Lento

Interesting! The answer for me was right here right now all along, though. I am the centre of the universe. I am the reason why everything exists. This may sound egotistical, but it's the truth for me. I don't know what the truth is for you, perhaps it's the same thing, perhaps something else. - The distinction between thoughts and being is itself a made-up thought. It can be viewed as valid from a certain perspective, and it can be viewed as an invalid thought. Thoughts and being are interconnected; they're one; they create each other. - I wasn't planning on doing anything afterwards, but I was having some doubts, and now they're gone. I guess it kind of makes sense. Still, I thought about this before and wasn't convinced. Perhaps it's just not the answer for me right now. If it's working for you, then that's great. Love was the answer for me.

@mandyjw Of course! How could I not be able to see it before? What a Devil?! ? This is precisely the maximum amount of love that could be! Now, everything seems to be perfectly aligned with itself! Love is what holds me up. Truth!

Time, like any other concept, only exists due to the dualistic nature of reality. Time is symbolic; i.e. relative. You'd need two points which you can compare with each other in order for you to comprehend time. With only the present moment, you cannot comprehend the past or the future. However, reality is both dualistic and non-dual. Which means that you can have the present moment alone, and you can also have something else besides it through your thoughts and imagination.

Or, the obsession with 'being present' is just more ego fixation to distract from knowing. ?

So, where am I right now? Just the furthest from balance. I'm experiencing the worst ego-backlash of all time. I'm back to my bad habits, one of which is watching Leo's videos. This time it's the stupidest video of all time; Explicit vs. Implicit Understanding. Just the stupidest video he's ever released! I don't know whether he's actually deluded or a devil. My intuition tells me that he's deluded. Yet, I can't know for sure. He seems to be having legitimate insights, and using them for his agendas. However, the video is for a specific type of people. It's for the ones who still have a mind, which I don't. I'm insane! There's no such thing as infinity. This is infinity. He also talks about being implicit in flirtation, which is frankly false. I've known a woman who was only satisfied with explicit compliments and flirting. She implicitly wanted me to be explicit! I could read her easily. Anyway, just the stupidest video ever. Go back to being God, Leo. Get outta here!

@mikey1028 If I don't have a preference, then that's also a preference. We conventionally assume that the ego is about having a preference, and that's true. What's missing, though, is that not having a preference is also egoic, since it's just another preference. The conclusion here is freedom! You can have any preferences or have none. It doesn't matter. You're free.

@Serotoninluv Actually, I was kind of suspicious about that. But I mean usually.

The most important thing to remember is that every knowledge you'll ever have is merely a symbol, a representation of something else that isn't the symbol. In other words, knowing is always symbolic. To know something, you'd have to relate it to another thing by using something else which we call a symbol. For example; how do you know dogs? Because you've seen dogs earlier in your life. Before you've seen any dogs, the word 'dog' meant no more than the three letters themselves. That being said; before you've 'known' anything at all, or after unknowing everything you've known, you'll end up with reality itself, without symbols, and without any other layers. That's what we call Absolute Truth. Of course, the term 'Absolute Truth' must be realised to be a pointer to the actual thing, which, by definition, must include the symbol itself and the associated meanings, if there's any. Absolute Truth is Absolute Truth. It just is. That's the ultimate realisation.

@mandyjw Do we create the judgements? Or, do they create us? Do we create the thoughts? Or, do they create us? Did God create us? Or, did we create It?

Nothing is under control. Nothing has ever been. Only windows of illusion that we cling to. I surrender my will to the highest will. I fully accept reality as it is. Now I, in no way, feel complete. But I don't need to feel complete to actually be complete. I was never complete, neither incomplete. Nothing really matters. This is exactly how everything is supposed to be. There's a higher order, an ultimate governing law that everything submits to; the law of being.

