Osaid

Haha, I like that term, haunting. I will haunt the "degrees of truth" out of everyone. ? Cool breakdown.

You know Ralston took psychedelics, right? Did he take them wrong? Did he not do them enough? 100 more? 101?

That's about the exact response I imagined. Many people who take it and are very much fooled, you can even see it on this forum for yourself. It's also just very clearly a big fat assumption. You failed step one, making assumptions. You are delegating authority to psychedelics. Psychedelics are your new God, as is the case with Leo and most of this forum.

❤️

Do edibles count? I took them a day after I became enlightened.

Is that what the alien squirrel told you? Maybe they lied. Delusion is a function of mind. It imagines ideas that contradict experience. There is no contradiction in reality. Reality does not lie. Direct consciousness does not lie. The color red does not lie or delude.

That's not metaphysical anymore, that's physical. Aw, that's not true. I probably wouldn't have become enlightened if I never found you.

Thank you, I enjoyed reading this ❤️

Yes, you are doing that right now. I assume you are talking about the "true self" here? Engaging in being functional is not going to "counteract" the truth of what you are once it is realized, no such thing is going to happen. No, but they won't make you forget what you are anymore. They are recontextualized. No, in the same way that you do not need an understanding of the color red to perceive the color red. Self-inquiry is probably going to be required, but it is just your minds tool for locating what is already "hiding" in your experience. It is not the thing itself, so it is possible for it to be unnecessary. Don't know what you mean exactly, but it seems irrelevant. Everything stays the "same" perceptually, it is just recontextualized. Like an optical illusion where you can flip from one image to the other, but the image itself stays the same. You do not stop engaging in thoughts and wants and needs, but they are realized to have nothing to do with you.

If anything is to be taken away: If you're not directly conscious of it, the possibility of deception is always there, because it occurs in that same way everytime. If you are "trusting" anything anyone says on anything existential/metaphysical, you have failed step one, which is to examine your experience, not to entertain ideas or trust other people. You are not an assumption. This entire thing is very personal and it has all to do with you and your current experience, never any other experience.

Not to my knowledge, a glitch maybe? I don't see any restrictions. Was there an explicit message telling you anything? Like a warning message? Doesn't look like you even posted that much. I'm pretty sure there is a restriction limit on posts, but there is a message that pops up which tells you exactly why it is happening, and I don't think it can last 12 hours. Next time it happens try clearing your cache or opening an incognito tab which has no cache, otherwise I've no idea.

Because you're a human that has survival needs. There is nothing existential telling you it is better aside from your relative desire to experience things as a human. This is a human anthropomorphism. This whole idea of higher and lower degrees of consciousness is anthropomorphism. OF COURSE Truth and reality doesn't hinge on achieving a HIGHER (dualism) degree of consciousness. And it seems that Leo has tried to reconcile this discrepancy by saying that "Truth" is different from "degrees of consciousness", so he is biting the bullet on the fact that it IS dualistic and separate from Truth, but it is not merely just a useful relative distinction he is making, it is creating a serious cognitive dissonance somewhere which is preventing him from considering enlightenment as a possibility. He is also definitely conflating "degrees of consciousness" with enlightenment/Truth. He needs to ask WHY it is necessary to switch to "higher" states forever to access what reality is. Just because an experience is morphing the metaphysics of your experience, that does not mean it is Truth or enlightenment. This might seem paradoxical and impossible, but the ONLY existential deception that can occur in the entirety of existence is non-enlightenment. Either you can see what reality is, or you can't. There are only states where things are THOUGHT to be finite. All states are always infinite. All states have access to Truth. If you do not handle this "enlightenment" thing, your lack of clarity will bleed into most of the rest of your experiences. Also the idea that Ralston is denying "metaphysical love" is a complete strawman.

Truth is, Leo has no idea what enlightenment is because he hasn't achieved it, he even says that it doesn't exist. Yet he judges it all the time. I guess it's because it contradicts his idea of reality, but isn't that what all his new and deeper awakenings are doing as well?

