aurum

Nice! Sounds like some real insights.

There can be a variety of surface-level motivations that bring someone to truth-seeking. What matters ultimately is just that you get there.

Yes I understood that. Physical beauty doesn't happen in a vacuum. It still depends on a relative component.

I think this is too far. Physical beauty is still a relative notion. If every woman looked equally beautiful, you would not find it as meaningful.

You really want some of both. Game is great for initial attraction. But if you want to genuinely build a life together long-term, you need that financial infrastructure. Game cannot do that. Game is sparkles and fairy dust.

You are still going to experience normal human emotions. Doesn't matter how much spiritual work you think you've done.

This is not even close to what spirituality is about.

Of course. Leftists are interesting in puncturing much of the self-deception around these things. While MAGA wants to preserve it. That's the tension. This is why leftists can be both right and naive. It's always why they lose. Leftists have their own self-deception.

Good stuff. You can worry about body count if you're never getting laid. Once you've gotten laid a bit, forget about it. Massive diminishing returns for something that will cause you to miss higher aspects of life if you put too much emphasis on it.

That’s good. You should be afraid to some degree. It’s a big responsibility. Don’t mess it up

There's tailoring your answer to your audience, and then there's just confusion. I feel this is just confusion.

@WonderSeeker If you feel your understanding now far eclipses that of the ordinary person, then that's an opportunity for leadership. Lead us to greater understanding.

Sin is whatever pulls you away from God.

I found this video, which expands on his thinking. This is more sophisticated. I'm also very fond of "Pure Consciousness" as a term. But still, it feels like unnecessary resistance to the word 'God' to me. Why would 'Pure Consciousness' not suffer from the same problem as using 'God'? 'Pure Consciousness' could just as easily be taken as a static, finite thing. You could argue he is switching up his answer as a teaching device, but that seems like unnecessary confusion to me. Just say clearly what God is and what God isn't.

Never seen that video of Osho before. That is pretty condemning. If someone asked me "what is God?", that is not at all how I would answer it. Even if I was going to critique the traditional, religious notion of God, I would make it clear that's what I was doing. I would say something like "traditionally, God was thought of as X. This was wrong for Y reasons. But actually, God is Z". I would not just say "there is no God, it's all projection".