I don't know. I don't know. Why do I feel so bad? What's wrong? It's vague. I feel incomplete. Thoughts, yeah, whatever. I feel alone. I never felt this alone in my entire life. I miss her but I can't reach to her. I'm just a part of a puzzle and there's no more perfect fit for me than her. It's just ridiculous. We connected on all levels. We had to temporarily let go. It sucks! I'm having doubts about her. How could I? I know her better than she knows herself. This is insane! I'm going crazy! I trust her and I believe in her. We both agreed to this. This is the best decision. I'll be waiting, and we'll see ??♥️

The first trick is that fear is also love, except that it's a limited form of it. When this is realised, fear stops feeling limiting, it starts becoming freeing and creative. The other trick is to direct fear at itself! When fear gets fearful, it eats itself up, it diminishes. That's the whole point of the concept 'ego', is to create awareness of the problem, to shine a light on the shadow. There's no ego in actuality. There's just fear. The concept 'ego' is an add-on, a cunning idea to help us move away from fear by becoming aware of it.

@mandyjw In Arabic; the words 'suffering' (moana) and 'meaning' (maana) both come from the same source, they both share the same root word; (ana). Now, "ana" in Arabic means "me". So, there you go. You're not imagining anything ?

Non-duality cannot answer this question. You'd need duality! It's called Non-duality for a reason. It's both one and two. We're never alone, because all is one ? By the way, have you wondered yet about meaning? I mean it's really mean, isn't it? ? And BOTH. It seems as if the creator is separate from the creation, but is it really separate? Is there really an external and internal? I'd say it's both. Enjoy the ride and the monkey-mind, there's nothing to be worried about. Just go for it, and don't hold back ✌?

I grew up in a stage Blue society. And thanks for the suggestion, but I'm intentionally going back there to integrate my past. For all I know, that's how shadow work is done. Lol! Okay. Let's say if someone is acting out of fear of rejection, that's ego. The advice to those people usually is to act more authentically, which means more detached and less neurotic/fearful, which means less egoic. The guy must suppress/deny/resist/etc... his fear of rejection in order for him not to be rejected. It's a painful process, a sacrifice, for achieving a certain goal. This is the paradox. As for your example; well, being jerk or nice is a judgement that the nice guys create. They think that they don't get laid because they're 'nice', and they see the 'jerks' getting laid. So, in this case, "being nice" (whatever it actually means) becomes the ego from the nice guys' perspective, and therefore it gets repressed, and when it gets repressed, they get laid. There isn't actually a solid thing called ego. It's something we create to achieve certain goals. For the nice guys, they're usually occupied with victim mindsets, so they judge the 'jerks' and create excuses for their own inability to get laid, one of which is that the jerks are egoic and that they're nice and not egoic. The smart move is to flip sides, and to take responsibility. That is when they start viewing their 'nice guy' traits as egoic. Therefore, a goal gets created, ego gets repressed, and then eventually they get to have sex. I hope now you'll get what I mean by ego. It's not what you think it is. That's why you think I've got it backwards! This is one of the deepest insights I've ever had, and that's why I shared it here. Otherwise, I would have probably just kept it to myself.

So, recently, I decided to read this book called; "Demeaning The Self (or the ego)" from the Islamic scholar called; "Ibn Al-Jawzi", which is a very respected scholar in the Islamic mainstream world. He died almost 800 years ago. I think he's at stage Orange, because his style of writing is very rational and he uses logic and the mind as the utmost authority besides religion. Most of his books are alike in the structure, from the index, to the chapters, to the subjects, to the individual concepts, and eventually to the quotes he uses. In the preface, he expresses his overall opinion on the matter, and then he demonstrates hints of evidence for why his opinions are valid. In the beginning of each chapter, he demonstrates his opinions on the chapter in general, and then he breaks down the chapters into subjects, which he calls 'doors', and each subject is broken down in the same way. The evidence he provides is mainly logic, which he considers to be the consequence of being a good Muslim, and then he provides quotes from other scholars which support his ideas, and he throws in some old poetry as well, and his most important evidence is "hadith" which is the quotes from Muhammad himself, which are in his opinion, infallible. Enough with the introduction... The reason why I decided to read that book is because I am doing shadow work and trying to integrate my past. Actually, I did read that book once when I was a Muslim, and I was like "yeah, that's totally true! I should do this and that, etc...". This time, at first, it was very disturbing, and I was completely shocked! Then I calmed down and started viewing it from a meta perspective. The way he views the self or the ego is very different from the way we learn about it today. To him, survival and self-image are not selfish at all, the hierarchy is very important. What other people think of you is very important. In short, everything that serves the collective is very important. In contrast, finding and following your passions are egoic, following your heart against your mind is egoic, preferring instant gratification to the long-term gains (which are in the afterlife) is egoic, suppression is good and expression is egoic. In short, anything that promotes your individual identity is egoic. Still, the basics of ego to him are more or less the same as they are right now, i.e. anger, jealousy, envy, hatred, desire, indiscipline, etc... The way I see it is that from a stage Orange vantage point, he's got some very good points. However, from a stage Green vantage point, his views seem very limiting. To him, ideology is not egoic, and non-ideology is egoic. To him, it's completely backwards! Interesting thing is that right now I've become able to detach from the way we usually view the ego. It's apparent to me right now that it's just a mental construct, and that we can modify it however we want. So, he's not right nor wrong, neither we are. Yet, the most important thing is that I have captured the essence of the ego, as paradoxical as it sounds, it's that which does not serve its own agendas. It's whatever you want and are not able to get. Why does the concept of ego even exist? To apply awareness on what's holding you back. You demonise the ego in order for you to move towards it. Whatever you resist persists. The more you demonise it, the more you become it! And the more love you give to it, the faster it dies! Such a beautiful and paradoxical creation!

