GENIUS FORUMS

Tomas wrote:

David Quinn wrote:In modern speak, doesn't tool mean "loser" ....?

Define "modern speak".

What kids say.

-

David Quinn wrote:

Tomas wrote:

David Quinn wrote:In modern speak, doesn't tool mean "loser" ....?

Define "modern speak".

What kids say.

-

I suppose 'what kids say' is an acronym for kissaki?

Taking that kissaki is probably a 20-something and hasn't been anywhere much around this planet...


-Complete Tool-
He has found the way to sort communications clutter. A way to discriminate among messages, handle the quantity of communications, and compensate for the blah-bla, so on and so forth.

Need more, David?

We've all seen them. We know they're out there. You are probably one of them. Tools. You know.. that guy.


.

dejavu,

If my summary of your stance is incorrect then correct it and restate it. This is an internet forum, words are really your only representation. Why not share your words in a clear manner instead of simply hiding in their fog.

Tomas,

Indeed, I am 27 years of age. And this counts against me because ...? What does my age or the fact that I haven't been to all the exotic locales you've visited betray? I've visited this board for many years, at least 6, so I've read quite a number of your posts. I think it's clear you exalt new experiences and personal connections with others.

If I am but a young punk then simply crush me out of existence. Why the mercy act? After all, that's what I came here for: annihilation.

David Quinn wrote:It's early days, but kissaki might well have a bit of spark in him. There are not many people who can drive to the heart of a matter with simplicity and clarity, and be roundly abused by others because of it.

Just because he swallowed your philosophy in whole?

dejavu wrote: Yes, existence is inherent, and the universe is self-caused.

But is motion your proof of this? Any particular thing in existence is always composed of more things, so any self is nothing more than a temporary appearance. Your entire statement seems simply a complicated way of saying, "Appearances exist." Yes, that is known, but it doesn't challenge the constructions a person builds around appearances. In fact, I think it's more likely to comfort a deluded person than the phrase, "Existence is non-inherent." Non-inherent brings to mind destruction, death, the end -- all the things a person normally recoils away from.

dejavu wrote: As for discovering how these realities constitute what you call my 'stance' you may continue as you please to rummage through such rubbish as 'motionless engagement'.

The word stance simply denotes your particular statement. So how do you describe it? All those inherent self-caused appearances, but the word stance is somehow a no-no.

Motionless engagement is precisely what describes your phrase: It points out the obvious and leads nowhere.

dejavu wrote: Perhaps you could even wax lyrical on the nature of 'Ultimate Reality'. Since you say you are here for annihilation, it matters little whether you understand just how clear I can be.

It matters are great deal for me to understand how clear you can be. Any delusion on my part is reflected in others.

dejavu wrote:

Woman defines her existence around an act she never performs.

It is fit that you should be mocked for statements like this.

Because? What or who has been offended causing you to charge in and defend, well, something apparently?

The spirit of this board is to engage and challenge. You go out of your way to provoke scorpions into battle and then refuse to follow through because your statements are so obvious and need no explanation, with an added drop of smug high-nosed attitude to boot. Yes, you are coming through quite clear.

maestro wrote:

David Quinn wrote:It's early days, but kissaki might well have a bit of spark in him. There are not many people who can drive to the heart of a matter with simplicity and clarity, and be roundly abused by others because of it.

Just because he swallowed your philosophy in whole?

More because he has a genuine inkling of what philosophy is. Which is rare.

Admittedly, he's still immature and rough. But I like his spirit.

-

There are places in existence now that are very much like what i imagine the 1950's to have been like, and they are significantly more feminine than places that are 2008. So maybe there is an upwards movement in consciousness. In those places women run the show, and they make sure the men are uneducated, physical slaves that they drive till they literally break. They hate male intelligence, although it gives them sexual rushes. They also have sexual rushes when money and new material objects are talked about. The men have almost no consciousness, it's amazing, you can't even have a brief conversation with one.

As one would expect, the women are holding onto the past and rejecting the future, which, to their chagrin, will result in the slow demise of the culture, because people don't move to them. People will always move out of places, so unless they have a high birthrate (the women in those places try), they need to attract outsiders to survive, and they don't.

I think movement towards women being self-supporting money makers is good, and it leaves more scope for males to actually become men.

