Certain instances of Buddhist harping...

[JustARandomPanda]

It's obvious you haven't been paying attention to anything I've written. The screen is not the movie that runs on it. The mirror is not the reflections that appear in it. When you talk about various experiences such as one of neither perception nor non-perception, that's a certain kind of an image that arises in the mind. It's not itself mind.

 

Your explanation sounds like something straight out of one of the Hindu texts I've read. The author described it exactly as you do above. It's my understanding though that this is a major difference between Hinduism and Buddhism. I thought meditative insight eventually got to the point where there was no mind along with no mindset. In otherwords...meditate long enough and that 'unborn', 'unmade', 'unbecome' "movie screen" that 'reflects' disappears too. There's only the reflecting left. The "movie screen mirror" does not exist.

[goldisheavy]

Your explanation sounds like something straight out of one of the Hindu texts I've read. The author described it exactly as you do above. It's my understanding though that this is a major difference between Hinduism and Buddhism. I thought meditative insight eventually got to the point where there was no mind along with no mindset.

 

That's impossible. You'll always have both mind and mindset. You can't get rid of them, but of the mind and mindset, you can change the mindset. That's why rebirth and karma that goes beyond one life are important topics in many spiritual traditions.

 

In otherwords...meditate long enough and that 'unborn', 'unmade', 'unbecome' "movie screen" that 'reflects' disappears too.

 

OK, suppose something like that disappears as you say. When this happens, it will be the case that such disappearance was recognized, noticed. What's recognizing? What's noticing? That's the mind.

 

Buddhist texts are pretty clear that both Nirvana and Samsara are mind-made.

 

Here's a reference to one of my favorite texts. This one is attributed to Bodhidharma (whom I consider a Buddha):

 

http://fodian.net/world/dmhml-e.html

Edited July 3, 2010 by goldisheavy

[Mark Foote]

My interpretation is that change is only the "ultimate" truth for "things"; while the Udana sutra (among others) points to an ultimate (so to speak) which is an end to the sorrow that is bound to things...

 

"There is monks, an unborn - unbecome - unmade - unfabricated. If there were not that unborn - unbecome - unmade - unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born - become - made - fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn - unbecome - unmade - unfabricated, emancipation from the born - become - made - fabricated is discerned". (Nibbana Sutta, Ud 8.3, Thanissaro

1994)

 

And it seems to me sometimes that this teaching is not of much importantance to some Buddhists (?) when they (sorry for the "they" people) go around and around talking about things and change, yet without the truth that the above sutra points to - all knowledge and facts of things, change, realms, meditations, etc., would not lead to emancipation as described.

 

Om

 

The quote about the unborn is from the fifth sutta nikaya collection. Last I read, historians regard this collection as of later composition than the other four, and probably less accurate as a representation of the actual teachings of Gautama who became known as the Buddha. I think the birth stories, Jataka, are also from this collection.

 

I personally find it suspicious, because the other nikayas cite anhiliationism and eternalism as errant views, and the passage quoted is eternalistic in viewpoint.

 

If you need something unchanging, that would be change as a factor in life. How's that. I like the four mindfulnesses (particularly in the chapter on the intent concentration on in-breaths and out-breaths in the fifth sanyutta nikaya, but that's another story) that close with "only to the extent necessary for mindfulness, and grasps after nothing in this world".

[goldisheavy]

I like to re-read some things I've read and as I was re-reading the Bloodstream Sermon I linked above, I realized it contained many typos.

 

I hope this is a better quality link, with fewer typos:

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13909483/Bloodstream-Sermon-Zen-Teaching-of-Bodhidharma

[adept]

.

Edited July 20, 2010 by adept

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

 

OK, suppose something like that disappears as you say. When this happens, it will be the case that such disappearance was recognized, noticed. What's recognizing? What's noticing? That's the mind.

 

 

Ah... the dreamless sleep. yet are we really dreamless if we can reflect and say that we were without dreams?

 

Even if we dream of absolute nothing[ness], we are still dreaming, recognizing, reflecting.

 

My question is how do i return to life and dreams from the pit of absolute nothing[ness]?

[Vajrahridaya]

I see some dzogchen teachings out there that are available and seem to be fairly ultimate:

 

 

It only seems that way. Especially in the many English translations of Dzogchen texts.

 

It's just that everything is always and always has been empty of inherent existence and awareness of this reveals that awareness has always been empty of inherent existence. This is what is meant by primordial. Not that your awareness of this is the ultimate existence of all things or the singular source of all things. So, this is still different from creationist theories.

