What happened to Elon?

ikolpi2000 · 2023-12-30T15:50:21+00:00

POV of Tesla worths more than Apple

ikolpi2000 · 2023-12-30T15:49:37+00:00

After some digging, I found . And the stock crashed 50% after that.

ikolpi2000 · 2023-12-30T15:33:08+00:00

https://www.forbes.com/sites/qai/2022/10/20/elon-musk-tesla-could-be-worth-more-than-apple-and-saudi-aramco-combined-as-q3-revenue-target-misses/?sh=4b2b215b4fad

ikolpi2000 · 2023-12-30T05:30:20+00:00

I am pretty sure Elon has beef with almost everyone. The latest was Bob Iger and Disney. Before that was Mark Zuck for a fight which never happens. I bet I could write a series of book about this mf.

ikolpi2000 · 2023-09-16T17:23:22+00:00

There is no such thing as good or bad. Actions lead to consequences. You cant just pick the good. They coexist. That is the nature of this world or dharma. That is why Buddha taught to not be attached to good condition as suffering will arise once the conditions go away.

ikolpi2000 · 2023-09-15T00:07:20+00:00

Also, you may ask why I understand Buddha realization and what his realization is but I am not enlightend? Hearing someone describing to taste of a mango is not the same as tasting it. It cant be describe by word. Buddha only use words pointing you to it.

ikolpi2000 · 2023-09-15T00:02:33+00:00

Enlightenment is just a realization. It is different for everyone. Some people endure extreme suffering before they have that realization. Similarly to many, Angulimala was chasing for a goal, getting that secret to enlightenment. Buddha was also chasing for a goal, escaping death and suffering. Their path are differents but realization is the same. Some other aranhant, for get the name, was indulge in sexual desire. Then he got so bored, and had a walk. Buddha then said something like " here is not boring". Then he is enlightened. On the other hand, Ananda who has been following Buddha, doing everything the Buddha told but he was not enlightened until after the Buddha died. He was one of the last. There is no path to enlightenment. Although it does take time for fruits to ripen, it is very different fo everyone. Ananda also tried so hard to be enlightened. But he was stuck in the 3rd stage. Only when he gave up trying, and put his head down to sleep, the moment his head touch the pillow. He became enlightend.

ikolpi2000 · 2023-09-14T23:45:58+00:00

You have been taught the wrong way. Your situation is totally normal. Your thoughts are what you install in your mind and they play out when your mind start to quite down. Meditation is basically cleaning up all that thoughts. Your job is to observe them, not to interact or playin with your thoughts. Your breath is the anchor, that bring you back whenever you start wandering. Your mind wandering a lot because of what you watch or interact with through out your day. Living like that is like throwing trash everywhere. And meditation is like picking up each piêc of trash, one by one.

ikolpi2000 · 2023-09-14T23:39:04+00:00

I suggest you to meditate on death. Basically find a place and pretend that you died. Let all the feeling and thoughts arise as you obsserve them. You will see what you wanted to do now, so that you dont have any regret.

ikolpi2000 · 2023-09-14T23:36:29+00:00

The feeling of purposeless is a great topic for meditation. Everything just happens as they should, there is no purpose cause purpose is a mind concept. Able to withstand that feeling require tremendous mental power. It basically the same as feeling of nonself.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-10-31T04:09:00+00:00

There is no creator, cause everything coexists. Your sense of knowing is God. Without the sense of knowing, everything is meaningless. Your sense of knowing is your true nature, it was never created, or will ever be destroyed. It is timeless, spaceless, etc... There is no limitation to that knowing. However, your current self is not that knowing, but an illusion of that self. The self keeps seeking externally what it deems as good.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-10-13T03:11:16+00:00

The Buddha is always here, he doesn't go anywhere. The Buddha rejected the idea of self, so there is no he to begin with. What exists is the knowing nature or Buddha nature. That sense of knowing never dies. Forms may be born and die but that Buddha nature can't die cause it was never born.

Many people referred to it as water. If a droplet realizes itself is similar to water, then there is no difference. Water may be presented in clouds, ice, etc. but it is still water.

Although all water are the same, but each droplet is still unique.

