electroBeam

@Shin Totally understand where you're coming from, and I'm sorry for causing you any pain, if I did.

@SamueLSD mind = Mind

why would truth not care about unifying with itself? and aren't you into sober methods for abidance?

@Shin no one is actually thinking to begin with.

@SamueLSD physiological states are real in the sense that imagination is real, but aren't in the sense that they are nothing more than that.

@Shin your followers are only dualistic if you're dualistic.

yeah the thing is, in a twisted way, what you call 'hate' is actually 'love' and what you call 'love' is actually 'hate'. And that's because your dualistic mindset is biased. Spirituality is acceptance of what is, while duality is separating what is into what is good and what is bad. and so what you call love, is creating a duality or distinction between what a good teacher does, and what a bad teacher does. But what's really Good, what's actually Good, is not making any distinctions at all, and loving the whole thing at once. And when you love the whole thing at once, its not about upholding what you labelled good in duality, and running away from what you labelled bad in duality, its about using both sides of the coin to maximise the amount of good/love/happiness that can happen all together. It might seem like calling people dumb is bad from a dualistic framework, but when you don't see 'dumb' as being a bad thing on its own, sometimes using dumb is actually a good thing.

Yeah but don't fall into the trap of calling yourself a non dualist either And it will continue to.... But really what I think is going on here, is this observation is making ya stuck I think. And in that context specifically, it may be helpful to contemplate what the actual difference is between different physiological states. Yeah sure they are different, but why? Can you actually grasp what specifically is different about them? I remember ages ago you told me that all rules are imaginary and aren't actually there. You sort of got that the rules are there, but aren't there at the same time, because what's really the difference between different rules? Well are different physiological states actually different too?

Love is everything, but if you want to realise that, follow love.

Well that's very silly, because you don't know what that state is, and therefore cannot know how someone acts from that state. And its even more silly to assume that you (from a state that isn't what you describe Leo's to be) would know more about what wisdom, peace and love is, then what Leo does. Or to assume that you (from a lesser state) knows how a higher state should act lol.

the problem is you don't understand what religion is... you think it started by some person deciding "what valid and non valid religion is". Like its some kind of tribal ritual. That's tribalism. Religion is simple and logical. You read the text, listen to the pope, follow what the text and pope says. That's it. Religion has nothing to day about tribalism or amazon cultures because they don't have a book. Wasted 3 hours of your life.

my bad then +1 I don't think what's really going on here is a competition landscape but more of multiple perspectives complimenting each other. Even if it seems that way on the business end of spiritual teaching. Jed also sets proper expectation by ensuring that you don't chase states of consciousness (through his slapping you in the face mentality) he ensures you don't confuse the map for the territory (like telling you that its about truth not happiness). These things are very useful when your ego starts to get that 15 minute pill, get over excited about it, and then make up a bunch of delusions about what the truth is (well for lsd and ayahuasca and those sort of magic pills). Not for 5 meo, but for other psychedelics, terence mckenna is a great example of what happens when you don't have a slapper on the face. Dreaming up dmt machine elves and new realms and all that stuff which is egoic projection of just a mildly different state of consciousness. EDIT: not necessarily mild, but not as outlandish as what the ego comes up with. And its not to say you don't do these things, but IME Jed aced these aspects.

@Tim R out of pure curiosity, How does it make you feel when people are called dumb?

You wouldn't need to mail that check to God, because once he's finished with all the other 6 billion people, you're screwed anyway.

????????????????

fucken legend.

Well even if Jed did tell you its love, that wouldn't help ya. I think your pointers to Love are amazing. And I would be deeply regretful if I lived in a world where they didn't exist. But listening to your pointers doesn't give you the answer of course because its a map. What Jed's doing, is he isn't telling you what the truth is, but he's angling you with the right orientation and attitude so that you find it, which is very powerful even though he doesn't explicitly describe the truth/love.

yeah i was being more abstract and comparing similarities between different approaches and results from different contexts. I was saying that the buddhist approach to the path compared to the tantra approach to the path is that of the 'detaching from friends' and 'not being needy at all' approach to friends compared to being a bit intimate with friends approach. Both former approaches seem safer, but miss out on stuff the latter approaches have.