Rhett wrote:I think movement towards women being self-supporting money makers is good, and it leaves more scope for males to actually become men.

Yes, and men becoming men is probably the only practical first step to women becoming more than children. Women will probably never grow up so long as men support and reinforce the status quo there.

dejavu wrote: We are not speaking of any particular thing in existence, but existence itself. Take motion as proof, take infinity, it doesn't matter. Don't try and twist out of this. Your phrase "Existence is non-inherent" is a lie. Admit it.

Inherent means inseparable. To say, 'Existence is inherent', is to say 'existence is inseparable,' yet if we take your explanation that you are talking about existence itself, the phrase becomes, 'existence itself is inseparable,' which might as well be 'infinity is inseparable.' The subtle implication in it is that there could possibly be something for infinity to separate from. No, it can't because infinity refers to all constructions. Using inherent is redundant at best and useless at worst, so I make one further simplification and the true nature of the phrase is revealed, 'infinity is.' That's it.

To say, 'Existence is non-inherent' is to say 'Existence is separable.' Clearly this is indeed true and not a lie as things have always shown themselves to be composed of more things. This immediately triggers the mind's category creating mechanism. The phrase leads to the ten thousand things and suddenly I find myself without a clear starting or ending point as to the nature of existence. I am now forced to deal with all the unpleasant causes in any particular thing and the fact that any particular cause I decide to rest in is completely arbitrary. So, which particular things shall I value?

dejavu wrote: Should it lead anywhere? Your phrase leads to it, because there's no truth in your phrase but the fact that it is a phrase.

I think phrases should lead somewhere for the purpose of determining the nature of reality. The non-inherent phrase leads to more thinking as I demonstrated above. The inherent phrase simply stops before there is any chance of gathering insights.

dejavu wrote: Romance. What battle? I crush you and your 'sting' as easily as I conquer sleep when I rise in the morning. This topic of yours and the shite you link it to amount to not much more than the bitching of resentful, sour-faced, dull-witted little fart-sniffers! (:D) Stop being such a piss-ant and start being the Kissaki you are cut out to be!

Battle is a good description I think. It means that I want to push the edges at the risk of harming myself, my opponent, or both. It's a valid mindset for someone who knows death is coming and would rather meet it head on than simply wait for it. I find inspiration in creatures, such as scorpions, who are otherwise completely legit manifestations of reality but still hated and feared by the unthinking. I might be just a baby scorpion right now but I hope one day to grow into a king sized one, with a fat black body and a tail that packs a vicious sting. If you enjoy crushing scorpions you best get in your killing blows now before I grow any larger. Brushing me aside may prove fatal to your future lives.

OK, so you don't like the article, the author, or anything about the subject matter, womens' delusions, it seems. So do you have anything to say about it more than just claiming it is stupid? Why should I not call out the ridiculous inconsistencies in female behavior and so called logic? At least make a stand.

I read it, I see it, lots of truth, must be said, BUTTTTTT......will it help?? I say NO, because to late for any girls born already, sure maybe with pressure a guy here a guy there get a break, just appearance of balance.
Its like when you get a crack in window, nothing you can do for it, call glass man he fill holes crakes keep window working one more season, but useless to try to restore, must be replace.
Same for western minds, all brainwashed have to go and be replaced, will take few centuries to recover from present madness. Got to get worse before get better. Lucky us!

Main problem is our girls could not handle to be re-calibrated, go out of there minds. Men know this men worry men protect men stay suffering men stay as is. If woman is strong may handle dissapointment and truth, but few of those. Trick is how we make sure unborn minds dont suffer same fate. Thats ALL we should work on, we current men are walking dead.
But who is working on this?

.




-kissaki-
Tomas,

Indeed, I am 27 years of age.

-tomas-
We all gotta be that age at some-time in our earthly walk of existence.




-kissaki-
And this counts against me because ...?

-tomas-
The way you rant about "marriage", and then tend to lump it all into one big cesspool. The institution isn't perfect but how better a way would you propose?

Please don't take Ryan's approach of some sort of National Board of Enlightened and Eligible Single Men browbeating the unconscious men into vasectomies and women into hysterectomies.




-kissaki-
What does my age or the fact that I haven't been to all the exotic locales you've visited betray?

