bmcnicho

I generally believe that moderation is necessary and that over 90% of locked posts are pretty low quality. Up until now I've disagreed with people complaining about the moderators, however, I believe this particular thread warrants a defense. Vedanta is a highly respectable spiritual tradition, one of the more direct in my opinion. The creator of the thread, @Preetom, clearly has a differing perspective from Leo. Although, agree or disagree, he laid out his ideas in a well thought out way. Personally, about 20 comments down, I asked a clarifying question and received a high quality response. He interacted similarly with several other commentors. The post did involve over a dozen people and 187 comments, so I'm not defending everything that was said. People do tend to get bogged down in technical details. In fact, I made a post awhile back saying that spirituality is made to sound too complex. However, Vedanta is a rich, nuanced tradition, and I believe a variety of perspectives were being respectfully discussed. I personally learned a lot from reading through it, as various Vedantic teachings were cited that I was unfamilar with. It was also a good example of stage yellow in action, with differing interpretations being contrasted. If the main point is that people should stop endlessly speculating on the forum and go do the actual work, then I couldn't agree more! However, why have a spirituality discussion forum if you don't want people discussing spirituality?

@LastThursday This is a complex question that I'm still trying to understand myself, but I'll go ahead and take a crack at it. The conscious and unconscious together form a unified psychic totality. Ego consciousness is but the surface of the much larger psyche, but it emerges from, and is heavily influenced by, the unconscious. This makes sense from a biological perspective, as the prefrontal cortex is stacked on top of the mamalian brain, which is stacked on top of the reptillian brain. This means that other animals aren't fully conscious in the human sense, and are almost exclusively ruled by unconscious instincts. However, animals still possess a psyche, it's just that it's an uncounscious one. It's important to note that I'm not making a materialistic claim here, rather I'm invoking the paradoxical notion that something can simultaneously be both numinous (i.e. non-physical) and unconscious. Even though the unconscious is distinct from ego consciousness, you can still become aware of it in your experience, just not directly. The unconscious can only be known symbolically, for a symbol bridges the gap between the conscious and unconscious minds by containing aspects of each. For example, take the symbol of a snake. The conscious component is the literal image, and the unconscious component is its viseral, hard to define significance. Mythology in essence is a collection of these symbols. Symbols also appear in dreams and in the imagination. The meaning of symbols can be made more conscious through conceptual interpretation, however, no interpretation can fully explain the unconscious content, and thus the orignial symbol must not be arrogently dispensed with. So, from Jung's perspective, enlightenment is when the distinction between conscious and uncounscious breaks down, and you become aware of the totality of your psyche, which Jung refers to the archetype of the Self.

@arlin Yes, it's very fascinating! I've read 5 of his books so far. He is very difficult to understand though, so I'd recommend the YouTube channel Uberboyo to help make sense of it. Their videos could also serve as a good introduction.

Oh, the unconscious is definitely real, but Freud only scratched the surface of it. He was only aware of the personal unconscious, but Carl Jung discovered the collective unconscious. He discovered univeral archetypes common to the mythologies of all human cultutes. He saw these archetypes express themselves in the dreams of his patients. In essence: the gods are real and they live inside your mind. These archetypes are what govern most of our behavior, and until we make the unconscious conscious, then they will rule over us and we will call them destiny. Jung created the Individuation Process, so that we could integrate the shadow and achieve psychic wholeness. But he wasn't a mere western rationalist, he was very aware of the traditions of the East. Inspired by Gnosticism and mystical traditions around the world, he formulated the archetype of the Self, his understanding of God, the Absolute, Enlightenment. This was the ultimate goal of Carl Jung's psychology of the collective unconscious.

