Morality and Spiritual Training for Trolls
Alright. Morality and spiritual training for trolls. A common misguided tendency among many novice philosophers, or older rigid inflexible thinkers, (which is never good; as, that which is inflexible will inevitably crack, then eventually snap in half,) is this premature assumption that a lack of objective outputs automatically translates into subjective meaninglessness. That, there can be no such thing as morality; nor any purpose that could be derived that would be worthy of focus and discipline; all such assertions being complete and utter nonsense, and lame justifications for just plain laziness. And I’ll go into detail as to why. And oh, you know you don’t even have to worry about a thing, because of course I’m going to go into the why, ad nauseam.
So I got a couple of recent comments from an insidious troll; and seeing as how the comments are conveniently on topic, I’m going to serve them up, and then slap them down with brute force; dissect and deconstruct every nuanced detail of them, with sniper precision. Because that’s what I do.
A little backstory on this particular troll. We’ll call him, “dual-sock”. This troll might loosely be considered a former aspirant of enlightenment, who, for a brief time, earnestly gave a half hearted attempt to free his mind, but, ultimately, in the long run, failed on his path dismally, then quickly fell into the shadows of the darkness thereafter; and has since degenerated into a low wretched state; reduced to a vile repugnant creature; a loathsome abomination completely bereft of any positive qualities; a blighted deluded consciousness, whose overall potential has become completely mired by his own dark insatiable appetites for attachments, desires, and heavy negativity. It was the type of deterioration that saw this troll come to embrace sinister ideologies, such as nationalism, and just plain full out racism. This type of descent qualified the troll to be gagged, bound, blocked and buried. And he was indeed subsequently blocked from the Meta Sage channel. And thus, such was done.
Hence, the troll was CAST OUT of the fold, banished, and then exiled forever into oblivion, never to return. And, for awhile, the troll vanished; finding respite and refuge down in the bowels of the sewers; hiding deep in the sewage where no one could find him. But, eventually, he awoke from his deep troll hibernation, and gradually rose to the muck of the surface, where he would, once again, re-emerge, raising his ugly head up out of the slop and slurry; and has since been spending most of his time prowling around in the shadows of the internet landscape, lurking about under rickety bridges, and haunting the acres of old abandoned playgrounds; all the while festering in his malcontent; stewing in the juices of his own personal deep hatred for freedom and enlightenment. And so it was. And so shall it be.
Fast forward to current times. One morning recently, I noticed that this stalker troll is suddenly commenting again! So, either he somehow got unblocked, which is a basic impossibility, or, he simply created a new account, which, incidentally, is one of his greatest proficiencies. So very adept in his artful deceptions, yet so very incredibly bankrupt in the core fiber of his being. And so, he made a couple of new comments on a couple of different videos. And, as usual, has shown that he hasn’t grown any more insightful or intelligent with the passage of time. It might even be argued that he has regressed, and is now being passive aggressive, using a sock account to make an initial comment, then waiting to see if the Meta Sage would respond, and if and when I did, he would then have the opportunity to chime in to the conversation with a comment under his main account, responding on the thread without it seeming like he started the comment exchange. And it was this same type of comment configuration that occurred for both of his new comments on both of my videos. A desperate ploy for attention. Shameful. And pathetic. And exactly why he’s acquired the sobriquet of “dual-sock.”
So, without further ado, on to the dual-sock’s comments, which I will now slice dice chop and mop, and then block.
In the first of his comments, he makes a rambling statement to a subscriber named “Sew Me”, who just got finished having a comment exchange with the Meta Sage, concerning a possible incongruent relationship between lucidity and morality, which, coincidentally, also ties in to the main subject of this video. The video on which this dialogue occurred, was an oration of disapprobation on pollution. And so, I will read the comment exchange, as it happened, including the dual-sock’s remark at the end, which I’ll then circle back around and skewer in conclusion.
So here’s the comment exchange:
Sew Me: “sure, fine, but you seem to venture into moralizing and it doesn't follow from the other content or you don't convincingly connect it.”