Nice to know who it was directed at! I find the replies interesting. and I know a few others who will chime in with similar sentiments. I think there's a lot of parallels between these sentiments, and what a monks (buddha) attitude to the path is. A very masculine path like buddhism advocates celibacy, living in a cave and very rigorous discipline to achieve enlightenment. Compare that to the opposite path which is tantra, whereby you can have sex, get drunk, live a luxurious life, but do it consciously. Tantra is a path which balances the femininity and masculine aspects of self, while the buddhist path follows just the masculine part, no mind/no self, but it misses love. Buddhism was way more popular in the earlier days, because with buddhism it seemed wiser. Don't get attached to anything because everything is conditional. Tantra though, that's a scary path because it advocates indulging in life and therefore getting attached to things. But there were limitations to the buddhist approach, and that is it missed out on integration with life. And also it missed out on love - it just fixated on no mind. No mind is peaceful, but you miss out on being the heart of experience, rather than just the observer. You may be a peaceful observer, but you miss out on feeling and being all of the wonderful experiences you can have in life. Its honestly unfulfilling to be in an adviata vedanta no mind state all the time, its just pure emptiness and the craving for love will eventually come. And I think a lot of people on here have been hurt by friends or ex friends, just like how the buddha was hurt by an unfulfilled life, and so to combat it, the approach seems to be to not rely on friends for a source of happiness. Its conditional so therefore don't fixate on it. Now that may seem effective, but just like how the buddhist approach has limitations, so does this approach. To really enjoy friends, you need to get a bit intimate and close to them. Which is scary because you're fixating your source on something that's transient and conditional, it seems better to just be a buddha and keep detached. But if you keep detached, you can't get into the heart of your friends, you can't get intimate with them, you can't get super close to them. And you'll just be empty, like the buddha himself. Devoid of love. There needs to be a balancing between getting attached to them to feel their love, but also not too attached that you go through heaps of suffering - a balance like what the tantra path is. And honestly, as you go deeper into spirituality, what you end up finding is there is no real balance, because they are one thing - No Mind, Love, 2 sides of the same coin, and you can have the best of both worlds - to be attached, but to not go through hell if you loose those attachments. And I think that's what some people on here miss when they approach friends. And I'm saying this as someone who was raped in high school, bullied badly the years before that, and swore an oath to never get attached to humans ever again. And its been about 5 years now of doing that, I've dodged a lot of friendship issues through this approach. All the drama and getting sucked into bullshit, but I felt empty inside, and only 6 months ago did I really see the true value in human connection when I hit a point in my path where I couldn't tell the difference between a good person and a bad person, as they seemed to blur together. And as I've started hanging out with people more, there really is value in getting intimate with people. It really fills up that emptiness.

I have this very slightly underlying sense of mourning. Like feeling of loss and grievance. I wouldnt care at all if the mind body died right now. as far as my experience is concerned. Its not really there anyway, so im not grieving over loosing stuff, im grieving over whats already lost. Im not depressed though. I have a good life. How do i release this mourning? What are some nice ways of getting over this?

No but funny you mention that, connecting with others face to face is the most effective way to alleviate this issue.

hey minimalist friend ?

Exactly what you, and everyone else wants, to realise the entire universe is love.

You think im elon musk or something? Dont have the money for 6 billion people Thanks everyone for the replies. Think i used the word nihilism a bit too quickly. It was really loss that was the issue. Anyhow it was similar to nihilism so its good stuff that others have posted.

@Carl-Richard thats ultra weird dude. Mindfulness throughout the day was the only thing that worked for me. setting a specific time to meditate a day was the most ineffective method I have ever tried. But i dont want to derail this thread though, just was stunned by your reply.