[Vajrahridaya]

 

"There is monks, an unborn - unbecome - unmade - unfabricated. If there were not that unborn - unbecome - unmade - unfabricated, there would not be the case that emancipation from the born - become - made - fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn - unbecome - unmade - unfabricated, emancipation from the born - become - made - fabricated is discerned". (Nibbana Sutta, Ud 8.3, Thanissaro

1994)

 

Om

 

This is merely talking about the realization of Nirvana, seeing emptiness directly and always, this is it. It's not talking about a transcendent being.

 

If you understand dependent origination on an experiential level then the above makes sense, otherwise the habit to reify will still remain.

[Vajrahridaya]

That's only true of the mindset, but not mind. The mind is not dependently originated. But mindset is.

 

 

The Buddha said that there is nothing outside of the all. The mind is also dependently originated. There is not a transcendent entity to take refuge in and if you take your own experience of mind as refuge, then you fall into the erroneous view of Eternalism.

 

It's obvious you haven't been paying attention to anything I've written. The screen is not the movie that runs on it. The mirror is not the reflections that appear in it. When you talk about various experiences such as one of neither perception nor non-perception, that's a certain kind of an image that arises in the mind. It's not itself mind.

 

You obviously don't understand what neither perception nor non-perception means. Think about it, or reflect upon it.

 

Mind does not transcend this state, only the realization of dependent origination does, because it reveals emptiness directly. Your mind is also empty of inherent nature, and the Buddhas say this over and over again. Emptiness means dependent origination.

[Vajrahridaya]

It is Karma that is making those who deny the True Self be that way.

 

Clinging to a self either relative or ultimate is the seed to Samsaric rebecoming, weather it's the next moment, or the next eon, or the next universe. One who takes up any experience as proof of an ultimate Self, does not see emptiness directly and does not see the Buddhas teaching of dependent origination clearly.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

Oh ok... I was just reading into what you had said before. For that I apologize.

 

THANK you for isolating and quoting that! I doubt i would have fully comprehended his message as such unless you had!

 

 

I feel like im in the same boat My tail doesnt wag anymore though, because of the neglect and abuse that is life.

 

 

I am desperate to LIVE again...

[JustARandomPanda]

Clinging to a self either relative or ultimate is the seed to Samsaric rebecoming, weather it's the next moment, or the next eon, or the next universe. One who takes up any experience as proof of an ultimate Self, does not see emptiness directly and does not see the Buddhas teaching of dependent origination clearly.

 

Vaj,

 

I'm curious. What's so magical about seeing DO in freeing one from rebirths? I mean...it's just seeing. What's so great about seeing something? What if you see it but still have rebirths anyway? Is there some sort of mechanical process whereby seeing grants the power to not have rebirths? Or does it just mean you can choose the time, place, circumstances of manifestation, etc? Could one not do exactly that and not yet see DO?

 

I'm just curious why Buddhists place such uber-importance on this one thing as the be-all/end-all of realization.

[gendao]

I'm curious. What's so magical about seeing DO in freeing one from rebirths? I mean...it's just seeing. What's so great about seeing something? What if you see it but still have rebirths anyway? Is there some sort of mechanical process whereby seeing grants the power to not have rebirths? Or does it just mean you can choose the time, place, circumstances of manifestation, etc? Could one not do exactly that and not yet see DO?

 

I'm just curious why Buddhists place such uber-importance on this one thing as the be-all/end-all of realization.

Rebirth is caused by karma (unpaid debts).

Karma is caused by attachments (accounting or keeping score of acts).

Attachment to any illusory "Self" is the root of all attachments.

 

So, to prevent rebirth, you must lose all attachments (including that to any "Self") and thus all karma. Only when you let go of your identity and all attachments - is there no longer anything to be reborn or debts to be settled.

If you attain anything at all, it's conditional, it's karmic. It results in retribution. It turns the Wheel. And as long as you're subject to birth and death, you'll never attain enlightenment. To attain enlightenment you have to see your nature. Unless you see your nature, all the talks about cause and effect are the dharmas of the Exterior-Paths. Buddhas don't practice Exterior-Paths dharmas. A Buddha is free of karma, free of cause and effect. To say He attains anything at all is to slander a Buddha, how can the speaker achieve the Awakening?

 

If you are attached to even one thought, one ability, one understanding, or one view, you can not match the Buddha. A Buddha does not keep or break anything, the nature of His Heart is basically empty, neither pure nor impure. He is free of practice and realization, He is free of cause and effect. - Bodhidharma

At least that's my guess for now!

