Epiphany today

I'm sure this might be common knowledge as it should be but this kind of just hit me out of the blue today when i was thinking about "what is hate". I got to thinking today about the opposite of this negative emotion and started thinking about happiness and have concluded that:

The greatest amount of happiness is acquired from doing good things for others.

reply to post by mojo2012


hatred has consumed everything in its path. just look and its a darn shame some of us just want to see the love and not in a hippie way. love as is respect for mankind.

reply to post by mojo2012

If i had kept all my hate to the people who have done me wrong, i would be in jail for murder of at least two of them.
But i got a good mind, that always tell me to stay calm, so i am still a free man.

It havn't been easy though.

Hate (to me) can be defined as a distinct and progressed forgetfulness that we are all connected and One. Our Ego creates the illusion of separation from another, and the illusion of difference magnifies from small issues into hate, progressively, as the Ego stirs and creates false illusions of difference.

Ego self-feeds so hate (and what comes next) is a natural process to that feeding, but completely unnatural to living as One.


Does that makes sense?

And your point about helping others, VERY astute and yes, it is the polar opposite. I'd like to suggest the reason I believe this is so.

"The greatest amount of happiness is acquired from doing good things for others." Because recognizing we are all One, the path of Service to Others is simply knowledge that by serving others, I am serving myself.

Contrastingly, Service to Self means that the rejection of the truth that we are all One, I must serve only myself because I am the only one that matters, and is worthy of it. Hate can be a progressed feeling that occurs (due to the pain of separation from the Service to Others path.) The further one veers from the STO path, the more painful it becomes, because it is not the natural alignment of Love/Nature/Being One.

reply to post by fourthmeal


yes and now i hate you for making me crave taco bell

I added more to my post because I realized I only partially responded to your epiphany.

Also, yes, lol, Fourthmeal. I forgot about that being Taco Bell's thing. In years past, I got that nickname somewhat because I was always out late partying, and all that was open was... you guessed it. But with a kid and a normal work life, I suppose the nickname has long been inappropriate for who I really am these days.

The greatest happiness for me is experiencing something I love in perfect happiness along with everyone else.

Meaning when I'm happy, the people I love must be happy too for me to be truly 100% happy. If my mother is sad for example, I cannot fully enjoy lets say "a holiday"

Which of course is almost impossible in this world today, which is why I love the idea of heaven, where everyone is as happy as can be forever.

Anyway pain and suffering has positives, if you take it the right way it can help shape you into a stonger more mature individual, and of course most of all makes you appreciate the positive things in life.

Ahh where am I going with this? haha.

I guess I will end with, happiness is all about perspective........I think.

Today when going home from a meating, i had anger and frustration which could have turned in to hate.

I decided to get it away by rewarding my self with a beer walking home(selfish) when i got out of the shop, with a beer in one hand, and the change from the note i paid with in the other, i saw one of those guys that sells The Homeless Newspaper( they try to make some coins from the paper) and just dropped the change in his hand( 10 dollar, in Danish Kroner) and wished him a good weekend.

He was pleased, and i was relieved, it's that easy.

reply to post by mojo2012


reply to post by mojo2012


that is very selfish of you to be so concerned with acquiring happiness.

according to the standard program, you are supposed to do good things for others to promote THEIR happiness.....


....selflessness and all, you know?

reply to post by tgidkp

....selflessness and all, you know?

I sincerely doubt there is a single species on the planet capable of acting selflessly. Even the so called "hive mentality" is better understood as swarm intelligence,
which leads us to self organized systems.

Nice to see you my friend.

reply to post by mojo2012


Achieving the greater good, which would be the greatest good to the greatest amount, requires affluence. An affluent individual can do far more for others than one trapped in poverty. Poverty reflects a scarcity paradigm. Affluence harmonizes with abundance. In order to do good things for others one must be able to do good things for themselves. In order to good things for oneself, one must be happy.

Immanuel Kant suggests we forget happiness and do our moral duty. I would suggest that happiness is our moral duty.

reply to post by tgidkp


If you are unhappy you cannot help but make 'others' unhappy. Find happiness for yourself and you will not beable to spread unhappiness.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by mojo2012

 

Achieving the greater good, which would be the greatest good to the greatest amount, requires affluence. An affluent individual can do far more for others than one trapped in poverty. Poverty reflects a scarcity paradigm. Affluence harmonizes with abundance. In order to do good things for others one must be able to do good things for themselves. In order to good things for oneself, one must be happy.