@Enlightenment Of course the ego perfers not to feel pain, that's part of it's survival agenda. However, these value judgements don't apply to Existence in itself. The same applies to love. What people usually think of as love is a very conditional type of love. However, as an absolute, Love is radically unconditional and is identical to the Truth. Meaning there is nothing that is not Love. @Commodent Genetic factors could influence it, but generally it would happen on the level of cultural evolution rather than biological evolution. Although, the boundary between these starts to break down once you factor in group selection, which modern science is very closed off to, since it's locked into the "selfish gene" paradigm. Howard Bloom makes a great case for group selection, brilliant guy, the epitome of stage yellow. Mass immigration leads to demographic replacement, which would cause the cultural collapse I mentioned earlier. As for A.I., do you really trust people to use something of such immense power responsibly, given the low level of consciousness of our society? Also, I don't think it would be good for us psychologically to outsource all of our responsibilities to machines.

SAAFE by TJ Reeves is a comprehensive spiral dynamics assessment. I don't endorse his other work and talking about him is technically banned on this forum, but this particular assessment is too high quality not to mention.

Anti-natalism is perhaps the most wrong idea a person could possibly have. @Enlightenment You're assuming that pain is bad just because people don't like to feel pain. In reality, Consciousness is Good as an Absolute without an opposite. Also, from an evolutionary perspective, people who hold the anti-natalist position would not reproduce, thus the psychological factors leading someone to that position would die out, leading to the position itself ceasing to exist. You might think I'm making a cheap point there, but I'm actually getting at a core metaphysical insight: Truth is what's Actual. Therefore, an idea that only works on a conceptual level cannot be True. @Hellspeed Yes, overpopulation is a problem, but primarily in developing countries. The fertility rate in Europe is actually below replacement at 1.58 births per woman, with some countries as low as 1.3. The United States isn't doing much better at 1.76. People should actually be having more children in these countries. A fertility rate around 2.0 would ensure a strong workforce to support an aging population. Most importantly though, when birthrates fall too low, the culture can't maintain itself and will inevitably collapse. This has been demonstrated throughout history. So, despite the numerous problems with western culture, it would be a huge setback for mankind if it were allowed to collapse.

In the book The Origin and History of Consciousness by Erich Neumann, he describes the archetype of the Terrible Mother, a devouring, chaotic force of cthonic nature. This is commonly represented by a dragon or serpent. It's the dark side of the archetype of the Great Mother, which is represented by the ouroboros. The ouroboros is a symbol of balance and wholeness, the primordial fundamental principle that generates itself from itself. The dragon fight in mythology is when the hero defeats the Terrible Mother and asserts himself over the chaos that threatens his world. One would need to be very powerful to acomplish this. The fish and seaturtles could represent the battle being won, and the seas returning to being calm and full of life, as the ocean typically represents the unconscious mind. Black tears could represent some kind of dark emotion, without context it's hard to say which emotion specifically

Since chemicals such as oxytocin and vasopressin are released when falling in love, should love be thought of in that way, akin to taking some psychedelics or snorting some cocaine? I know love is usually thought of as being more significant and genuine than that, but these chemicals do significantly alter various aspects of cognition and emotion. The one time I was in love, the whole experience was very psychologically destabilizing, including before, during, and after. While relationships can provide a huge opportunity for personal growth, I want to avoid having something interfere with my sound judgement and emotional stability. Maybe romantic relationships should be thought of similarly to psychedelics: a profound opportunity that involves great danger, so should be used with extreme caution.

@Preetom Ah ok, I'm starting to see the distinction you're drawing. There seems to be a debate between various spiritual traditions of self-transcendence vs self negation. I've been studying Gnosticism a lot recently and it's similar to Leo's teachings in that it describes unifying with and becoming some higher thing. Whereas what you're describing sounds more like realizing that you never existed in the first place and just being aware of reality as it is. I could see how that approach would be less prone to zen devilry, although the things Leo describes sound fascinating! I should be careful though, because I have a fairly significant stage red shadow which could easily corrupt my work

@Preetom This is probably a very broad question, but from the vedantic perspective, which spiritual techniques lead to Braman and which spiritual techniques only lead to macrorealities? If it would take too long to explain, do you know of good resources to learn more about this?