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

""Only when you let go of your identity and all attachments - is there no longer anything to be reborn or debts to be settled.""

 

 

 

JUST be sure to do it AFTER your life has been lived.

 

 

 

It's a long and lonely and painful journey that seeks to bind you and create [more] attachments otherwise.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Stoner Shadow Wolf

[Vajrahridaya]

Vaj,

 

I'm curious. What's so magical about seeing DO in freeing one from rebirths? I mean...it's just seeing. What's so great about seeing something? What if you see it but still have rebirths anyway? Is there some sort of mechanical process whereby seeing grants the power to not have rebirths? Or does it just mean you can choose the time, place, circumstances of manifestation, etc? Could one not do exactly that and not yet see DO?

 

It's not rebirth per say that is the obstacle, but rather lack of awareness. If you take formless, non-conceptual awareness as a Self of all, this leads to reabsorption and so full awareness is not recognized. If you see emptiness directly, it's not a dualistic thing, this is just a figure of speech.

 

You don't have reabsorption into Samsaric re-becoming by recognizing emptiness on all levels applied to every aspect of experiencing, this way awareness unbocomes, unbinds and uncompounds and truly becomes fluid and free without any type of self-fixation.

 

 

I'm just curious why Buddhists place such uber-importance on this one thing as the be-all/end-all of realization.

 

Because DO shows that there is no end all be all, just constant relativity. Other traditions take something up as some sort of ultimate and self sustaining existence generally on a universal scale thus the extreme of Eternalism. DO is the only insight that transcends both Eternalism and Nihilism yet is completely eminent and does not really transcend anything at all, but rather just sees directly and cuts directly through and reveals the transparent nature of everything. This is why they say Samsara is Nirvana. Because Samsara is actually not transcended, just seen through. It's really just about going beyond unconsciousness, or unaware rebirth, moment to moment. You are not a mystery to yourself anymore because you see right through yourself and you don't take up anything as ultimate and true self existence which is basically saying there is a mysterious will behind everything.

 

I don't know if it's easy for you to see the co-relation of seeing an ultimate Self of all and seeing an ultimate and mysterious will behind everything which basically reveals ones ignorance about ones own actions.

 

Taking up any experience as proof of ultimate self existence shows non-recognition of dependent co-origination, thus there is still ignorance about the cause of ones own actions and being.

[Vajrahridaya]

Rebirth is caused by karma (unpaid debts).

Karma is caused by attachments (accounting or keeping score of acts).

Attachment to any illusory "Self" is the root of all attachments.

 

So, to prevent rebirth, you must lose all attachments (including that to any "Self") and thus all karma. Only when you let go of your identity and all attachments - is there no longer anything to be reborn or debts to be settled.At least that's my guess for now!

 

This is true up to the Mahayana vehicle, but one actually turns all the endless debts acquired through countless and beginningless births into endless blessings as cause for endless Nirmanakaya manifestations. So, one does see right through rebirth and non-rebirth, basically through duality, but one still constantly display's meritorious rebirths for the sake of others. So, basically Buddhahood is merely the beginning of living as a selfless being for the sake of service. Everything becomes enjoyed though and there is no more psychological suffering.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

This is true up to the Mahayana vehicle, but one actually turns all the endless debts acquired through countless and beginningless births into endless blessings as cause for endless Nirmanakaya manifestations. So, one does see right through rebirth and non-rebirth, basically through duality, but one still constantly display's meritorious rebirths for the sake of others. So, basically Buddhahood is merely the beginning of living as a selfless being for the sake of service. Everything becomes enjoyed though and there is no more psychological suffering.

 

 

 

We here at the Tao Bums, or the majority of us, thus, must all be Buddhas.

[goldisheavy]

The Buddha said that there is nothing outside of the all.

 

When Buddha was talking about the 5 heaps, he was talking with regard to particular, manifested, observable phenomena.

 

The mind is also dependently originated.

 

That's not true. Is dependent origination itself dependently originated? If yes, that means dependent origination depends on some condition to be what it is, and if that condition changes, dependent origination is no longer dependent origination.

 

There is not a transcendent entity to take refuge in

 

That's correct.

 

and if you take your own experience of mind as refuge, then you fall into the erroneous view of Eternalism.