Meta Sage: “It connects solidly. We are students, here to undergo spiritual training, in order to free the mind from mental slavery. Behaviors that are conducive towards enlightenment are worthy of encouragement. Behaviors that are conducive towards delusion are worthy of condemnation. For a sage not to uphold these standards would be a dereliction of duty.”
Sew Me: “i guess, i cant really argue that littering large or small is good, but i still feel something is missing.”
Meta Sage: “Yes, something is missing. A few things, actually. Mainly, discipline, mindfulness and efficiency.”
That was the initial exchange; to which, dual-sock decides to now chime in, and comments, quote:
dual-sock: “What’s missing, is the recognition of his de-evolution into attachments and valuation of illusion. As if there was some point to this place we find ourselves in. A training ground, a spiritual training ground, he tells you. Is that what this is? Training for what? Ask him that. What are we training for? Oh, that’s right, NOTHING... And does nothing require the illusion of training for some end? Lol. He’s descending into the darkness, slowly but surely. He’s projecting his valuation of a future world for his child. He’s finding PURPOSE here. He’s finding, because there is a sense of self that is searching. It really is that simple. I gladly welcome him to the darkness. At least now he’s letting his morality flow. A powerful sith lord he will become. Or, he will fade into irrelevance. Either way, who really cares?”, unquote.
Well, obviously YOU care. And more then just a bit. In fact, it seems quite obsessively, to be exact. Apparently, enough caring to warrant a haunting on the video by the shadowy specter of the dual-sock. Please. Go away, hungry ghost. There’s nothing for you here. No one summoned you. So why dost thou harken to me? Go back to the shadows. Go out back to moan and groan in the boneyard, where you belong. All of this malcontent within you is just due to the fact that you are heart broken over the knowledge that, soon, you will no longer be able to continue to successfully fool people into attributing power and responsibility onto some imagined externally existing inventory item. So naturally you’ve become irritated and disappointed, but I’m so completely glad you’ve become disillusioned; because all this fake bullshit that’s currently being used for self pacification and willful delusion, is coming to an end! And you don’t like it. You want to be able to continually hide in delusion, and all the implications about lucidity, truth and awareness, will just spoil everything. Awwwww. Poor baby! The little baby needs his little baby bottle! That’s why the poor little baby is lamenting that there isn’t any point.
“As if there’s some point to this place we find ourselves in!”
Of course there’s no pre-existing point. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t any point. There may be a point, but it isn’t a point that’s gonna be supplied to you. And that’s because sensory perception is mind created phenomena. You can imagine it to be an objectified manifestation in your mind, all you want; if that makes you feel better, but that doesn’t change the fact that perception is a complete fabrication. And you’re not okay with this. Hence worship of god. Hence worship of objects. That’s the difference between a true escapist and a true realist; but the REAL difference, rather then the continually told lie of the inverse. And as such, there are those that shun the truth, and reject mind created reality, most commonly materialists or theists; thereby authentic escapism. And there are those that welcome the truth, and accept mind created reality, usually some type of nihilist or existentialist; thereby authentic realism. You see, existentialism doesn’t have a problem with the contrived nature of sensory phenomena. But this is your exact trouble. You want purpose and morality to be factors supplied to you by some type of superior outside power. You want to feel exceptional. You want to be anointed; so you wish some otherworldly aspect would materialize, to see that your washed, then smear your body down with holy oil; so as to better bestow a divine hand job upon you, all because you are just so god damned unbelievably fucking special. Well, unfortunately for you, but luckily for the rest of us, it ain’t happening.
