ground

Why do you care about the enlightenment of others? Discover your own and you've discovered that of others.

yes, I recite mantras from time to time and I do find it very helpful.

When reading "Sex and spirituality?" my first thought was about tantra / vajrayana where sexual union is a practice in inner tantra / vajrayana. But then, reading the opening post of Mada I am not quite sure what this thread is meant to be about. It is certainly not about sexual union in tantra / vajrayana but maybe about Mada being torn between mundane and spiritual matters?

Sounds good. If you have issues with him recommending mantras there is no need to have issues with mantras categorically because the effect of mantras need not be explained religiously but can also be explained psychologically.

you focus / concentrate on the question continuously striving to anser it. It is a kind of concentrative meditation. A koan is a question that can't be answered conceptually, nevertheless the effort is directed towards a conceptual answer until the mind is like a hot knife and the koan like a piece of butter. The nonconceptual freedom attained then makes possible a spontaneous answer/reaction when being asked.

Stop that unconducive struggle and surrender.

yeah, chattering mind can be a real killjoy

Sometimes dualistic thinking is the issue.

What comes to my mind is this: 1. There are as many paths as there are beings. 2. "Being enlightened" is not validated through hearsay. 3. Some "religious" people say that a "Buddha" knows how to teach every being individually according to its biases and needs and that those with lower attainments lack this capacity.

If one wants to get rid of ignorance one has to segregate from outer ignorance supporting conditions at least for some time to be able to directly deal with mind's inherent ignorance supporting conditions.

if your self identifies with autobiography and family then what is this other than "ego"?

Whom did you get your instruction from and who guides you to do it right?

Not really but I am wondering whether appropriate practice may release you from such thoughts.

If there would be no spoon then how could you see a spoon bending? If the spoon would clearly not be solid then it would not appear so to you. If you are in doubt then I suggest you take a spoon and try to bend it.

What does that mean?

Of course your model is merely ideas. These ideas have been nutured by experiences and brought forth by experiences. Experiences of hearing sounds, seeing forms which were empty of inherent meaning but to which your mind imputed meaning according to its accummulated biases. Nevertheless biased ideas can be helpful if seen as insinuations of the guru. They can be harmful if misunderstood as truths. There are no truths. Seeing the truthlessness of all appearances and ideas is seeing through the eyes of the guru.

The ineffable nature of things is that they are actually absent by virtue of their emptiness. When the ineffable is taken as existent, labeling occurs out of confusion. Yet even when there is labeling in awareness there is neither confusion nor its opposite.

A path can only reveal what has been present from the outset. A path cannot create something new. Actually there is nothing to do.

Chasing enlightenment really is a big waste of time. It's like chasing one's own shadow.

Detachment is conducive.

Put meditation aside for the time being and straighten your view through getting some teaching.

A general answer is not possible because there are people that are more biased towards faith and people more biased towards rational thinking and logic. However for both types of people a kind of "direct experience" is necessary. This "direct experience" actually is a non-experience since it is an emptiness of any kind of experience, an emptiness which is clear and aware simultaneously. It is kind of a "breakdown" of what is commonly known as "experience". Such a "direct experience" can certainly be evoked by rational analysis but it is not necessarily evoked by rational analysis. So there is always the possibility that one is stuck in mere conceptual understanding. Maybe such an experience may also be evoked by mere faith depending on further conditions. On the other hand when having done rational analysis before and/or cultivated conducive faith such an "experience" may happen "out of the blue" when being involved in any kind of activity. So in summary I would say: a rational/logical understanding is useful and it is better to have one than to have no conceptual understanding at all. But it is not sufficient.

Whatever you desire, choose or stop or pursue is not a question of being allowed or not being allowed. It is totally up to you. And whether what you desire, choose or stop or pursue has effects or not and if it has effects whether these are wanted or unwanted solely depends on whether there is delusion or not.

"Playing a game" is not an appropriate expression because in conventional parlance this may imply "to pretend" or even "to cheat". In the abiding reality of primordial awareness everything is empty of inherent existence and thus empty of inherently existing as truth and this includes everything said and done and perceived, the one who says and does and perceives. Since awareness and emptiness are indivisible there cannot arise a sentiment of "playing a game". If such a sentiment is present then integration of awareness and "everyday life" has ceased and dormant habits have again gained control. That's not an issue since practice is about stabilizing this integration.

The point is not balancing but integrating. Balancing may lead to confusion and conflict. Integrating levels out merely apparent contradictions. Based on the non-truth of all conceptual views /ideas it is only about whether ideas are helpful for the attainment of certain goals or not helpful or even counterproductive. Given a specific goal what ideas are helpful however depends on the individual and cannot be generally said. What Leo finds helpful may not be helpful or even counterproductive for some individuals. The starting point of every individual is unique and so are potentially helpful ideas.