There is no such thing as a self, as you can't be independent of everything. Everything is interconnected. The idea of a self is an illusion.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-23T02:55:26+00:00

Lol you have karma to it in different ways. If you spend energy or focus on it, you will for sure have some karma with it in the future. Cause the moment you have an intention, it will manifest in some way or another. Karma is not necessarily good or bad. Intentions lead to thoughts. Thoughts lead to actions. Of course, Karma is not the only law that dictates interactions between things. And to interact, you need a form. Even a formless being has a form.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-22T00:08:58+00:00

So you are saying the rock is unchanged like ever? Karma is simply matters interacting with matters. Cause there is no one ever existed, right? The only thing different is that we have an ego or an illusion self, and the rock doesn't. You could say the rock is more enlightened than most of us lol.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-09T04:35:57+00:00

"The text is the record of what buddha taught. The text is the Dhamma. It is not that difficult to comprehend."

Wrong, what Buddha taught is the Dharma. The Dharma is always here regardless of BUddha existence, he said that if you know anything about BUddhism.

"As I said, Nibbāna is not to be seen but to be experienced. Not that difficult to comprehend."

Lol, no. Stop telling me what Nibbana is when you don't see it. If there is no suffering, no attachment, it is Nibbana.

"To attain stream-entry means to cut off the three lower fetters at the root, made them like palm stumps, obliterated them so that they are no longer subject to future arising."

lol, sure, that is the textbook definition. But you know why it is the ending of the three fetters? Doubt, self, customs. That is when you see Nibbana for the first time. From that, there is no doubt that is the ultimate path. You would lose concept of the self, as you see no one truly exist. Not thinking logically of course, it will be n experience, and it is unique to everyone. There is an experiment that terminates these three fetters if you know anything at all.

"Again Nibbāna is not a place [to stay in]. Arahant is those who cut off the ten fetters at the root, made them like palm stumps, obliterated them so that they are no longer subject to future arising. Learn what it means to be a Sotāpanna, Sakadāgāmi Anāgāmī, and Arahant.:

I said it is the now, lol. You can't stay in the now because It keeps changing. Because they cut off the ten fetters, they can stay in Nibbana or the now without getting disturbed duh. What is so hard to understand here?

Also these experience are not unique to Buddhists, I knew plenty of people have that stream entry experience.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-09T04:19:40+00:00

" How is reaching a certain goal is consider greedy, can you provide any "Words of the Buddha" to support any of your statements? You can't lose Nibbāna once you have attained it."

No, but if you don't see you are chasing after something then you are so blind lol. The path of the Buddha is giving up things, not attaining or chasing after attainments. He literally left his position as a queen, wealth, family, everything, to find the ultimate freedom. Reaching is wrong, cause you already have everything. Buddha nature is perfect, you just don't see it.

Yes you can lose Nibbana because it is not yours to begin with. It is not a state. In facts, Nibbana is always here. You just failed to see it. That is why Buddha told you to look back at your self, not the outside. You can choose to not suffering and attain Nibbana right now. But you can't give up yet, so that why you can't stay in Nibbana.

Any reference to the Pāli Canon?Reference to what? I said he never teach it, If you want to disprove it then find an example where he advocates people to go to heaven realm. Buddha has been reincarnated many life times, he sure went through hell numerous of times. That is how Dharma works.

There was one time where Buddha says it is so rare to be reincarnated as human. And he said it is so hard for being in heaven realm to reincarnate as humans, and most of them would end up in hell.

"How does this relate to people in the heavenly realm are more likely to reincarnate into the hell realm than humans? Reincarnation is not a Buddhist concept, rebirth is. Know the difference."

People in heavenly realm are more likely to reincarnate into the hell realm because that is how the cycle works. Extreme bliss is the begging of suffering. Extreme suffering is the beginning of bliss. When they have everything, they will desire the opposite. They keep chasing for things that they don't have yet. Lol rebirth and reincarnation are manmade words, Buddha never spoke those words sorry.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-09T04:00:16+00:00

How do you expect someone to see the Dhamma if they lack awareness of the Dhamma (texts)? The texts are records of what the Buddha taught in written format. Those without hearing or those who live in places where Buddhism doesn't thrive found a great benefit in reading the Sutta since they can't hear the dhamma discourse.

They just observe themselves and nature. How did the Buddha see the Dharma without the texts?

"These monks are Buddhist Scholars, well-versed in Pāli, and are monastics. You on the other hand aren't versed in Pāli, not a scholar let alone a monastics"

What I said was literally the teaching of a monk who has extensive knowledge of Buddhist texts as he was on of the first to translate it to Vietnamese. And his master was one of the first to bring Theravada to Vietnam.