Wearing makeup (other than for costume or artistic purposes) is a form of manipulation. On a subconscious level, they're lying about their level of youth and fertility. This isn't only to attract men, but perhaps more importantly to intimidate other women. (Women who say they wear it for themselves are being self deceptive.) I'm not blaming women, as our culture strongly supports this, and cosmetic and beauty companies exploit this to make massive profits. Also, women who are highly attractive are more likely to be stuck up and lack consciousness, as receiving large amounts of positive attention can easily inflate someone's ego. Your resentment could be a sign that you should look for higher consciousness romantic partners. Resentment is a natural emotion, but it can become toxic. Understanding why people act the way they do along with doing consciousness work will generally reduce this. If you experience insecurity, then I'm sure there other posts discussing that, but the main thing to realize is that these women are not actually high value in a dating sense. Our culture is very shallow and materialistic, so it pedestalizes them, but look at your own values in a romantic partner, and you'll realize that they're quite lacking in higher consciousness virtues.

Well for me having repeated experiences of the lack of consciousness of girls my age has gradually made me jaded about relationships. I wouldn't say that I've completely transcended the desire for one, but I've mostly lost interest at this point. I see two possible paths for myself, either I will find a well functioning relationship with a relatively conscious person fairly soon, or I'll naturally transcend those desires within the next few years. Getting your heart brutally broken is a good way to detach yourself, although it's definitely not a pleasant solution, and it'll be a huge distraction for awhile. Modern culture will tell you that you should continue seeking out new relationships regardless of how badly past ones have failed - otherwise known as Einstein's definition of insanity. But hopefully you've evolved beyond such mass cultural delusions. As far as sex is concerned, I find that masturbating in moderation takes care of that fairly well. I view it as akin to eating junk food: not an ideal habit, but esentially harmless if not done too often. Ultimately it comes down to your core values. If you focus intently on solo personal development work, then you should naturally transcend conflicting desires over time. However, if you're able to find a high consciousness woman to start a relationship with, then it could potentially boost rather than hinder your growth.

Enlightenment certainly seems complex with Leo shooting hours and hours of metaphysical videos, and the multitude of different techniques, and the dozens of books on the booklist, and the endless forum discussions... Yet fundamentally it's one of the simplest things there is: just surender everything and become One with Truth. Maybe all the abstractions and complications are necessary in order to trick the ego into letting go - the thing it would otherwise least want to do Imteresting paradox I noticed

@Leo Gura Yes very true! Thanks for the wise advice, I think that something like that is my true calling! Your latest episode on survival was fantastic by the way! It helped me realize how much of an identity I had formed around getting a PhD back when I was stuck at stage orange

Issac Newton was a very different man than how mainstream culture portrays him. Most people know him as a mathematician and physicist, but the truth is he actually spent over 90% of his time on alchemy and hermeticism. While these practices seem primative by today's standards, they were the precursor to modern science. More significantly though, the real value of hermetic practices was psychological rather than physical. Aspects of Christian mysticism were also involved. In fact, mathematics to Newton was more of a means to the end of knowing the nature of God. So despite basically being the father of modern science, Newton was no mere rationalist. He had a genuine desire for a more holistic truth. This contrasts starkly with modern science, which has largely abandoned truth and become simply a means to produce technology. It clings to its rationalist, materialist, reductionistic paradigm, and can't even consider knowledge that lies outside of that. It brings me no joy to say this, as it was my dream to become a scientist since I was a kid, but I must now abandon that dream in order to seek truth in another way. Maybe someday science can return to its origins and become a more holistic natural philosophy, because sadly I don't think Newton would approve of his legacy.

I think the key is that Self-Actualization is about inner growth, wheras Life Purpose is an outward attempt to improve the external world. (I'm using inner and outer in the everyday sense, even though metaphysically there's no distinction) The other issue is that Self-Actualization is a very broad domain, including any theories and practices that could improve yourself or your life in any one of a countless number of facets. Try to narrow it down to what specifically draws you to self-actualize at your deepest, viseral level. (For myself, I've narrowed it down to the pursuit of truth, but even that is way too broad) Then try to apply that idea to an aspect of the world that could be improved. In a sense that is just Self-Actualization because you are identical to the entire world, but in another sense Life Purpose is a separate endeavor.

