-of-the-mill local married bloke, even if he is smart, friendly, and a good carpenter.

No, no, I'm not saying he was married at that time---I'm saying it's plausible he might have been earlier in his life (he seems to have figured out women to some extent---he got that from somewhere, someone; if he was truly wise, it would be experience that taught him, not second-hand info, even from his 'father'). If not, he definitely had other kinds of relationships.

Kelly Jones wrote: Also, to have attracted so much attention as a healer, and as a kind of loner wise man, merely through word of mouth, he would definitely have entered the spiritual path as a youth.

The parables he used demonstrate the kind of familiarity with nature that a walker has. He was a roamer, liked spending a lot of time by himself.
-

I'm not disagreeing with that---yet there is no way to experience a life as a man on this planet without having some sort of relationship with at least one female; Jesus would be thick-as-a-brick regarding women otherwise, but he wasn't. He knew quite a few things he could not have learned except through experience...