 

Correct. Because your own experience of mind is not actually mind. What you experience with regard to all things, including mind, is your mindset. A mindset is something conditional and ultimately temporary. Mindset is like a set of clouds in the sky. Even if the clouds move very slowly, they do move, and they are inconstant. But whether the clouds move slowly or quickly, whether they can be seen or not, the sky is always there. Just like the analogy with the mirror, this analogy is not perfect. Both the sky and the mirror analogies are used widely in Dzogchen, even though they aren't perfect.

 

Our experience has a deceptive capacity. If we allow ourselves to be deceived, we begin to believe the contents of our experiences. If we are not deceived, our relationship to our experience is mystical -- we neither believe it nor disbelieve it, there is a different kind of freedom available than the freedom of belief or the freedom of disbelief, more creative and more dynamic freedom.

 

You obviously don't understand what neither perception nor non-perception means. Think about it, or reflect upon it.

 

You're the one who doesn't understand anything. Why don't you contemplate for a bit?

 

Mind does not transcend this state, only the realization of dependent origination does,

 

Actually mind transcends even realizations. Realizations appear and disappear in the basic space of mind.

 

Your mind is also empty of inherent nature, and the Buddhas say this over and over again. Emptiness means dependent origination.

 

My mind is not really mine. If you're talking about your mind which is really yours, you're right, that's just a shadow of the mind, a product of beliefs about the mind, in other words, it's a product of the mindset.

 

Remember that the mindset is a condition of the mind in the same way that wind and stillness are conditions of the air.

Edited July 4, 2010 by goldisheavy

[goldisheavy]

Ah... the dreamless sleep. yet are we really dreamless if we can reflect and say that we were without dreams?

 

Even if we dream of absolute nothing[ness], we are still dreaming, recognizing, reflecting.

 

My question is how do i return to life and dreams from the pit of absolute nothing[ness]?

 

There is no "how". The step-by-step procedures you are used to following in day to day life are the result of your belief that the reality is split into internal and external, and you believe the external reality is structured, and thus changes in the external reality demand structured behavior on your part. If you understand what I am saying, all you need to do is relax, because all is already as you wish, effortlessly. There is no "how."

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

There is no "how". The step-by-step procedures you are used to following in day to day life are the result of your belief that the reality is split into internal and external, and you believe the external reality is structured, and thus changes in the external reality demand structured behavior on your part. If you understand what I am saying, all you need to do is relax, because all is already as you wish, effortlessly. There is no "how."

 

 

Then the words of my quetion are semantics you are arguing.

 

 

Drop the semantics and answer the question.

 

 

 

 

Currently, i do not wish to be single.

Currently, i do not wish to have only blackness to reflect upon during my sleep.

Currently, i do not wish to be unable to achieve my dreams of a life on the land and a family to raise from the land.

 

 

Currently, my wishes are neglected.

 

 

 

You speak not of my consciousness, but of something beyond my conscious awareness, if such which you speak holds any truth at all.

[goldisheavy]

Then the words of my quetion are semantics you are arguing.

 

 

Drop the semantics and answer the question.

 

 

 

 

Currently, i do not wish to be single.

Currently, i do not wish to have only blackness to reflect upon during my sleep.

Currently, i do not wish to be unable to achieve my dreams of a life on the land and a family to raise from the land.

 

 

Currently, my wishes are neglected.

 

 

 

You speak not of my consciousness, but of something beyond my conscious awareness, if such which you speak holds any truth at all.

 

It's not "just" semantics. The word "semantic" refers to "meaning." (or the study of meaning). Meaning is the most important "thing" in a sentence. Syntax and grammar are less important. So if you said "it's only just syntax" I could understand that. If you said "It's only just grammar." I could even understand that. But when you're saying "It's just semantics" that's like saying "Oh, it's only just meaning." Just meaning? What else is there more important than meaning?

 

Let's continue.

 

Currently, i do not wish to be single.

Currently, i do not wish to have only blackness to reflect upon during my sleep.

Currently, i do not wish to be unable to achieve my dreams of a life on the land and a family to raise from the land.

 

You don't think you wish these things because you don't understand the full extent of your wish. You're just not cognizant of the grand scheme of things. It's true that you do wish for all these things, but there are other things you wish for much more. Those other things are interfering. In other words, you wish is fragmented, and the individual fragments of your wish are complicating, or even making entirely impossible the fulfillment of some of the other fragments.

 

I'll give you a simple example. You most likely wish that each person have a free will and an independent mind. That's one thing that will complicate finding your romantic match. You also wish for the world to have physical qualities. That also complicates things, because now things must make sense. A woman can't just appear at your door -- that would not make sense to you, because the world you have built up with your wish demands that such things be either impossible or extremely, extremely improbable. And it is your wish for that kind of world that makes thing this complicated.