-tomas-
It's a case of seeing married couples in action other than what is practiced as being normal in this neck of the world.




-kissaki-
I've visited this board for many years, at least 6, so I've read quite a number of your posts.

-tomas-
As you, I lurked for a few years (pre-to-mid-2005).

But, read at another of their sites when at Topica Forum.

And I've read all of yours :-)




-kissaki-
I think it's clear you exalt new experiences and personal connections with others.

-tomas-
You've been pleasant, so far.




-kissaki-
If I am but a young punk then simply crush me out of existence.

-tomas-
Hissy fits will never resolve the underlying issues.




-kissaki-
Why the mercy act?

-tomas-
I'm all out of hand grenades at the moment.




-kissaki-
After all, that's what I came here for: annihilation.

-tomas-
Mikiel, Ryan, Alex will do that for you.

I'm here for the long haul..





Edited for- wa (way) - and there - should be (their).

Edited a second time for "unlying" shouldda been underlying..


.

It's no wonder you insist on having the sword put away. If a deadly manifestation of motion were to kill you you'd no longer be able to enjoy it so much.kissaki

Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Austin, TX

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... &plindex=7

dejavu,

I never claimed the phrase 'Existence is inherent' was untrue or a lie or anything of the sort, so stop subtly framing things in such a way that I ever implied it. The only one throwing around the word lie is you. My argument is that the phrase 'Existence is non-inherent' leads to more thinking that reveals the nuances in reality.

'Infinity is inherent' is completely redundant and meaningless, and again I never said that using the word inherent is contrary in the context of that phrase -- rather redundant and useless, get it straight. You already have infinity, and it's inherent, meaning inseparable, thus what could possibly move or take place? What could possibly separate and perform this is inherent business, much less any business. The moment you create any separation in order to perform any action, you leave the realm 'Existence is inherent' and enter the realm of 'Existence is non-inherent.' Again, the moment you create separation the phrase disintegrates, as the foundation it was laid upon breaks. It is nothing but a fragile unimaginable idea.

dejavu wrote: Not true. Existence itself is infinite and you have already conceded that infinity is inseparable. Existence is not separable from itself in any sense, which is not to deny the differentiation of its particular aspects.

The word existence in the phrase 'Existence is non-inherent' clearly refers to things, which is why I made the point of substituting the word infinity for existence in your phrase, 'Existence is inherent' -- to show I speak of the things in existence. Don't act as though you weren't aware of that just so you can try to prove me to be a liar.

You don't deny the differentiation of things, err aspects, you say?

dejavu wrote: "Things" are not comprised of 'more' things, but precisely the things that they are.

So wait are things also aspects or not? Is differentiation not the same thing as comprised of? Look at the foolish word games you play. If things were not comprised of more things then every thing would be completely independent of all other things and there could be no connection between things in any form. Motion, which in some previous posts of yours you seemed to favor, would not be possible. Are you not reading these words right now? Is each word not differentiated from the next? Is each word not comprised of other words? The very thing in your face betrays every single thing you say.

dejavu wrote: "Non-inherent existence" is a lie, denying the truth of this is stupid.

Then show it to me! Clearly you must have arrived to this exalted truth with words, so what were the words? I've put more effort in analyzing your phrase of 'Existence is inherent' in each post of mine than you have combined in all of yours. It seems all you can do is spew platitudes peppered with accusations of lying and stupidity. If you can't or simply refuse to explain yourself then, assuming you have even broken through to the clear state of awakening, you amount to nothing more than a paccekabuddha -- a silent private Buddha that is unable to communicate his discovery to others, which really means his larger self. In short, a useless impotent Buddha. Congratulations.

dejavu wrote: As though not seeking death thereby means one waits for it! Are you having a mid-life crisis?

Stop acting as though you don't know what I mean. If you weren't interested in death you wouldn't be browsing this forum either. Oh but wait you don't actually seek death right, which word is it now?

Mid-life crisis? I am 27, hardly the popular definition of mid-life. You're nothing but a jester, playing at looking the part, living up to the image of your vain avatar. At least my colorful comments are intended to bring you front and center in order to battle with words, something you're clearly either not interested in, incapable of, or somehow beyond. Enjoy your private nirvana you fool.

dejavu wrote:

OK, so you don't like the article, the author, or anything about the subject matter, womens' delusions, it seems. So do you have anything to say about it more than just claiming it is stupid?