@Shin I'm sorry, but my body knows better than your ideology. And it seems like not-ejaculating has some cons, such as; Throwing in claims without proof; Add also that I feel incredibly good after ejaculation. Being defensive, and easily getting triggered; which is clear from the fact that is below ?? Name-calling; I hope you've had fun. Now, it's time to move on. You need to read @Danioover9000's comment. Thanks again ???? This is very insightful!

This is like not believing in mitochondria because I haven't seen them directly. There's a certain procedure that the books go through in order to verify them; It's explained by the reviewers (which are scholars as well) who produce the books. The reviewers don't claim infallibility, they actually admit that they may make mistakes, and that the manuscripts can be damaged sometimes, and that they try to complete them on their own. There is so much to this procedure. I don't either have the time, neither the capability or enough understanding to explain it. But I believe that it's pretty much good. Of course, he has a Blue component. But if you read his books you'll see why I think he's mostly Orange. He believes in Allah because he thinks it's logical. He uses logic as the ultimate authority. He has a theme that is present in pretty much most of his books, which is; the mind is above history, and history must follow the mind. However, he might be Blue as you suggested. I don't really know. There's a certain procedure for this too. And the reviewers demonstrate which hadiths can be trusted, and which ones cannot, according to that procedure. It's explained in depth here if you're interested; en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith Here's a hint of the procedure (and there's more to it in the link); "According to Bernard Lewis, "in the early Islamic centuries there could be no better way of promoting a cause, an opinion, or a faction than to cite an appropriate action or utterance of the Prophet." To fight these forgeries, the elaborate science of hadith studies was devised[93] to authenticate hadith known as ilm al jarh or ilm al dirayah[94] Hadith studies use a number of methods of evaluation developed by early Muslim scholars in determining the veracity of reports attributed to Muhammad. This is achieved by the individual narrators involved in its transmission, the scale of the report's transmission, analyzing the text of the report, and the routes through which the report was transmitted. On the basis of these criteria, various classifications were devised for hadith. The earliest comprehensive work in hadith studies was Abu Muhammad al-Ramahurmuzi's al-Muhaddith al-Fasil, while another significant work was al-Hakim al-Naysaburi's Ma‘rifat ‘ulum al-hadith. Ibn al-Salah's ʻUlum al-hadith is considered the standard classical reference on hadith studies.[20] Some schools of Hadith methodology apply as many as sixteen separate tests.[51]" I'm sorry. But I think my idea wasn't clear enough. I was trying to explain how the concept 'ego' came into being. This is difficult to communicate, because there isn't actually an ego. It's just a made-up concept. And the same thing goes for awareness. I mean for a dog, there's no such thing as an ego or awareness. We, humans, have created these abstract concepts to help us achieve certain things. The concept 'ego' helps us move towards something. Because when we demonise the ego, whatever it is, we try to move away from it, but in trying to move away from it (by resisting it) we actually move towards the end goal of it. So, for example, when we say that the ego is preventing someone from getting laid, that someone will suppress (resist) their ego in order to get laid. That's one example.

@Gili Trawangan Thank you. I appreciate your comment. I experience all of these results and more with only 30 minutes of exercising every morning. The more the better, of course. Moreover, ejaculating releases the tension that gets stored in my body. So, that's my experience. I'm still not sure I will try abstaining from ejaculation, but at least now I understand it's not just a dogma. Thank you ??