 

If you give deep thought and consideration to the full extent of your wish, you will realize that everything is exactly as you want and has always been. The key word there is "full". Not partial! There are many things you take for granted. There are many things that you only notice when they are gone. These kinds of things are also your wishes. When you ignore a thing and begin to miss it when it's gone, that thing was your wish and you didn't know it, because you took it for granted. This means that many of your wishes are hidden from you, because you just think "that's how it always is" -- you take them for granted. You probably don't think gravity is your wish either, but should gravity go missing you will quickly find you want yourself some gravity quickly, and you want it a lot more than you want a romantic partner.

 

Your dreams should be much easier to influence than the appearance of a partner. Why don't you try this: before you go to sleep, resolve to have a dream and to remember it. Be serious about it. Mean it. Believe it. And don't get too worked up about it, because being obsessed about something could be an indication that you believe it is hard to achieve. Try this.

 

You're the only one who has access to all the hidden corners of your own consciousness and subconscious. There might be things buried in you that make your life more difficult than it has to be. For example, maybe you used to commonly have nightmares, and then your mind learned to black everything out as a defense mechanism. You might have fear of dreams. Or there might be completely different reasons that are buried deep down that cause that blackness. You are in a much better position to find all that than me. You are the one who is intimate with your own consciousness, so even if you may not know it perfectly, you stand the best chance of figuring things out. You can get some hints from others, but other people can't solve anything for you in the end.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

semantics wasnt the right word, and only now have i heard the word referred to as "meaning" and not just "medium for meaning", or as you put it, grammar and syntax.

 

 

regardless of the meanings of the words, the point of question i am trying to establish, i thought, was blatantly obvious.

 

 

 

ANYWAYS.

 

 

I DO wish to aide this world into an awakening, to raise awareness to the equal level of real reality and immunize our collective selves to propaganda and falsehoods.

 

 

I feel like i have been waiting 5000 years for humans to GET THE FREAKING PICTURE.

 

 

That is too much for a 24 year old to feel!!!

 

 

BUT the problem i have is that the only way i can see guiding anyone in this world to a better way of living is to RECEIVE that guidance first!

 

 

I've sought it long enough that, at this point, if some random farmer appeared at the door unannounced and unexpected, i would warmly welcome their proepr example and not question wher they came from except in conversation.

 

 

Heck, at this point, i'd GLADLY accept "i materialized out of thin air a few minutes after you posted your response on ttb"

 

Even if only to acquire the necessary seeds to plant for my first steps toward fulfilling my wishes.

 

 

 

But without opportunities to move forward, wishes are nothing but desires made verbal.

 

 

I've tried dream resolution... but it's pretty useless when you never have dreams.

 

I havent been able to conjure up subconscious dreaming for the last 12 years. ALL my dreams are now nothing more than conscious desires for opportunities to embrace contentedness. "day dreams" as it were. im SO pissed off.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your dreams should be much easier to influence than the appearance of a partner. Why don't you try this: before you go to sleep, resolve to have a dream and to remember it. Be serious about it. Mean it. Believe it. And don't get too worked up about it, because being obsessed about something could be an indication that you believe it is hard to achieve. Try this.

 

 

 

Well that sure seems impossible.

 

 

Experience dictates that it is impossible to make my dreams come true, let alone dream LET ALONE influence my dreams.

 

 

 

I am about || this far from calling you a politician type with nothing but pretty words and promises

Edited July 5, 2010 by Stoner Shadow Wolf

[ralis]

It's not "just" semantics. The word "semantic" refers to "meaning." (or the study of meaning). Meaning is the most important "thing" in a sentence. Syntax and grammar are less important. So if you said "it's only just syntax" I could understand that. If you said "It's only just grammar." I could even understand that. But when you're saying "It's just semantics" that's like saying "Oh, it's only just meaning." Just meaning? What else is there more important than meaning?

 

Let's continue.

 

 

 

You don't think you wish these things because you don't understand the full extent of your wish. You're just not cognizant of the grand scheme of things. It's true that you do wish for all these things, but there are other things you wish for much more. Those other things are interfering. In other words, you wish is fragmented, and the individual fragments of your wish are complicating, or even making entirely impossible the fulfillment of some of the other fragments.