No, there isn’t any point out there, waiting for you to find. And there also isn’t any “place” for a sense of self to find itself in. Yeah, “in.” This sense of self is apparently located INSIDE some type of parameter, right? That’s why you keep insisting that there’s some sense of self out there searching for a purpose. Always taking everything way too literally. Places, inside, outside, self, others. All externalizations. But, it’s understandable why. Of course you’re not going to understand the implications of existentialism, because you are not lucid. At all. So, naturally, you wouldn’t be able to recognize where the source of reality is. Because you’re always too busy looking past it. Therefor, you apparently need a purpose to be forcibly penetrated into you, by something you think in your mind is extrinsic; otherwise god will die, and then everything just gets ruined for you, and then you’ll be forced into cynicism, and then compelled to believe that purpose, and hence morality, are ultimately worthless! And then everything goes downhill from here. What a dilemma indeed!
Basically, just like a little anally wounded theist, who wants to take his ball and go home, all because there isn’t some big sky daddy out there to give a blowjob to. Awwwww. You just can’t seem to get passed your little oral fixation, can you. And I know, anyone who tries to help you to stand up on your own two feet and be a man, is an asshole, all because you can’t get passed your little oral fixation, and you insist on giving fellatio to flying spaghetti monsters. Well, get off your hands and knees and get over it! And don’t bother saying that it isn’t what you’re doing, because it’s EXACTLY what you’re doing, whether you consciously realize it or not. And it doesn’t matter if you say you are not a theist, because your mindset achieves the exact same depressively oppressive mind state. Just because you’ve replaced “god”, with some narrative about an extraterrestrial, a secret society, a DNA molecule, or whatever other bullshit externalization you’ve come up with, doesn’t make it any different. Same fecal matter, different anus. Understand: There isn’t any objective aspect out there to act as your supplier. So stop searching for one; like some drug addicted junkie, looking for a dealer to jock for a chance at some product. That makes you no better then a cheap common dirty whore. And that’s truly contemptible.
You mock my call for discipline, mindfulness and efficiency because, by your estimation, it must be the result of attachment and the valuation of illusion, and it’s completely understandable why you’d think that, due to it being the only frame of reference you can conceive of; because you are truly an unabashed attachment whore, and a shameless value junky. When one can only intellectually consider the concept of lucidity, rather then lucid awareness itself, then it would seem to logically follow that, if one learns that sensory perception is illusion, then this will ultimately mean that nothing matters, and this will justify recklessness, and eventually become a license to be a predator. And this is the part you just can’t seem to understand. Hence, this is where I step in to expound.
First off, no on ever said the objective is to eradicate value, reason, purpose or narrative. You are only being asked to detach from these utilities. And before you even ask, no, you can’t. Anyone who tries to manipulate this process to foster the ego will meet quick remand. The idea that lucidity will lead to a loophole that will allow the playable character to cheat the game and fulfill all it’s twisted desires, is just that: an idea. It doesn’t follow in actual methodology, and is incongruent to reality. Pursuing desire is necessarily a fall into delusion; as, any craving for illusion can only be sustained by a loss of clarity. If it’s clearly laid bare that all sensory perception is mind created, then a desire for any of this phenomena; that is, the fear based motivation to grasp or push away at illusion as a means to some end, relies completely on completely burying the truth. So get that right. We subtract the ATTACHMENT to value, reason, purpose or narrative; not the value, reason, purpose or narrative itself.
Secondly, it’s also not about abstinence, or the denial of certain inventory items to your playable character; another pitfall you just can’t seem to stay out of. Again, it’s not about pulling or pushing. It’s about seeing the true nature of what you’re pulling and pushing, and adjusting to the truth accordingly. Hence, valuation of illusion isn’t necessarily a problem. It’s the attachment to valuations of illusion that becomes a problem. How many times must this be said before you can comprehend it? Of course illusion has some value, as illusion assists in our spiritual training. Not for you to cling to it desperately. Hence, purpose itself isn’t necessarily an issue. Attachment to purpose is the issue. Understand? It’s okay to interact with illusion. Just don’t become attached to interacting with illusion.