Immanuel Kant suggests we forget happiness and do our moral duty. I would suggest that happiness is our moral duty.

Ah and thus we get into what degree of affluence? While the primary definition is that of great wealth, it is also to have great abundance. Could a affluently happy person be able to spread their abundance in a manner that would be akin to who is affluent in wealth?

Hate is one of the traps that distracts your soul and keeps you confined to this world. It is another distraction that keeps you from the Creator and a higher sense of self. It is blinding. Use it like a barometer as to where you are in relationship to the Holy/Great spirit; The more you find yourself involved in hate, the farther away you are from the truth of anything.

reply to post by mojo2012


So what happens when you keep doing good for others and they don't do any good back? I find this leads to resentment, and by extension, hate.

I hate that which I perceive to harm or hinder me. Mosquitoes and corrupt authority figures top the list. I try to imagine a deeper meaning for their existence, but mostly I still hate them and want them gone or transformed.

reply to post by ownbestenemy

Ah and thus we get into what degree of affluence? While the primary definition is that of great wealth, it is also to have great abundance. Could a affluently happy person be able to spread their abundance in a manner that would be akin to who is affluent in wealth?

You know me better than virtually anyone else in this site, Brother, and you know my personal circumstances at the moment. If we accept the lexicographers definitions of wealth then we generally accept that wealth means possessing valuable material goods. However, these lexicographers do provide a simpler definition which simply means abundance of, or a profusion of, such as a wealth of knowledge, a wealth of experience, a wealth of friends and so on. I do not have much money, and I struggle just survive, but you know me well enough to know I am happy. While I can be guilty of agitating and annoying the crap out of people, not just in this site, but in the "real" world, I am also blessed with many, many, friends, and I would like to think that to some degree this is so because what wealth I do have lies in other areas outside of material possession.

While it is more likely - at this time - that you would have to buy me beers, or coffee, than I would for you, I do hope that I bring something to the table and that I can offer you some of my wealth that is not at all a part of any material world. I am happy even though I suffer, but to paraphrase John Galt; I get that suffering is so unimportant in the overall scheme of things and that pain should be flatly rejected and never allowed to scar my own personal perception of existence in this universe. That's Ayn Rand talking and me parroting, but if this thought means anything at all to you, or others, then I have shared some wealth.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
You know me better than virtually anyone else in this site, Brother, and you know my personal circumstances at the moment. If we accept the lexicographers definitions of wealth then we generally accept that wealth means possessing valuable material goods. However, these lexicographers do provide a simpler definition which simply means abundance of, or a profusion of, such as a wealth of knowledge, a wealth of experience, a wealth of friends and so on. I do not have much money, and I struggle just survive, but you know me well enough to know I am happy. While I can be guilty of agitating and annoying the crap out of people, not just in this site, but in the "real" world, I am also blessed with many, many, friends, and I would like to think that to some degree this is so because what wealth I do have lies in other areas outside of material possession.

While it is more likely - at this time - that you would have to buy me beers, or coffee, than I would for you, I do hope that I bring something to the table and that I can offer you some of my wealth that is not at all a part of any material world. I am happy even though I suffer, but to paraphrase John Galt; I get that suffering is so unimportant in the overall scheme of things and that pain should be flatly rejected and never allowed to scar my own personal perception of existence in this universe. That's Ayn Rand talking and me parroting, but if this thought means anything at all to you, or others, then I have shared some wealth.

Aye and I believe I accomplished what I wished to do; to see you present this topic with your affluent ability to convey your message. I felt your response, though in context to who you responded to, needed to be broadened out and not get hung up on material wealth. Just as you explained that affluent has been defined, we can define wealth in many more manners too. Wealth is not money, at least not solely. The vast wealth of knowledge that we are presented with is proof of that. The wealth of a good friend that smiles when we are sad is proof of this.

As always you have a way of imparting your wealth

Originally posted by mojo2012

The greatest amount of happiness is acquired from doing good things for others.

I agree and it's pretty simple when you get right down to it.