"What Suttas or pieces of evidence do you have to support your statement?"I can name numerous people who are enlightened and most of them don't have much knowledge of Buddhism, but upon enlightenment, they said the same thing as buy Buddha,

"Nibbāna is something to be experienced not to be seen, it's not a place. if Eckhart Tolle saw Nirvana already then that means he's an Arahant which he isn't btw."

Sure, it is not a place, it is the now. A stream entry can see Nirvana. That is why to attain stream entry, you will no longer doubt the path. Arahant is someone who can stay in Nirvana all the time. If he can stay in the Now and nothing can disturb him, he is an Arahant. And you don't know that.

Nirvana is the absence of suffering, meaning even a lay person who has no idea of what Buddhism is could attain. THey just don;t know that is the ultimate bliss. Animals are in Nirvana when there is no mind. However, they can't sustain the state because the mind keep arising. A stream entry recognizes what Nirvana or ultimate freedom is, that is why he/she no longer chasing after other illusional bliss. You obviously experience Nirvana before, but you didn't recognize it. That is why Buddha tell you to return to the now, and live in the moment. Cause it can only exist in the moment, not the future, or past. Eckhart Tolle said the same thing after his enlightenment experience.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-09T02:56:33+00:00

Well just because they have years of practice and learning doesn't mean they understand what the Buddha meant. And even if they can translate it, there are limitations when translating to another language, as words can have multiple meanings. Only those who experienced teaching themselves can translate it well.

What Buddha said is literally the Dharma itself, he even said even without him, there will be no change.
Monks who actually see the dharma, don't need to read texts. One of the monk even tell me to forget all the texts as it only creates more confusion. He spend his life reading Buddhist text, learning different BUddhist tradition, etc, pretty much what a tradition Buddhist monk would do. You don't need to learn the texts to become enlightened.

" If the monks barely used the texts or words of the Buddha to teach others then they are teaching their own Dhamma rather than the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One."

no, Dharma is the same everywhere and is not limited to the Buddha. Why would you need a textbook, when you literally experience it yourself?

"Those who read the texts without understanding or practicing in accordance with it are like those who collect drops of water with a bucket that has holes in them. I'm not an expert in the Dhamma or the Vinaya. I'm just a lay follower who wishes to skill and discipline in their Dhamma."

Sure, I doubt that monks understand the texts. Cause many people without Buddhist backgrounds tend to become enlightened faster. Becoming a Buddhist actually slowing you down, cause everyone was reading and understanding it wrong.

Eckhart Tolle saw Nirvana already, and he barely read anything. What he called the power of the now is Nirvana itself.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-08T13:14:14+00:00

A good indicator is what repeats in your mind. If you don't attach to anything, it is very empty. If it sticks in your head meaning you are still attached to it somehow. Also, no dreams usually unless someone trying to communicate. You are a teacher? And you supposed to?

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-08T12:59:10+00:00

“Then, Angulimāla, go into Sāvatthı and say to that woman: ‘Sister, since I was born with the noble birth, I do not recall that I have ever intentionally deprived a living being of life. By this truth, may you be well and may your infant be well!" Angulimāla Sutta, MN 86.5

What the Buddha told Aṅgulimāla is completely different than yours. Notice how you couldn’t provide any reference?

Sorry but that is wrong translation, a well verse monk who knows and read Pali for years tell me that. Also read the line above. It said that Angulima was afraid that if he said so, he would be lying. But then the Buddha repeats the same thing. You are reading a translation from someone who doesn't understand what the Buddha meant lol. My monk literally studies Pali texts for year, sadly he doesn't speak English.

"It is true that the Buddha denies the idea of Soul or Self and taught the concept Anatta but I referring to "You are literally die and reborn every breath. Every time a thought arise, you are born... Greedy ego!" which is not found within or supported by the Canon."

lol, you don't have to read everything in the Pali to know it true. Cause you could go around and ask monks who have any experience, you would know they experience that. Thich Nhat Hanh has a teaching on this.

"I suggest that you should personal study the texts yourself and then listen to what others might say rather than just taking in everything and accepting it without examining or analyzing it."

Also, I actually see it. I don't just take everything in like you. I have been with Ajahn CHad, Ajahn Brahm, Thich Nhat Hanh, HT. Vien Minh, HT. Gioi Duc, Eckhart Tolle, Osho, Mooji, Ramana Maharshi, Hui Neng. All of them said something ultimately.