 

I'll give you a simple example. You most likely wish that each person have a free will and an independent mind. That's one thing that will complicate finding your romantic match. You also wish for the world to have physical qualities. That also complicates things, because now things must make sense. A woman can't just appear at your door -- that would not make sense to you, because the world you have built up with your wish demands that such things be either impossible or extremely, extremely improbable. And it is your wish for that kind of world that makes thing this complicated.

 

If you give deep thought and consideration to the full extent of your wish, you will realize that everything is exactly as you want and has always been. The key word there is "full". Not partial! There are many things you take for granted. There are many things that you only notice when they are gone. These kinds of things are also your wishes. When you ignore a thing and begin to miss it when it's gone, that thing was your wish and you didn't know it, because you took it for granted. This means that many of your wishes are hidden from you, because you just think "that's how it always is" -- you take them for granted. You probably don't think gravity is your wish either, but should gravity go missing you will quickly find you want yourself some gravity quickly, and you want it a lot more than you want a romantic partner.

 

Your dreams should be much easier to influence than the appearance of a partner. Why don't you try this: before you go to sleep, resolve to have a dream and to remember it. Be serious about it. Mean it. Believe it. And don't get too worked up about it, because being obsessed about something could be an indication that you believe it is hard to achieve. Try this.

 

You're the only one who has access to all the hidden corners of your own consciousness and subconscious. There might be things buried in you that make your life more difficult than it has to be. For example, maybe you used to commonly have nightmares, and then your mind learned to black everything out as a defense mechanism. You might have fear of dreams. Or there might be completely different reasons that are buried deep down that cause that blackness. You are in a much better position to find all that than me. You are the one who is intimate with your own consciousness, so even if you may not know it perfectly, you stand the best chance of figuring things out. You can get some hints from others, but other people can't solve anything for you in the end.

 

 

One of the best works on semantics is 'Science and Sanity' by Korzybski. After reading this I have tried to reduce my use of the term (is).

 

 

ralis

[goldisheavy]

I havent been able to conjure up subconscious dreaming for the last 12 years. ALL my dreams are now nothing more than conscious desires for opportunities to embrace contentedness. "day dreams" as it were. im SO pissed off.

 

You seem to dislike that, but some other people would trade places with you, I am sure. Some people think the dreams are bothersome things and would prefer just blackness. Have you tried enjoying it? If I experienced such a thing every night, I would find it interesting. In any case, you still see this waking world, or else you wouldn't be typing here. So that means you are still dreaming just fine. Maybe your subconscious wants to relax and doesn't want to trouble itself with dreams.

Edited July 5, 2010 by goldisheavy

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

You seem to dislike that, but some other people would trade places with you, I am sure. Some people think the dreams are bothersome things and would prefer just blackness. Have you tried enjoying it? If I experienced such a thing every night, I would find it interesting. In any case, you still see this waking world, or else you wouldn't be typing here. So that means you are still dreaming just fine. Maybe your subconscious wants to relax and doesn't want to trouble itself with dreams.

 

 

makes sense!!

 

 

 

Actually,. i used to HATE it, i was scared it meant i was going insane and that i would wind up being taken away by "officials" and put in a rubber room (mind you was 12, and heard that when people stop dreaming they go insane - i beleived it maybe too much - or maybe im too insane to realize ), but eventually, after getting stoned, i embraced it and found it to be quite relaxing actually.

 

 

Though insomnia doesnt help

 

 

But overall.... i miss life... i havent experienced life except in minutely small dosages for over 18 years.

 

Last summer was 3 consecuative months of REAL reality, until i fell in love with a girl i had never seen before except once.... in a dream...

 

 

Dreams dont come true. they jsut dont. they lie to you and trick you into wasting your life and then when they finally present the pay off, they strip it away from you and piss in your open heart wound.

 

 

It's too late for me. i must exact compensation from the innocent, as the guilty are not within reach!

 

 

Dont blame me, i didnt ask to be here or be lied to, or go insane. im just a product of YOUR world.

 

 

I of course speak out to my inevitable victims and their families and above all, the "powers that be" who run the economy and society.

 

 

They (The "PTB") are to blame, not me, i am just a byproduct of their evil. I will fight it for as long as i am able, but i must warn you, after 12 years of fighting to retain my sanity and express respectful conduct, one day soon, the long haired and easy going hippie will kill all humans.

 

 

Sounds funny, heck even im laughing, but i have to express this is a very true and real warning. i am losing it, and i know it, and... sadly... short of me finding a mate and getting the heck out of this society and living off the land in peace... there is nothing anyone can do at this point to stop it.