Not really, no.

Finally some honesty on your part.

dejavu wrote: Because if you were truly concerned with pointing out ridiculous inconsistencies in behaviour and 'so-called' logic, you would not limit yourself to the opposite sex without having some other agenda. What is it Kissaki?

Right back to more subtle implications. This implication is that somehow I've limited myself to discussion of the opposite sex in some grand sense. Did you notice the topic of this thread? Am I unable to talk about one thing without offending reality or, more likely, just you? Oh that's right, existence is inseparable, these words are not appearing right now. Waste your inherent existence elsewhere.

Tomas wrote: -kissaki-
And this counts against me because ...?

-tomas-
The way you rant about "marriage", and then tend to lump it all into one big cesspool. The institution isn't perfect but how better a way would you propose?

Please don't take Ryan's approach of some sort of National Board of Enlightened and Eligible Single Men browbeating the unconscious men into vasectomies and women into hysterectomies.

I think attacking women conceptually is useful for deprogramming males from female magic and mystery, something I was under the spell of for almost my entire life, as young as it might be. I still think I need to refine my thoughts on the matter further and make it more potent.

I am currently unable to propose an alternative that tries to achieve the same goals of marriage.

Tomas wrote: -kissaki-
What does my age or the fact that I haven't been to all the exotic locales you've visited betray?

-tomas-
It's a case of seeing married couples in action other than what is practiced as being normal in this neck of the world.

Yes, it's true that not all marriages are disasters and some even seem to work. Yet I'm not convinced even in those cases, comfort makes me nervous. Perhaps I am still premature. Perhaps when reality crushes all sense of idealism and high mindedness from me I will crawl on hands and knees to a female for support in this frightening universe. That might seem too extreme, but why not? Woman is the portal to my apparent existence, that is a fact. Why do I need to exalt her even further? Is that fact not sufficient glory? Furthermore, how much longer must I pay tribute to the female form and be taxed for it? Forever? Until I can truly become a ghost in a machine? One thing is certain, if I don't even attempt a jail-break then I am guaranteed to be in the confines of her prison, however pleasant, for all my future lives. The universe has so many other forms outside of the female paradigm, am I forever denied them?

Here is something I ponder quite frequently: If I found myself on the brink of escaping her form, would I change my mind at the final moment because I had one lingering desire? Pity? Guilt? What if I had to destroy the female form in order to give birth to my next form, which is altogether completely outside her scope? Would I even have the courage to perform such an act, especially since I'd be hated for it by the humans I leave behind?

Tomas wrote: -kissaki-
If I am but a young punk then simply crush me out of existence.

-tomas-
Hissy fits will never resolve the unlying issues.

OK, I admit that was an attempt to evoke fire from you. I suppose you are too seasoned for that to work.

tek0,

Shaolin monks are impressive in a showy flashy sort of way, but I still find the overall substance lacking.

Here is an example of an individual in the realm of martial arts who inspires the spirit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mm3CmNE72Bw

kissaki wrote:I think attacking women conceptually is useful for deprogramming males from female magic and mystery, something I was under the spell of for almost my entire life, as young as it might be.

Yes, when you give in to a woman, you are surrendering youself to something that is imperfect. The magic and mystery are just your belief that she is perfect.

Let me tell you what I find most frustrating. A woman goes into a relationship fully knowing she isn't perfect, or not even really caring about such a thing. What she wants is someone to take over and make fewer mistaken decisions than she has been making. What she wants, in other words - and this she would never admit - is someone to blame when things do not go right. She wants men as stepping-stones through life. If the stone is big enough, she may choose to make it her island and stay there, making sure no one else steps on it. She may not realize she is doing it at first, but it eventually becomes deliberate.

But a guy knows in this world, the stepping stones come in all sizes. He can read it in a woman's eyes: "Nice guys finish last, so if I go for a nice guy, I'll get less stuff." What's more, she can read it in his eyes, whether he is a nice guy or not. If he is, he becomes the nearest stepping stone. When things do not measure up to her expectations - which can come from her upbringing, what her friends are doing, or simply from watching too much TV, in any case uncontaminated by gratitude - she can then blame him, and move on.

