RendHeaven

read his blog posts - click the tab at the top of this page that says "blog"

@charles1 phenomenology is knocking on the door of nonduality but isn't quite the same thing (still too much categorization and fantasy). Idealism is way way way off. Idealism does not understand the difference between actuality and concept. When Leo uses the word "imagination," he means something totally different from your average ideas and thoughts. Idealism, not so much. They still have some sense that "reality" can be grasped through human mind-activity (ideas and thoughts). There is still hidden subconscious duality that is taken for granted, such as "there is an intelligence within me (separate from the rest of the perceived world) that is doing activity." Even the idealist believes that, even if they deny physicality and matter. There is no single process. Maybe you are describing your own process, but that is by no means universal

What a mindfuck! My conditioning immediately objected with: "Yes, but that's just imagination... what about in real life?" But there is no such thing! I'm imagining "stuff behind the scenes." How sneaky... Thanks for the clarity.

Would this "rock" be acknowledged by "other people?" Or would it simply appear real - insofar as we consider "physical reality" to be "real" - to the one manifesting it? I know these lines get blurred and that there is ultimately no ground for "real" or "unreal." Nonetheless, I am curious - let's pretend you could be so unbelievably conscious that you could manifest Actuality out of thin air, Jesus style. Would your best friend sitting next to you Jump back and say, "woah!" or will his eyes gaze straight past, staring at the opposite wall?

If that's the case, wouldn't it be silly to control this flow by "hanging up?"

What if you only get half the messa-*hangs up the phone*

Not exploring something is actually an epistemic trap, not a boon. Your greatest fear (it seems) is being sucked into Leo's biased perspective. But in denying Leo's perspective, out of fear, you strengthen your own bias (even though you call it "epistemological care") Try throwing yourself into it. And trust the process. You're far too critical to be suckered into someone else's perspective... Your greatest enemy is yourself.

@AlphaAbundance what?

ok

@Malekakisioannis Lol yes throw in the wink to appear as though you are detached and nonreactive

@Gsk Leo's words are not meant to be taken as beliefs. You are currently trying to reconcile his words as beliefs. Drop them. Besides, you acknowledge that they are not helpful to you. So drop them. I'm seeing a lot of blaming coming from you. Quit externalizing your pain. Leo hasn't "done" anything "to" you. You're making that up. He's literally just a dude talking to a video camera. There's nothing to be enraged about.

Sounds like you're proposing an ethical "bait-and-switch" of some sort! Many times I wonder if that might be my calling as well. Nonduality can be seen as a rather different "subject matter" from what most would consider "normal" - science, mathematics, history, english, etc. All of these more "conventional" subjects arise from the thinking mind using symbols. Nonduality is the opposite of that, you might say. "Nonduality" is not even a "subject matter" - it's not even a thing! So how the hell do you share that with someone wedged in a web of symbolic beliefs? I mean I mostly hide my "spiritual" side in public, I know I will sound dysfunctional and crazy if I start talking about this. It really does come down to individual bodhisattvas "watering things down" doesn't it? I don't see any other way of facilitating a massive cultural shift. Someone has to sort of "take the blow" - and sacrifice going all the way (not only in their personal growth - but also in their teachings) - for the sake of empathy by delivering a "kiddie version" of nonduality as though it were low-hanging fruit. Even if they had reserved "higher teachings" for committed students, their split focus would be a hindrance. And this archetype is nothing new, it's been around for millennia. But I feel that it might be more applicable to our current generation than ever before, given the sheer amount of comfort and distraction our society offers. Alan Watts is a good example of someone like this. Amazing introduction to this stuff, but his speeches get repetitive and stop helping you once you outgrow them and commit to a personal journey. And it's not uncommon knowledge that he was never truly "enlightened" himself - he was just more or less aware of his True nature, but apparently settled for a glimpse and had more of a focus on social impact. Even Alan freakin' Watts doesn't seem to be enough these days though, I've tried encouraging people to check out his speeches and they would only make people more confused. I used to wonder why cheesy group "mindfulness and meditation" centers existed, since those centers are never really serious about existential work and they usually just market as "stress relief," but now I understand.

@TrynaBeTurquoise You sound crazy!