Human beings are communal by nature, and instinctively we enjoy getting along with each other. We actually like doing good to each other, and we like it even more than we like winning - even to the extent that winning (as a desirable goal in life) requires a PR campaign that's constant and aggressively marketed to maintain its popularity regardless of the society you find it being championed as a primary driver. Competition exhausts us and depresses the average person, regardless of the outcome, and while we have to compete to survive, being compassionate comes naturally to a person, and gives us a 2nd wind. And this is due to the inherent survival strategy that has existed as a DNA level directive in each of us that promotes "the strength of the community (large or small) is always greater than the strength of the individual (rich or poor) and that all for one, one for all survival is the only truly effective strategy that exists for the human being"

The "powers that be" will always try to divide us, and to get us to compete against each other, so that they can remain the strongest among the weak, but they can't prevent any one of us from realizing just how soothing and restorative a small act of selfless kindness can be, as we wander through the layers and layers of marketing that urges us to break free from the "oppression" of social responsibility and cut all the losers loose to their own fates. Meanwhile, we're further isolating ourselves from each other and becoming more and more vulnerable to the inherent weakness of that isolation.

Especially middle aged men. They are the most vulnerable people in our American society. They can become completely isolated, even from their own families, and during a period of life when they could - if properly connected to their own natural community of similar people (men and women) - be the most powerful segment of our society, they generally find themselves commiserating with hired isolation-enablers like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, and wonder what the hell happened to the country they thought must've existed at one time for their dads and granddads.

And all the time, these poor bastards have no idea that their "lifeline" - the media commiseration cabal - are dragging them further and further away from the people [the local community) who can give them the control and empowerment that they feel has been taken from them by (government, Satan, modern culture, women, whatever) with the carefully crafted sales pitch they get each and every day when they turn on their radios and TVs. And these guys are miserable. Even when they win, they're miserable.

Originally posted by NorEaster
Human beings are communal by nature, and instinctively we enjoy getting along with each other.

I am not sold 100% on this statement. I believe that humans tend to seek out other humans, but communal is very much a learned and behavioral situation that cannot be classified across all of the human race. Though we do enjoy the company of others, I would contend it is the individuality of each of us that draws us to seek out that connection and has nothing to do with wanting to be communal or part of a community.

Competition exhausts us and depresses the average person, regardless of the outcome, and while we have to compete to survive, being compassionate comes naturally to a person, and gives us a 2nd wind. And this is due to the inherent survival strategy that has existed as a DNA level directive in each of us that promotes "the strength of the community (large or small) is always greater than the strength of the individual (rich or poor) and that all for one, one for all survival is the only truly effective strategy that exists for the human being"

Competition exhausts us? Depresses the average person? I respect your point of view but have to disagree. Competition is what drives us. A good example is that of my oldest son. When I was teaching him how to swim, he learned what I taught him. It wasn't until he was around other kids did he really push himself outside of his comfort zone to try a new style, swim deeper, swim farther, etc. This natural competition pushed his skills and his confidence (which equated to his happiness overall) further than if he were to just swim in a pool alone.

Granted the above is unique and we could find and tell stories of children who just naturally strive to drive further. In which again, I would point to my own son's reading abilities. He pushes himself and does not care what anyone else can or cannot do with that regard.

I would contend that competition is what has propelled human beings above all and invigorates our spirits much more than compassion does (though compassion is not to be discounted as being important). And while three cords wound together will be inherently stronger than a single cord; it is the individual strength of each which leads to the strength of the whole. The whole would be weak if each were not strong -- a poorly constructed arch depends upon the strength of each piece to be as strong as it is whole.

The "powers that be" will always try to divide us, and to get us to compete against each other, so that they can remain the strongest among the weak, but they can't prevent any one of us from realizing just how soothing and restorative a small act of selfless kindness can be, as we wander through the layers and layers of marketing that urges us to break free from the "oppression" of social responsibility and cut all the losers loose to their own fates. Meanwhile, we're further isolating ourselves from each other and becoming more and more vulnerable to the inherent weakness of that isolation.

I am not a buyer into the mysterious "powers that be" to dictate my life and my strengths. I make my way myself regardless of what outside pressures are pushing on me. It is "their" competition that pushes me to become stronger and better.

Especially middle aged men. They are the most vulnerable people in our American society. They can become completely isolated, even from their own families, and during a period of life when they could - if properly connected to their own natural community of similar people (men and women) - be the most powerful segment of our society, they generally find themselves commiserating with hired isolation-enablers like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, and wonder what the hell happened to the country they thought must've existed at one time for their dads and granddads.