So what you have to do is avoid any kind of attachment or attraction to anyone with this game plan. You know there are sharks in the water.

But be honest. You know there are many times when you see a woman that you know you can get into bed. If that's all you want from her, then you are using her as a stepping stone. If people decide to use each other, that's okay, isn't it? It's not okay when the magic act starts.

Because that's what it is. There is no "magic and mystery." It's a magic act, which is an act whose sole purpose it is to deceive. It is peroxide, curlers, and lipstick. It's yet another dress you haven't seen before. There is no mystery because the magic is really a magic act.

So kissaki, why not simply use women, but do it in an honorable way? Do not tell me you have never seen a woman and thought, I'd like to roll her in flour and find the wet spot, but then I'd never be able to get rid of her.

Just be honest, and face the facts. Women are here to stay. Not one of them is perfect, but you are no great prize yourself. This whole forum is about enlightenment, and that starts not so much with the truth, as we realize that is after all a goal as well, but with honesty. Men need women for sex. Sex is not, and never was, about enlightenment. It is not even about attachment, because if two people stay together long enough, the pheromones wear off.

And when they do, kissaki, you will say "I was tricked! I was duped!" What you will be doing, in other words, is blaming her. Sound familiar? That's right, it's a blame game. And you are just as guilty.

Honesty comes before enlightenment. You either dance or you sit it out. No one is making you dance. It's your choice. It's a matter of finding the right partner(s).

brokenhead,

There is great pull around the physical act of sex, no contention there. What I am getting at is that the sex pull, and since I am a male of heterosexual bent you might as well call it the female pull, is not the greatest influence nor does its influence extend to all domains. Look up at a dark night sky; now that is pull.

If I keep the female tethered to myself, in body or mind, I am unlikely to reach escape velocity.

I strive for effortlessness throughout. I already command trillions of cells effortlessly, what are but a few more thoughts.

kissaki wrote: I strive for effortlessness throughout. I already command trillions of cells effortlessly, what are but a few more thoughts.

The "you" that strives to control the few thoughts has very little power than it imagines itself to possess. Those trillions of cell run on their own.

Then I give up possession of those few remaining thoughts as well. What can stop the breakthrough now?

kissaki wrote:brokenhead,

There is great pull around the physical act of sex, no contention there. What I am getting at is that the sex pull, and since I am a male of heterosexual bent you might as well call it the female pull, is not the greatest influence nor does its influence extend to all domains. Look up at a dark night sky; now that is pull.

If I keep the female tethered to myself, in body or mind, I am unlikely to reach escape velocity.

Very true. That sounds enlightened to me.

kissaki wrote: Then I give up possession of those few remaining thoughts as well. What can stop the breakthrough now?

Giving up or letting go is a very hard thing to do.

kissaki, I'm curious why you said these two things:

'Infinity is inherent' is completely redundant and meaningless, and again I never said that using the word inherent is contrary in the context of that phrase -- rather redundant and useless, get it straight.

and

Then show it to me! Clearly you must have arrived to this exalted truth with words, so what were the words?

In one you say that inherent existence is tautologically true (redundant), and in the other you are criticizing dejavu for saying that non-inherent existence is false. I can't see how you could believe both of these as written without contradiction. Are you being direct, or are you mixing your perceptions of dejavu's beliefs in with your own?

.



-kissaki earlier-
And this counts against me because ...?


-tomas earlier-
The way you rant about "marriage", and then tend to lump it all into one big cesspool.


-kissaki-
I think attacking women conceptually is useful for deprogramming males from female magic and mystery, something I was under the spell of for almost my entire life, as young as it might be.


-tomas-
Was it from family, tv, the media .. or playing with little boys and girls i.e. being conditioned (by society) to go with the flow?


-kissaki-
I still think I need to refine my thoughts on the matter further and make it more potent.


-tomas-
When the right one comes along (she always does) .. don't hesitate. Put away the childish illusions for it's you and her, and to heck with the world's way of doing life. True, it's difficult, but then, so is the way you perceive women now.


-tomas earlier-
The institution isn't perfect but how better a way would you propose?


-kissaki-
I am currently unable to propose an alternative that tries to achieve the same goals of marriage.


