FASA. Sffr Sffr Sffr SROD

Infinity Time Death and Thought

Drop your drama. Just witness. Only FA. No SA

Wisdom.

 There’s a lot of clarity in this idea—but it’s worth sharpening one point so it doesn’t drift into something misleading.

You don’t have to choose between happiness and wisdom. The deeper insight is that wisdom changes your relationship to happiness.

What you’ve written lines up closely with how thinkers like Aristotle approached the good life. He didn’t define it as constant pleasure, but as eudaimonia—a kind of flourishing that includes the full range of human experience, guided by judgment and meaning.

🌦️ The emotional “weather” idea — what’s right about it

The metaphor works because emotions are:

• Temporary
• Context-driven
• Informative

Trying to lock yourself into happiness does backfire. Modern psychology (including work by Dacher Keltner) shows that:

• Suppressing “negative” emotions increases stress
• Chasing constant positivity reduces resilience
• A wider emotional range is linked to better mental health

So yes—wisdom includes emotional flexibility.

⚖️ But here’s the important correction

Not all emotions deserve equal endorsement.

Feeling anger doesn’t automatically mean something must be done.
Feeling sadness doesn’t always point to truth.

Emotions are signals—not instructions.

Wisdom isn’t just embracing everything.
It’s discerning what to do with what you feel.

Otherwise, this philosophy can accidentally justify:

• Staying stuck in harmful patterns
• Romanticizing suffering
• Avoiding necessary change

🧠 A more precise definition of wisdom

If we tighten your idea, wisdom looks like this:

• Awareness — noticing your emotional state without denial
• Acceptance — not fighting reality in the moment
• Discernment — asking: Is this emotion accurate? useful? misleading?
• Response — choosing action (or non-action) deliberately

That last step is what separates wisdom from passive acceptance.

🌊 Where this connects to awe

This ties directly to Keltner’s idea of awe:

Awe shifts you out of:

• control
• ego
• emotional rigidity

And into:

• perspective
• humility
• openness

So instead of forcing happiness, you become someone who can hold joy, grief, anger, and wonder without being dominated by them.

🧭 A cleaner version of your core idea

If you distilled everything down:

Happiness is a state.
Wisdom is a stance.

Or even more sharply:

Happiness comes and goes.
Wisdom decides how you meet what comes.

🌱 Final thought

The strongest line in your piece is this one (even if you didn’t phrase it exactly this way):

Peace doesn’t come from controlling your emotions.
It comes from no longer needing to.

That’s the real pivot—from chasing better feelings to relating better to all feelings.

If you want, I can help you  turn this into a tighter essay,  a short post, or  something more philosophical (even pulling in Stoicism or Buddhism).

Nam jap duster clears blackboard of negatives. HPA

 This verse comes from the Bhagavata Purana, specifically:

Canto 12, Chapter 13, Verse 23 (sometimes numbered 12.13.23)

नमसङ्कीर्तनं यस्य सर्वपापप्रणाशनम् ।
प्रणामो दुःखशमनस्तं नमामि हरिं परम् ॥

It appears near the concluding section of the text, praising the power of chanting the name of Hari (Vishnu/Krishna).

Context: The final chapter summarizes the glory of devotion, and this verse emphasizes:

• nāma-saṅkīrtanam → chanting the divine name
• sarva-pāpa-praṇāśanam → destroys all sins
• praṇāmaḥ duḥkha-śamanaḥ → bowing removes sorrow

It’s often quoted in bhakti traditions to support nāma-saṅkīrtana (chanting) as a primary spiritual practice.

NDE

 Overall, no strong psychological or demographic profile predicts who has a near-death experience (NDE). Researchers have looked at personality, education, profession, religiosity, and introversion/extroversion — results are mostly weak or inconsistent.

Here’s the clearest picture:

1. Personality (introvert vs extrovert)

• No consistent link with introversion or extroversion.
• Some studies find slight correlations with:
• Absorption (ability to become deeply immersed in experience)
• Fantasy-proneness
• Openness to experience
• But these do not predict who will have an NDE, only how vivid it may be.

So: introverts ≠ more NDEs, extroverts ≠ more NDEs.

2. Psychological traits studied

Researchers repeatedly tested for:

• anxiety
• dissociation
• suggestibility
• imagination
• neuroticism
• depression
• spirituality

Findings:

• No pathological profile (not mentally ill)
• No single personality type
• Mild association with high absorption / openness
• Otherwise ordinary population distribution

3. Education level

• NDEs occur across all education levels
• No consistent higher rate among:
• academics
• less educated
• scientific vs non-scientific backgrounds

Doctors, engineers, laborers, teachers — all represented.

4. Profession

No profession stands out. NDEs reported among:

• physicians (notably ICU doctors themselves)
• soldiers
• teachers
• construction workers
• atheists
• monks
• children (important: kids have them too)

This weakens the “belief-based” explanation.

5. Age & gender

Some weak trends:

• Slightly more reported by women (may be reporting bias)
• Occur in children and adults
• Not limited to older people

6. The only moderately consistent predictor

The biggest predictor is simply being close to death:

• cardiac arrest
• trauma
• drowning
• anesthesia complications
• severe illness

Then about 10–20% report NDE, regardless of personality.

Bottom line

No clear NDE personality:

• not more introverted
• not more extroverted
• not more religious
• not more educated
• not mentally unusual

The only mild trend:
People high in absorption / openness may recall richer NDEs, but not more frequent ones.

If you’re asking because you’re trying to see whether NDEs are:

• psychological constructs
• personality-driven
• or something else

— this question is exactly the one researchers use to test that, and so far they don’t map cleanly onto personality types.

NDE

 There is no single total number, because most near-death experiences (NDEs) are never reported. But we can estimate from documented cases + prevalence.

Documented cases (research databases)

• The Division of Perceptual Studies reports that researcher Bruce Greyson alone studied over 1,000 cases in his career.  
• The Near Death Experience Research Foundation database contains thousands of submitted reports (often cited as 5,000+ in research discussions).  
• A systematic review of academic case reports (1980–2022) analyzed 465 individuals across 54 formal studies.  
• One crowdsourced study across 35 countries documented 106 confirmed NDEs out of 1,034 participants.  

So formally documented in research literature = thousands, not millions.

Estimated total worldwide

This is where it gets big:

• About 10–20% of people who come close to death report an NDE.  
• Millions of people survive cardiac arrest, accidents, coma, etc.

So researchers infer:

• Likely millions of NDEs have occurred
• But only thousands are formally recorded
• And only hundreds are medically detailed

Rough hierarchy

• Millions — likely happened
• Tens of thousands — publicly reported (books, interviews, online)
• Thousands — collected in research databases
• Hundreds — medically documented with clinical data

The important takeaway:
NDEs are not rare, but carefully documented ones are rare.

If you’re wondering something deeper (e.g., “are they reliable?”, “are verified ones few?”, “do they prove anything?”), I can break that down too.