@electroBeam Ego-backlash is a prerequisite for the ego. Without ego-backlashes, there would be no ego. And without ego, you'd stay stuck wherever you are. This is how growth occurs. You don't grow just by being awake all the time, you also need to rest and get some sleep every now and then. Otherwise, you're going to get burnt out and die (at least as an ego). Think of awareness vs. ego-backlash as growth in the horizontal plane. And think of ego-death as growth in the vertical plane.

@Raptorsin7 Good for you! It is a very lucky place to be in. The new Buddha is coming ? What are your practices, daily schedule, age, and country? (if you'd like sharing). And how would you rate your happiness now after 5 months of Self-Actualization? And do you think there are disadvantages to being wealthy? If so, what are they?

@Shin I'm sorry, but you seem to be having biases towards your own ideas. You seem to be demonising porn and masturbation for whatever reason(s), and you seem to be valuing the chakras system for enlightenment. Yet, you seem to be keeping those biases for yourself. I don't want to empirically experience something that is not explicit about its biases/goals. I could easily tell you that holding your breath for one hour is the best thing you could ever do. Stop having fancies ideas and just empirically experience what I'm saying. Go and dive deep down into the ocean and experience what I'm saying. What exactly are the benefits that may come from abstaining from ejaculation? Is it just more energy? I can simply replace it with more food and more exercise. Is there anything else to it? I'm waiting for your response and I hope it will not disappoint me like the ones before. @Danioover9000 Thank you so much ??

So, recently, I decided to read this book called; "Demeaning The Self (or the ego)" from the Islamic scholar called; "Ibn Al-Jawzi", which is a very respected scholar in the Islamic mainstream world. He died almost 800 years ago. I think he's at stage Orange, because his style of writing is very rational and he uses logic and the mind as the utmost authority besides religion. Most of his books are alike in the structure, from the index, to the chapters, to the subjects, to the individual concepts, and eventually to the quotes he uses. In the preface, he expresses his overall opinion on the matter, and then he demonstrates hints of evidence for why his opinions are valid. In the beginning of each chapter, he demonstrates his opinions on the chapter in general, and then he breaks down the chapters into subjects, which he calls 'doors', and each subject is broken down in the same way. The evidence he provides is mainly logic, which he considers to be the consequence of being a good Muslim, and then he provides quotes from other scholars which support his ideas, and he throws in some old poetry as well, and his most important evidence is "hadith" which is the quotes from Muhammad himself, which are in his opinion, infallible. Enough with the introduction... The reason why I decided to read that book is because I am doing shadow work and trying to integrate my past. Actually, I did read that book once when I was a Muslim, and I was like "yeah, that's totally true! I should do this and that, etc...". This time, at first, it was very disturbing, and I was completely shocked! Then I calmed down and started viewing it from a meta perspective. The way he views the self or the ego is very different from the way we learn about it today. To him, survival and self-image are not selfish at all, the hierarchy is very important. What other people think of you is very important. In short, everything that serves the collective is very important. In contrast, finding and following your passions are egoic, following your heart against your mind is egoic, preferring instant gratification to the long-term gains (which are in the afterlife) is egoic, suppression is good and expression is egoic. In short, anything that promotes your individual identity is egoic. Still, the basics of ego to him are more or less the same as they are right now, i.e. anger, jealousy, envy, hatred, desire, indiscipline, etc... The way I see it is that from a stage Orange vantage point, he's got some very good points. However, from a stage Green vantage point, his views seem very limiting. Interesting thing is that right now I've become able to detach from the way we usually view the ego. It's apparent to me right now that it's just a mental construct, and that we can modify it however we want. Yet, the most important thing is that I have captured the essence of the ego, as paradoxical as it sounds, it's that which does not serve its own agendas. It's whatever you want and are not able to get. Why does the concept of ego even exist? To apply awareness on what's holding you back. You demonise the ego in order for you to move towards it. Whatever you resist persists. The more you demonise it, the more you become it! And the more love you give to it, the faster it dies! Such a beautiful and paradoxical creation!

@Danioover9000 I'm at stage Orange. How should I view (each of) these things? I'm a pragmatist and I want success.