So, with that said, here comes your big question: how can you possibly establish any discipline or proper conduct in a context that is objectively meaningless and isn’t governed over by an all seeing super power that manipulates you into certain behaviors by doling out punishment and reward? Apparently, in your mind, you can’t. That’s why you relegate morality to the workings of a Sith Lord; as, without a god to dictate morality, that leaves man alone to establish a moral code; and, of course, that means human morality must be evil; as, man can’t be anything good, without a god to MAKE him good, right? Which is why you compared my righteous stance against pollution to a Sith Lord. Please. Keep that distinction for yourself. I think it’s YOU who is doing the projecting. Although, realistically, you would hardly be considered a Sith Lord anyway. More like a Sith LARVA. That’s about it. A measly little mealybug; a parasite who seems content to continually suck on the juices of a mighty and righteous host. A simple pest. An annoying little nuisance fit to be whisked away to it’s fate by a swift and heavy hand.
But, getting back to the meat of the matter, of which, is the main assumptive stance adopted by the dual-sock, and, by and large, by people in general; is this presupposition that mind dependent phenomena, and a lack of god, equates into a necessary loss of meaning and purpose, and hence, morality. And the other commenter on the video also apparently agrees; complaining that morality cannot follow from the implications of sensory perception as mind created illusion. So let’s break it down.
One thing you need to understand up front is, just because reality is mind created, doesn’t mean there can’t be morality. Take responsibility. Why do you need to be bribed by some imagined outside entity in order to understand discipline and morality properly? Let me guess. You wanna go to heaven and don’t wanna go to hell, right? How deep of you. And that very well may help you sleep at night. But I’ll tell you one thing. If you’re a player, game to conduct himself according to a paradigm of “avoiding punishment and gaining rewards”, then, for good or bad, you’ve established a code of conduct on all the wrong reasons. “Gaining and avoiding”, are the delusional path, and a way to obfuscate the truth. There’s nothing to gain or lose here. You were zero sum before you came in this game, and you are exiting this game in the exact same way. And don’t take zero to mean absence. An absence is a negative. A presence is a positive. Both different degrees of the exact same stuff: illusion. Zero is superposition. So gaining and avoiding aren’t a legitimate basis to formulate a moral compass on; unless you’re a Mario Brother, running around collecting coins and jumping over turtles.
A lack of a god doesn’t mean there can be no such thing as morality. A lot of atheists incorrectly dismiss moral features due to religious associations, but there’s no need to throw the baby out with the bath water. We can figure out a standard for intelligent beings that can be applicable to all life forms, and we don’t need some make believe judge in the sky to keep us honest. We can set a standard. And it’s not that difficult to sort out.
So, how can we set a standard? To figure this out, you need not look any further then to your own functionality. You know, without question, that within yourself, you have a free will that has the capacity to use force; as in, actions that create effects on outside conditions, and, you have a free will that has the capacity to receive force; as in, seemingly outside effects that apply actions on you, modifying your condition. So this formulates a border we can use as a basic outline. And there’s no such thing as anyone who does not have any boundaries. And even if so, there are still instinctual ones. Only Jesus Christ would be exempt from this. So with boundaries, comes the issue of consent. We’ll refer to this junction as the boundary line of the will. And this really shouldn’t need to be explained to you, because it isn’t an intellectual consideration, even though the terminology of “the boundary line of the will”, is an enigmatic and ambiguous consideration.
Let’s put it this way: Why do the sheep run from the wolves? Why do you get annoyed and move away when someone sits too close to you on the bus? Why do you scream in pain and recoil when you get punched in the eye? Is this a matter of moral relativity? After all, sometimes we enjoy getting our throats cut when we sleep, right? It just depends on your culture. Is that it? No, of course not. You don’t need an education or a cultural background to figure out that you need to remove your hand from a hot stove, do you? So the basis for a moral system is actually pretty simple. There’s no need for you to go on pretending that morality is too hard to flesh out.
Boiled down. Life forms are either receptive or unreceptive to phenomena; and the outcome of one or another isn’t a matter of philosophy; so the proposal of moral relativity stinks of extraneous intellectualism. This is not an ideological proposition. It’s a fact of raw instinctual physiology. And we can build upon this.