Hahahaha

I think it's the other way around, and what is happening is that your mind is conceiving infinity as "infinite experiences" or "infinite truths" or "infinite understanding" or something of the sort. "If reality is infinite, that means it can understand itself forever, therefore all the awakenings are Truth." This type of sentiment. I think the above is how I used to reconcile Leo's awakenings, until I became enlightened.

More of the same. This entire retort is dualism. At some point you guys have somehow convinced yourselves that this "chasing degrees of truth" is not dualistic. You are abandoning this very basic idea of "reality is one." You are having multiple awakenings, yes. And you are getting specific "insights" or "truths" which you are attempting to piece together, but this whole process is incomplete, because Truth is just one thing. You don't realize it a bunch of times. You don't integrate it or philosophize about it later. You can't refine truth. You either get it or you don't.

Communicating metaphysical love is like trying to communicate the color red. The communication is never the thing itself. Yes, because reality doesn't exist as a conclusion or answer or idea or communication. The medium is wrong. In the same way that the color red doesn't exist as a conclusion or answer or idea or communication. Sex, a hug, a lack of conflict, being useful to someone, etc. Any idea will be something specific and limited, and not it. Look at what you yourself are imagining. Any of that.

This is dualism. Something is INCREASING. Not Truth. Truth doesn't increase. Profundity is fine, but not necessarily to do with Truth.

Yes. No, but it is exactly that for most people, so that is what he speaks to. If you are not conscious of what metaphysical love is, and someone tells you about it, it will 100% will be turned into an egoic idea. Because metaphysical love is not an idea, which is why he is careful about it. This is how teaching enlightenment has worked throughout history. They "point" towards things, they don't tell you conclusions. He is saying that the ego is enticed when hearing the word "love." Meaning, it leads the ego to imagine many enticing ideas.

He says that he doesn't talk about it because it is an enticement for the ego. He'd rather just point you there without putting ideas of it inside your head. And he doubts that many people who use that term are truly conscious of what they are talking about when they say it.

I'm not thinking about it, you can't think it. I am not convincing myself of anything, I am just experiencing what reality is. When someone says "I am this", "Reality is that", "This is that", I can just infer that they don't understand what they are saying by looking at my experience. More than what? Not sure what you think I've constructed. I'm just saying that you can't realize Truth twice.

No. You think of it that way. "Physical object" is an abstraction of experience. It doesn't depend on a model. It depends on physical touch. On visual perception. Your entire experience. Models happen within experience, so they cannot describe or touch experience. It's not something I have to know. When you hear music, the experience of hearing music cannot be delusional because it is experienced. Enlightenment is an experiential shift in the same way. It is not some philosophy or insight you integrate intellectually.

Didn't say there was. Why do you perceive the existence of one Truth as a limit? Has reality ever been two? Being infinite is one, not two. Truth is one, not two. Enlightenment is one, not two. No, there are degrees of awakening, not enlightenment. Me too. Because I became enlightened. I don't have to trust him anymore since I became enlightened myself.

That's basically the problem. He only knows it. Never experienced it. You can't know it. There's not gonna be an enlightenment 2.0 or Truth 2.0 that comes after "classical" enlightenment. Since you like knowing, I wanted to ask, how do you know this?

My point is just that this "metaphysical love" is pointing to whatever is always the case. So it should just be assumed that it accounts for all experience. When you communicate, the mind will always make something out of it. Not gonna escape that. It's best then that the mind is simply guided towards what is real instead of ideas about what is real. I probably wouldn't say much of this if I was genuinely trying to guide someone towards enlightenment, but this forum only deals in the vocabulary that Leo has come up with, so I feel the need to touch on it I guess. Subjective in the end. Personally wouldn't say anything ever "stops" because that is straight up a duality, and I find this to be a confusing pointer. You do you though.