I've actually imagined myself doing this, it's a humbling image

@LfcCharlie4 I'm sorry but you're preaching to the choir lol. I agree with everything you've said, and I don't think we really disagree about anything even though you said you had a "Huge issue" with my last point. We are just speaking about different aspects of the same journey. I don't know where you are at on your own journey, but I find it sort of funny that you're explaining embodiment here specifically. After all, this thread is about a yet-to-be-realized Life Purpose that attempts to "deliver consciousness to the unconscious." It makes no sense to talk about embodiment. We're starting from ground zero, where a guy (Raptorsin) proposes to teach about consciousness to people who don't even know yet that consciousness is a thing Within the metaphor of the 10 Ox-hearding pictures, I wonder if that even qualifies for stage 1 lol. It's more like stage 0. I believe my point doesn't change. I've given multiple disclaimers about how everything I write breaks down at the highest levels. And I always pick my words with precision: That is to say, if you intend to leverage "meshing" of finite activities (gaming, cooking, travel, novels, whatever) with consciousness work for the sake of teaching consciousness, your student is bound to hit a plateau (the "inherent limit"). I think I wasn't very clear about what I meant by "meshing." Hopefully this clarifies. By no means am I suggesting the student should cease all activities! That's silly. You can still do your normal activities and be fully committed to awakening. The shift is primarily in priority and secondarily in behavior. Contrast this with someone who claims that they are committed to awakening, but actually ends up unconsciously playing video games more than they actually do inner work. That's where the "counter-productivity" comes in. And to anyone thinking, "Well, why not just be conscious while playing video games?" the untenability of that position is exactly what I was breaking down in my previous post. Thinking you can do both at the same time is naive, if you are still in the seeking stage. Again, the seeker has not even glimpsed the ox yet. This is where commitment is necessary. This is where shedding is necessary. That's what this work is about. "Don't put the cart before the horse," as they say. To bring it back to the OP, I was hoping that this dynamic we are covering now would be addressed - that in the "seeker" stage, this "mesh" of spirituality and gaming is limiting and counter-productive as a teaching and as a path wheres in the embodiment stage, absolute freedom is unlocked. So that puts Raptorsin in an interesting position where he either has to push for this "post-seeking stage" of embodiment in his marketing and branding (very unlikely, since nearly nobody is actually there, although we all pretend to be there because we're fake), or more likely (but still unlikely), he must manage to communicate through his marketing and branding the early parts of the "seeking stage" while being fully aware of the self-imposed boundary and tether that is gaming. Now that's interesting. P.S. Leo has an extensive history with video games. I recall him maybe an year ago describing how video games no longer really do anything for him anymore now that he is so conscious, and so he doesn't really interact with them anymore. I'm not woke, nor am I at this "embodiment" stage myself, but I definitely have an intuition for what he means. Once you're past "seeking," it's true that you can return to gaming with loving embrace. But chances are, you might actually outgrow it completely. Who knows, a stroll in the park might be more authentic for you at that point. The simple stuff, ya know? Why simplicity is so beautiful is still a mystery to me though.