Thanks for the encouragement everyone! I guess what I meant was I think I need to abandon science in the institutional sense, i.e. getting a PhD and doing large scale orthodox research. I've been considering learning a trade while I continue to develop myself, and then doing independent work on the side that's scientific in the more holistic sense But I'm debating this from a strategic perspective. It can be very difficult to change systems from within due to strong collective ego and paradigm lock. So that's why I think it would be better for me to remain independent. Although I could be wrong, and be throwing away an opportunity to make a big impact. I also have to consider the bias of my personal ego resisting complying with large institutions.

Maybe find a way to become a Stage Turquoise musician. I really have no idea what that would look like, but in theory it's certainly possible. Or if you have another idea for a life purpose, then you can always continue music on the side, or better yet find a way to integrate it with something seemingly unrelated! Limiting beliefs are a huge trap here, because ultimately it all comes down to creativity. Who knows what possibilities there could be! One of my father's friends is a musician. He's a native Hawaiian and adapts traditional Hawaiian stories into Western style music. He tours all over the US and is able to impact lots of people because he performs from a very authentic place. Not only is he technically talented, but he's able to convey emotions that make the stories come alive for people who wouldn't otherwise get to experience that culture! So music can certainly be high consciousness if done in the right way, but by all means explore other possibilities as well!

Well in one sense the present is all there is and the past is just in the imagination, but in another sense the boundaries between past, present, and future are the greater illusion. Your past is implicitly expressed in what you currently are, and, since being is in a way identical to becoming, so is your future. The traps of dwelling on the past have been expressed above, but I wouldn't say it's inherently unspiritual to do so. Personal evolution is a natural instinct, just as cosmic evolution is a property of the universe as a whole. Modern industrial society wants people to behave in mechanical, unchanging ways for decades and to strive to climb up constructed corporate ladders. This is an unnatural state for man. So I wouldn't sabotage the progress you've already made, but keep finding ways to become better and better versions of yourself. Ultimately that's what we're all doing here.

So I've tried a few different jobs and a couple of college majors, and I'm having trouble deciding what to do next. Every time I try something I end up quitting within 6 months. I was more idealistic when I was younger and thus more motivated, but after the past few years I'm just feeling really jaded with college and career stuff. I don't think it's depression, because I'm still really passionate about reading books, contemplation, spending time in nature, practicing music, etc. I'm still very new to spiritual work, so I don't think it could dark night of the soul or anything like that. (My sympathies to anyone going through that by the way, I've heard that it can be brutal.) I am autistic, so that could have something to do with it. I'm very resistant to conforming to any kind of institution or structure because of that. I mainly just feel out of place in the world, and don't feel like it's worth the effort to try anything else. I have completed Leo's life purpose course. Probably the best insight from that was nailing down truth as my higher consciousness virtue, not exactly sure how to go about pursuing truth though. Leo did say that it can be difficult to get results from the course if you haven't had much life experience. I'm only 22 now, so maybe I just need to experience more things in order to figure stuff out.

Thanks for the advise everyone! I guess I've just got to be patient and gain some more life experience @Leo Gura The life purpose course is very well made! I plan to redo it in a year or two and hopefully I can get some great results!

That’s really interesting! I once had a dream where at the end there was an image with no one seeing it. It was super weird!

I’m considering checking one out and was wondering if anyone’s had experience with this. Unitarian Universalism doesn’t have any official dogmas, but is open to wisdom from all spiritual and philosophical traditions. I thought it might be a good way to learn more about spirituality and have a sense of community for self-actualizing. However, it was originally a Christian church, so I’m wondering if it’ll have some of the same traps of traditional religion. If anyone has experience with this, do you think it’s something worth looking into?

I suppose it’s possible. If we imagine a time in the future where most of the population is yellow, then lower consciousness people would remain stuck at green. Although, stage green tends to value compassion and nonviolence, so it’ll be a bit different than the extremism we see today.