-tomas-
You never will until you take the plunge. You needn't a worldly marriage certificate to make her happy. Be sure U2 have jobs though - Uncle Sam's welfare=poverty will keep you (and her) chained to the world. If you don't have a lot of money at the beginning tis nothing to worry about because you will always have each other for sounding boards.


-kissaki-
Yes, it's true that not all marriages are disasters and some even seem to work. Yet I'm not convinced even in those cases, comfort makes me nervous.


-tomas-
I had enough chutzpah to find the girl when we were both young, age-14. There's always alibis and excuses to beat your meat and put off growing up until-after the next hand-induced orgasm. Why settle for Moloch with all its mind-melding degeneracies, when the woman will walk side-by-side with you to the Promised Land?


-kissaki-
Perhaps I am still premature. Perhaps when reality crushes all sense of idealism and high mindedness from me I will crawl on hands and knees to a female for support in this frightening universe.


-tomas-
No groveling on all fours! The real woman (a nice girl) expects a knee and a ring - in exchange for taking your last name.


-kissaki-
That might seem too extreme, but why not? Woman is the portal to my apparent existence, that is a fact.


-tomas-
If you get on good with your mom, your wife will see this in your inner being, respect you and expect the same from you towards her, forever and ever.


-kissaki-
Why do I need to exalt her even further? Is that fact not sufficient glory?


-tomas-
Because you would be willing to lay down your life for her.


-kissaki-
Furthermore, how much longer must I pay tribute to the female form and be taxed for it? Forever?


-tomas-
The fruit of your loin, seeded (ceded) to her, will produce offspring that will keep you bonded with little joys of new beings asking you questions while they are on your lap. Forever IS Ever :-)


-kissaki-
Until I can truly become a ghost in a machine? One thing is certain, if I don't even attempt a jail-break then I am guaranteed to be in the confines of her prison, however pleasant, for all my future lives.


-tomas-
Look, the "future lives" are your and her offspring (the bundles of joy). You break free of the prisons of your life when you are six-foot-deep. Till that event occurs, don't worry about it! You'll have plenty of time to sleep when you are dead..


-kissaki-
The universe has so many other forms outside of the female paradigm, am I forever denied them?


-tomas-
With the nice girl (not the good girl/bad girl player), she'll let you have your bowling night with the guys.


-kissaki-
Here is something I ponder quite frequently: If I found myself on the brink of escaping her form, would I change my mind at the final moment because I had one lingering desire?


-tomas-
If your lingering desire is to beat your meat into eternity, you are already a lost cause and Moloch has you by the balls..


-kissaki-
Pity? Guilt?


-tomas-
You are a prisoner of your own making.


-kissaki-
What if I had to destroy the female form in order to give birth to my next form, which is altogether completely outside her scope?


-tomas-
As I can easily gather, you are a straight guy frozen into a perpetual 13-year-old body with nowhere to go..

You sound like you have a decent mother - ask her "What did dad do to signal a green light (to her) that sparked her internal engine?"


-kissaki-
Would I even have the courage to perform such an act, especially since I'd be hated for it by the humans I leave behind?


-tomas-
What you said to others insofar as what you believed then - it just doesn't apply anymore - to who you are now. Life goes on. Each new day presents a new universe, it replicates itself over and over with a new sun every day.


-kissaki earlier-
If I am but a young punk then simply crush me out of existence.


-tomas earlier-
Hissy fits will never resolve the underlying issues.


-kissaki-
OK, I admit that was an attempt to evoke fire from you.


-tomas-
Today is a new beginning. Don't give up - you want fire? Ask your dad. Just because you are 20-something, doesn't mean that he should be discarded as an old newspaper would be. He sets his eyes with a new sun staring him when he awakes, too!

There's wisdom to be had each and every day with your old man pops. Give him a call or stop by their pad. If you earned his respect, he'll give back the same.


-tomas-
I suppose you are too seasoned for that to work.


-kissaki
Our adult kids are a bugger, but I wouldn't have it any other way! Just when you think they'll make it without asking another lame-brained question, out pops another doozie.

Being great-grandfather several times over amazes me every-waking-day.

PS - And the woman (my girl) looks every bit as good as the instant I first saw her (and she says the same of me). I feel fine.

It's an eternally wonderful life..





.