You already know that, when force is used against a will, there is a rejection of it. Just as you also know, when force is used in accord with a will, there is acceptance of it. Hence, moral behavior is the proper use of force. Immoral behavior is the mis-use of force. That’s it. Need more be said on the matter? If you are able to recognize this natural configuration within your so called “own existence”, then it shouldn’t be too hard to recognize that it also resides in ALL life forms; not just for your own personal ego.
And this isn’t about any “Golden Rule”, as, many of you hate yourselves, and are completely self destructive, so, “doing unto others as you would have others do unto you”, is not necessarily the best formula for the job. But even a self destructive degenerate ego still has a boundary line of the will. Positive and negative responses to stimuli don’t cease happening just because an ego has become devoted to evil. The evil one’s hand still recoils from the hot stove, does it not? So it’s still possible to violate evil’s consent. Yes, that’s right. Dracula doesn’t want you to stick that stake in his heart and will try to prevent it. Is that a shocker? Maybe Dracula had to go to college to understand that he doesn’t want a stake in his heart? So, this is why, if evil is going to pretend morality doesn’t matter as a mere justification for overly indulgent disgusting behaviors, then that ego will be punished swiftly. And rightfully so.
Because delusional behaviors are contrary to the training. And again. We are students, here to undergo spiritual training, in order to free the mind from mental slavery. Behaviors that are conducive towards enlightenment are worthy of encouragement. Behaviors that are conducive towards delusion are worthy of condemnation. For a sage not to uphold these standards would be a dereliction of duty.
Can you understand this? The right and wrong of behaviors will be determined on a foundation of lucidity as the highest ideal. That is, just as was previously said, behaviors motivated towards delusion are bad, and should be condemned accordingly. Behaviors motivated towards the truth of lucid awareness are good, and should be commended appropriately. Similarly, anything that malevolently tries to interfere with your enlightenment should be considered bad, and constitutes a mis-use of force. Just as, if you were to try to malevolently interfere with another’s enlightenment, it should be considered bad, and would constitute a mis-use of force; even if you personally benefited from it, or derived selfish pleasure from it. And yes, that needs be clarified due to the soul dead psychopaths out there. So there’s no way around it: any mis-use of force against a will is considered a delusional enterprise, hence is contrary to lucid awareness, and therefor is a violation of right conduct. There’s the basis for a rightly based morality.
Hence, this same moral template can be applied to the act of pollution; the argument I made that the dual-sock has criticized as attachment. But the criticism doesn’t wash. Being destructive to one’s environment definitely qualifies as immoral conduct. It demonstrates a total lack of mindfulness; a crucial element of a lucid mind; which is the the basis of the spiritual training. So does that answer your question? You told the commenter to go ahead and ask me what we are training for, but it’s really YOU who is doing the asking. And, unfortunately, you don’t like the answer.
And, that’s right. Training. SPIRITUAL training! And that’s right again. Training, for NOTHING. What’s the problem with training for nothing anyway? Oh, because an addicted heroin addict can’t fathom the idea of giving up his heroin. What a surprise! I guess the little baby is gonna need to adjust to functioning without a pacifier! Because that’s all that is awaiting you, “out there.” Nothing. And when I say nothing, I don’t mean an absence of objects. Hence, an absence of objects isn’t the focus of the training. The focus of the training is, and always has been, pure potential. So when I say, “nothing”, I mean that literally. Nothingness itself. The pure static field that isn’t even a pure static field. And there’s nothing wrong with training for nothingness. This is the essence of Pure Potentialism. And to master it, one must really be devoted to it, despite receiving no gratification or validation from it in return. That’s how it’s determined whether or not you are full of shit. This is how it’s seen whether you are a spiritual warrior who wants nothing for himself but freedom and the truth, or a little lying pansy, who looks to receive rewards and hide in his delusion. We pay respect to pure potentiality, even though we can’t affix a label unto it, familiarize it, or compare it to something similar. We are not here looking for a nipple to suckle, like the dual-sock. We are here to be spiritual warriors, sworn to serve the common good, and to sacrifice as much as we can. All for the truth of lucid awareness.