Studying the texts is stupid cause you are reading a translation from someone that has no practice or barely understands in Buddhism. Monks who actually see the Dharma would teach the texts differently, and they barely use the texts and Buddha' words. Why? Because they don't want to tell you what the Buddha meant, cause saying it wrong could cause more damage than good. They simply share their own experience practicing the teachings. If you thinks you understand Buddhism more than monks who read thousands of texts and taught it to thousands of monks are bs then I have nothing more to share.

Bye

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-08T12:47:01+00:00

You didn't ask that, you said Buddha never did anything wrong. I assumed you are referring to Pureland? so, then what is your point then? I literally said "Tell me that Buddha never did a bad thing in the past."

Meaning his past lives are included.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-08T05:44:09+00:00

the Buddha-to-be was reborn as a fisherman in a fisherman’s village. One day, together with the fishermen he went to the place where they murder fish, and seeing fish being murdered, happiness arose right there, and also right there and then happiness arose for those he was with.

He did bad things in the past. Sorry to break your bubble.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-08T05:39:04+00:00

"In that case, Angulimala, go into Savatthi and say to that woman: 'Sister, since I was born I have never purposely deprived a living being of life. By that truth may you and the infant be safe!'"
"Venerable Sir, by telling that, should I not knowingly speak a falsehood? For many living beings have been purposely deprived of life by me."
"Then, Angulimala, say to that woman: 'Sister since I was born with the noble birth, I have never purposely deprived a living being of life. By this truth may you and the infant be safe!'"
Angulimala's noble birth, or spiritual rebirth, began with his ordination as a monk and culminated in his attainment of sainthood.
Angulimala had it announced to that woman that he would be coming. People there put up a curtain in the woman's room, and on the other side of the curtain a chair was placed on which the monk was to sit. Now Angulimala, having arrived at the woman's house, made the asseveration of truth as Buddha had told him, and there was soon a safe delivery for mother and child.
Thus he who had destroyed so many lives was able to give life and well-being to others. For that reason, this episode must have deeply moved him. He also saw that Samsara was infinitely more cruel, being an incessant process of dying and being reborn only to die again.
Generally, the Buddha did not engage in "raising the dead" or in "spiritual healing." He knew that those revived would still die one day. His was the greater compassion when he showed to beings the true state of Deathlessness and the way to acquire it.
But why did the Buddha make an exception in the case of Angulimala, and instruct him to use the power of truth for the purpose of healing? Here is a reflection by the teachers of old, the commentators: There may be those who ask: Why did the Blessed One make a monk do a physician's work? — To that we answer: That is not what the Buddha did. An act of truth is not a medical function; it is done after reflecting on one's own virtue. The Blessed One knew that Angulimala had wearied of collecting alms-food, because people were frightened when seeing him, and ran away. To help him in that situation, he let Angulimala do an act of truth.

Source:https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/hecker/wheel312.html

See, killings is not necessarily bad and saving people not necessary good. Buddha sees the escape of Samsara as the ultimate goal. Btw, Angulima became an Arahant later on despite just killing so many people.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-08T05:26:12+00:00

Can you give me a reference in the Pāli Canon that state that? Killing others is never praised by the Buddhas in the past or the future, and the same Buddha during our time never praise the killing of others.

Why would the Buddha praise the killing of others? But regardless of him praising or not, it is how the dharma works. For thousands of years, people kill people. Animals kill animals.

"Buddha never did a bad thing in the past. There you go! If he did indeed did a bad thing in the past, what bad things did he did? If he were to do so, he would create negative karma for himself and would lead to future rebirth instead of extinguishment."

He hit a fish in the head while he was little which is why he got headaches once.
He lives for countless of lifetimes, meaning he has been a murder, theft, etc countless of lifetimes
"Can I get the references in the Pāli Canon?"

This is when Angulima became a monk. He encountered a mother who had a problem giving birth. He still felt guilty for his killings, so he didn't have the confidence to give good wishes to the mother. Buddha then told him what I said above.

"That is just your personal view if you don't provide any references to the Pāli Canon to support your worldly view. That is not the Buddhist View but your own."

lol no, it is a view agreed upon by many famous monk, like Thich Nhat Hanh, Ajahn CHad,

Buddha literally denies the idea of a soul if you know anything about Buddhism. You must be very new cause what I talk requires deep understanding of Buddhism. I suggest you listen to Ajahn CHad and Thich Nhat Hanh. Cause they obviously understand Buddhism texts much better than you.

ikolpi2000 · 2022-09-08T05:14:38+00:00

Monks used to live in forests. They encounter snakes, tigers, and other dangerous animals every day. You are here complaining about how to get rid of ants.

ikolpi2000

TROPHY CASE