RedLine

That was before the sexual scandalous, in his early works. He citated Adi Da a lot as one of the high realized man in history. Then he changed his mind. Dark guy that Adi Da. edit: I am seeing now that there is even a web only dedicated to the Wilber-Adi Da case haha: https://www.adidawilber.com/

According to Wilber he was the most conscious person of XX century.

Forget about motivation. If you only purusue your goals when you are motivated you are done becuase you probably only be motivated one day out of twenty but you need to work hard every day.

I tried also the Dr. Monroe material and all that stuff have 0 effect on me.

It doesn't make me enlightenen but make me miss when the discos were opened 1 year ago.

They found in the 60s that spirituallity, hippism and new era can be easily commercialized so capital is very pro oriental stuff since that. What they don´t like is you being alt-right and creating a rural community.

Government doesn´t care if you are enlighthen or not. If something, it is the opposite, globalist establishment is very enthusiastic with spirituallity and new era stuff. Regarding Osho case, you can be enlgighten and be a scoundrel at the same time. That is what Wilber is trying to teach all the time the last 20 years haha.

Christians is a religion of moral action and West religion is about contenplation. That's why the west is morally superior. Because compassion > enlighment. Compassion is wiser than enlighment. The widest man in the world would become a misoner like santa teresa not a mystic like maharani.

Enlighment is not the point but compassion. You know, pschycodelics don't produce in me weird states of consciousness but a clear message: be more compassion, fullfill your moral duties.

Project Atman last chapters and Integral pschycology. Stan Grof probably wrote about that too but my library is too messy I can´t find the books to tell you the book and chapters.

I am the pain behind my skull and the sensions of the top of my spine (all the I-thoughts rise mostly from that sensations). This sensations feels so solid that I have never been able to further deconstruct.

I can observe the sensation but then the observer becomes the sensation, then I observe this sensation-observer and so on and so on. It is a loop that never ends. It's like an infinite rusian doll's game. The thing is this sensation looks pretty solid because it is always there (probably ot in deep sleep but I don't remember what happens there).

Hi, you are mixing spirituallity with mental illness, which is dangerous. WIlber wrote a lot about that distinction, go and read it.

It is a paradox. Reality is paradoxical. It is not my fault. From your actual pov enlightenment is not something good (I mean experiencially, not the idea). Actually for you, enlightment is the worst thing in the world because it is death. If you accept 100% your fear (fear of death), you will get enlightment. And by the way, I don´t agree everydoby should pursue enlighment. I don´t think this path is good for most of people. You should pursue it only if you have a strong existencial displeasure with life and thirst for truth imho. You did wrong assumption.

No, you enjoy suffer, you enjoy ego, that's why you are not enlighten Same way probably you will get enlighment when you don't enjoy it anymore.

The paradaox is both are the same.

Yep. Also, beware of the hangover after the spiritual high, in case you go back to normality. pd: you look like a very intelligent guy, I am sure you will do well!

I thought it was obvious to everybody. If you don't "release" rn is because you love this ego movie. You don't even need spiritual practice background to realize this, just try to drop everything now and see why you can't.

This: https://images.milledcdn.com/2021-03-30/vMouGVyIFsRBpL3a/2bcNv4-dEHMG.gif

Oh, ok, I understood just the opposite from the Shinzen instructions, what a mess. I thought that you should drop the intention to relax intentions. Do nothing. Basic Instructions 1. Let whatever happens, happen. 2. Whenever you’re aware of an intention to control your attention, drop that intention. Shinzen Young. https://www.shinzen.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/FiveWaystoKnowYourself_ver1.6.pdf I think I obtain the state you describe keeping the intention "watch as I am meditating" As if I were the whole room and I was watching my body sitting there.

What happens to me when I do this technique is that I am in a daydreaming state most of the time, where I am aware of my mind creaing a lot of images and stories. It looks like the less-efford state, since if I try to cut the daydreaming it feels like "do something". Ia m not sure if I am doing the technique correctly. It is actually very similiar to sleep for me, periods of some silence and periods of simbolic activity...

Man don't you understand I am already in relativistic posmodern mode and I am trying to synthetize this with classic ontology, through the notion of "truth". I am trying to say we are not that different with the modern and premodern people. Just need to read between lines. I use question as style. You are treating me with condescension as if I were stupid. And also Leo very closed minded, don't even trying to understand what I want to say, as always. If guess it is too advanced for him and prefer to stick to basic perennial stuff from the 60s.

Which is basically the definition of truth. Chains of words to understand reality. What do you think people think a true idea is? Something flying in the air? A bubble in the head of God?

It is impossible to hold any morality, or anything in general, if you don't think it is "objective and true". Leo thinks Spiral Dynamics is objective and truth. Of course he wouldn't use these two words because they have methapisical or materialistic resonancences but he believe it, you wouldn't genuine defend something you believe it is not truth. And yeah you could say it is not truth but "a good map to understand reality" but you are just changing words here, words games.

It is just your INTP bias to think that the morality of others have some objetive or methapisical basis ; you want to bring everyting to abstract terms but what if the moral of the others is as practical as yours? You think it is good to aliviate suffer of depressed people JP thinks it is good to aliviate suffer of depressed people Same stuff Your thinking is "personal preference" and JP thinking is methaphisical values? If they are just preferences why don´t it change much? I don´t see you in the past or the future defending that being depressed and suffer is good, those believes are as strong as JP´s believes. You are in the same boat that him. In fact I see more ego in your judments than him in many cases.