And all the time, these poor bastards have no idea that their "lifeline" - the media commiseration cabal - are dragging them further and further away from the people [the local community) who can give them the control and empowerment that they feel has been taken from them by (government, Satan, modern culture, women, whatever) with the carefully crafted sales pitch they get each and every day when they turn on their radios and TVs. And these guys are miserable. Even when they win, they're miserable.

This is where I believe your true message begins to prevail and please don't take it as an attack, just what I see in what you wrote. With all that you have written up to this point, you have been pushing the "village" idealism, or more bluntly, the Marxist idealism (again, not calling you a Marxist). But you moved from talking briefly about happiness to all the ills of society present in the United States: Capitalism, media, Limbaugh, competition, and our individualist nature.


Post Script:

NorEaster, I forgot to add that Happiness is in the eye of the beholder, or at least that is how I believe it to be and what you wrote may be your happiness and I wasn't trying to disparage or deny it, just wanted to offer a separate opinion of how others might view it.

Originally posted by ownbestenemy

Originally posted by NorEaster
Human beings are communal by nature, and instinctively we enjoy getting along with each other.

I am not sold 100% on this statement. I believe that humans tend to seek out other humans, but communal is very much a learned and behavioral situation that cannot be classified across all of the human race. Though we do enjoy the company of others, I would contend it is the individuality of each of us that draws us to seek out that connection and has nothing to do with wanting to be communal or part of a community.

Learned? From whom? From small communities (the family) is whom. You think like a 21st century person. Don't. Instinctive behavior is much more primitive. Humans have never been lone hunters. They've always traveled in packs.

Competition exhausts us? Depresses the average person? I respect your point of view but have to disagree. Competition is what drives us. A good example is that of my oldest son. When I was teaching him how to swim, he learned what I taught him. It wasn't until he was around other kids did he really push himself outside of his comfort zone to try a new style, swim deeper, swim farther, etc. This natural competition pushed his skills and his confidence (which equated to his happiness overall) further than if he were to just swim in a pool alone.

I'm going to suggest that his being with his "kind" (community of similars) allowed him to feel relaxed enough to "own" what you had taught him and internalize it. Your example is actually a better defense of the communal nature of humanity than the competitive nature as a primordial influence.

I would contend that competition is what has propelled human beings above all and invigorates our spirits much more than compassion does (though compassion is not to be discounted as being important). And while three cords wound together will be inherently stronger than a single cord; it is the individual strength of each which leads to the strength of the whole.

One strong chord will never be stronger than three average chords wound as a cable. The winding of the three multiplies the strength, not simply adding to the strength. A community is immeasurably stronger than any outlier can ever be. And in many different ways of being stronger.

The "powers that be" will always try to divide us, and to get us to compete against each other, so that they can remain the strongest among the weak,.

I am not a buyer into the mysterious "powers that be" to dictate my life and my strengths. I make my way myself regardless of what outside pressures are pushing on me. It is "their" competition that pushes me to become stronger and better.

You can speak for yourself but not for humanity in general. You've been properly programmed to embrace the "rugged individual" archetype, so of course, you'll feel that it's the best way to be (given the choice between loner status and being part of a community), but the rest of humanity doesn't seem to agree with you, if cities and nations and other obvious examples of community are any indication.

This is where I believe your true message begins to prevail and please don't take it as an attack, just what I see in what you wrote. With all that you have written up to this point, you have been pushing the "village" idealism, or more bluntly, the Marxist idealism (again, not calling you a Marxist). But you moved from talking briefly about happiness to all the ills of society present in the United States: Capitalism, media, Limbaugh, competition, and our individualist nature.

I haven't been pushing anything. Just stating the obvious as it exists within our own society.

Marxism is what it is and to be honest, I've never bothered with finding out if it's actually anything like what it's been described as being, so I can really comment on that. I've been researching the basic structure of physical existence and how that base factors into how the rest of advanced progressive development has manifested. Not very political at all, and much more anthropological as it relates to the development of the human mind.

The human mind is what I was examining, and it doesn't exist in a vacuum. It exists in intimate contextual relationship with everything that affects it and engages it. My issue isn't with any one damaging impact on the human mind, but with all damaging impacts on the human mind. The media goons I mentioned are just one small slice of what has developed as a destructive influence on the natural expression of the human being. I guess, that as a middle aged man, I've been more aware of what's hurting my fellow middle aged guy human beings. I don't suffer from the same sort of affliction, but I see it all around me as a much more immediate problem, likely due to my being a middle aged guy myself.