Now, on to the dual-sock’s second comment, which I will now read, then obliterate quickly; as this video has already gone on too long. Again, it follows a comment exchange between a subscriber and the Meta Sage, and at the end of that exchange, the dual-sock chimes in, stating, quote:
dualsock: “You allowed the talking tiger to mind rape you. Notice how anything you bring up, he redefines for you? See how he redirects your attention to him? You speak of a creating force, he tells you there is nothing beyond awareness. This has subtle, psychological implications, that implies he is awareness, and you are not. That there is nothing beyond awareness (him), that he is the pinnacle. That your answers are found in him and need no searching beyond his word. These are mind tricks, to make you subservient to his will. You ask the wrong questions. Ask him what awareness is aware of. Ask him how awareness can be without the contrasting and complimentary distinction of the unaware. Ask him, how can he be sure he’s awareness if theres no way for him to be aware of what he’s unaware of.”
So that’s the second comment. And here’s a measured response:
Everything that comes out of the dual-sock’s mouth is deceptive bullshit. All he can produce is falsehood. So, to clarify: I don’t redefine. I guide towards the open ended. This isn’t a shell game. This isn’t about rejecting one inventory item in favor of another one. It’s about embracing the truth; and the truth isn’t found by selecting the right inventory item. They are all equally false. So how is it exactly that I’m redirecting anyone’s attention to me? This has nothing to do with me. But this is the nature of the dual-sock. Lies. Misrepresentations. Mischaracterizations.
Yes, the commenter spoke of a creating force, and I rightly brought him back down to reality. Awareness is the sure thing, which can be verified and is the ultimate foundation of everything. Not because I say so, but because that’s how it is. A creating force is an abstraction. Again, this is more cowardly evasions. Another example of feeble subservience, looking for some outside entity to hold all the power and responsibility, because you’re too weak and lazy to assume it yourself.
I point towards awareness. So how is this in any way an implication that “I am awareness and others are not”? Or that I am the pinnacle, and only want others to take my word with no verification for themselves? How is this so; other then just the dual-sock saying so? Because that’s all it is. Distortions and deceptions. I have always repeatedly advocated for just the opposite. Don’t take my word. Don’t stop your investigation. Find out for yourself. I don’t want your subservience. I’m telling you, I have no use for needy dependent followers who need somebody to lean on. If that’s what you are, then GET OUT OF HERE! I’m looking for those who want to stand on their own two feet; and don’t need my support. I have no time to support you.
And here you tell the commenter that he’s asking me the wrong questions, and, again, ask the commenter to ask me certain questions, which means, again, it’s really YOU who’s asking the questions. So I will go ahead and answer your questions. Since you indirectly asked.
Question 1: What is awareness aware of.
Answer: Awareness is aware of an imagination.
Question 2: How awareness can be without the contrasting and complimentary distinction of the unaware.
Answer: Awareness can’t “be”; as, awareness is not an existential factor. It’s only aware of existential factors. Therefor, it doesn’t have an opposite. It doesn’t play by the rules of duality. It imagines the rules of duality.
Question 3: How can I be sure I’m aware if there’s no way for me to be aware of what I’m unaware of.
Answer: “You” are not aware. This “you” is not your identity. More aptly stated: There is an awareness of a persona who thinks he has an individual awareness that he can’t be sure of, due to the fact that he can’t be aware of what he’s unaware of. See, your problem is misidentification. That’s why you can’t unglue from your dream stupor.
So that’s that. I now wash my hands of the dual-sock, and banish him to the netherworlds, once again. But this time, there’s no coming back. You are unrepentant, and hence, are unforgiven. And are therefor removed. Begone from this place.