@LfcCharlie4 I think you've mischaracterized me as an "addict," missing the point entirely. I also never wrote that games can be "incredibly addictive." I specifically said that they "lull you into unconsciousness." This whole analysis is very prescriptive based on the very little that I've shared about my gaming history. Notice that I wrote "borderline addict," meaning not-actually-addicted. I used that language to emphasize the escapism and denial I went through. Yes, it's possible for activities to be escapism without necessarily being addicted to them. For most people, in my experience, almost all activities in their life are escapism (including the most "important" things: school, career, friends, family, and spirituality). Even something as banal and innocent as owning a pet will turn out to be escapism on a deep level (the question is, will you see that for yourself and admit it? Or will you deny, deny, deny?). Noticing this subtlety does not mean you are addicted to your pet. For me, putting down video games is not the problem. The problem is that I am not truly happy or at peace when gaming (because it 'lulls me into unconsciousness.' Ironically, I can be conscious of that happening!) My original claim was that, "For some people, it's simply the case that video games are holding them back in their spiritual development." In hindsight I would actually change that statement to "For almost all people, [...]" Notice, that statement says nothing about "Addicts." Quite the opposite, actually. I meant something more like, "[regular!] people who mix video games and spirituality will stunt their growth in consciousness." The reason I'm hammering on this 'addiction' point so much is because I felt in your post that what I was really trying to convey was batted aside and dismissed as, "Well, you're a special case. You were addicted! Other people are fine." No! I was just fine (in terms of addiction)! Except I was not (in terms of consciousness)! Lol. I'm concerned when you re-frame what I am saying into "the perspective of an addict," since that implicitly conveys that "this has nothing to do with the average person's experience." That's a great tactic to avoid self-reflection. Furthermore, it's just not the case that this is an exclusive experience. I can intuit (and understand through empathy) that almost everyone goes through this 'lull of unconsciousness' while gaming. (even Raptorsin clearly goes through this, if you read his journal) Therefore, my suggestion was to quit muddying the waters. Commit to consciousness and drop the games, or stay within the realm of games and admit that you're really not all-in on consciousness. It's not that you can't do both... it's just that you are inherently limiting the results of your consciousness work, if you choose to do both (with equal intensity). Insisting that you can do both without limiting your results is like (someone with a horrible metabolism) eating candy and going on a weight loss diet expecting their dream body. They can pretend that they are "striking a healthy balance," (and maybe they are!) but their body will never become godly, at least not in a sustainable manner. To get that dream body, this person would need to commit to weight loss and either cut the candy entirely or eat it once in a blue moon. Edit: Of course it's not always a clear-cut binary. I imagine some extraordinary person could pull off gaming and spirituality flawlessly (in the same way that someone with an amazing metabolism can pull off eating candy with a six pack), but this is a very rare one-in-a-million individual. And I would hesitate before proclaiming, "That's me!!" Because everybody thinks that they're the special one. That's precisely ego. Extraordinary consciousness is not distributed so generously in the same way that a good metabolism is. Now, everything I said flies out the window if you (and by you I mean anybody reading this, I'm not addressing anyone in particular anymore) manage to genuinely undermine the statement that video games "lull you into unconsciousness." That is totally possible from certain unattached perspectives. But keep in mind, 'attachment' goes insanely deep. Just because you've dissolved a few layers, don't think you're unshackled. I don't merely mean "attachment to video games." I also mean attachment to: pleasures and desires, entertainment, activities and "doing," or "busy-ness," avoiding, any and all beliefs and meanings, purpose, identity, etc. These attachments all generally stem from an even deeper fear of: responsibility, pain, boredom, loneliness, silence, not-knowing, emptiness/being, directionless-ness, confronting evil, admitting your wrongs, being unloved, etc. Yes, all of these things are layered and actively cloaked while we play video games, no matter how innocently or harmlessly that playing transpires. In self-actualizing and "raising our consciousness," our goal is to bring these attachments and fears to the forefront, and to release them. That process requires a willingness to give up your cloak. That's not to say the cloak is bad. The cloak is cool, and fun, and sometimes even good. But the cloak inherently blocks the light. That very light is what we're going for here. Likening video games to meditation and breathwork (yoga) is a far cry. And be very careful about denial: "Well, maybe video games lull you into unconsciousness, RendHeaven, but not me and other people like me." If you are a gamer and that's your reaction to this post, you have so much further to go. Lastly, a greater meta-point might be that everything I have said applies to pretty much any finite activity. I'm not just picking on video games. Imagine; "I'm gonna mash spirituality together with cooking!" "I'm gonna mash spirituality together with travel! "I'm gonna mash spirituality together with relationships!" "I'm gonna mash spirituality together with fantasy novels!" These are all valiant ideas, and I'm sure they've been done by somebody somewhere. But understand that these ideals are inherently limiting (if not counter-productive) as a teaching, or a path. Be honest with yourself.

@TrynaBeTurquoise It's amazing how Leo actually predicted all of this - I recall Leo saying in a video maybe a year ago that "the devil will always twist things around, calling right as wrong, up as down, black as white" I never really understood that fully. A part of me was still like, "How could you possibly convince yourself [and others] that black is literally white?" Well, here we are. It's funny, I actually learned something super interesting

1) Yes, for sure. 2) I disagree. To me, the whole thing seemed chalk-full of neuroticism. I make that claim in contrast to the 'ideal' of someone who is more non-judgmental and selfless. That is of course, a relative perspective. It's also true that a neurotic person amidst a society of neurosis is not particularly neurotic! These judgments depend entirely on your frame of reference.

The peter ralston + boobie girl combo is blinding

I actually find several epistemic "problems" with your video, but I see where you're coming from and it's nobody place to "correct" anybody so I am allowing the urge to arise and disperse... Mad respect for actually putting your foot in the game though, you're taking the first step that I'm too much of a bitch to do. I've been wanting to make videos for about a whole year now, haven't even taken the first step yet

For real you sound cookoo

Consider that the the answer you are looking for is not necessarily "yes" or "no."

Science has always taken IDENTITY on assumption.

@LastThursday All fantasy

Yes, just an year ago I would have been enraged. Right now I'm certainly disturbed but I'm more... sad instead of mad? But not sad in the sense that I am personally hurt, but more sad in a genuinely empathetic way. Scrolling through the list of ignorant comments on that video made me want to befriend these people.