Osaid

Good analogy, I will borrow it. Music is sound under all circumstances. When you lower the volume, the higher volume literally stops existing, thus it is existentially not the case anymore, and not Truth. Although, it is simultaneously the case that all variations of music are sound, and the fact of it being sound encapsulates ALL variations of music. The music does not become more "sound" when you increase or decrease the volume. It's just an increase in volume. The fact of it being sound does not fluctuate at all. Either something is or isn't sound, it is binary. Sound is analagous to Truth/enlightenment here.

Truth doesn't come in degrees because that implies duality.

Right, nothing to do with Truth though. God is not gatekeeping Truth behind some alien experience, believe it or not

Looking for a tier 2 cat to enjoy having company with and giving pets to. It's hard to find a sophisticated one. I get the sentiment though. But don't use it as a crux or something. Not saying that you are.

Truth is not JUST anything you experience. This is a human notion of truth. Humans use the word "truth" as if they are just pointing to exactly what exists, and this is supported on a metaphysical level and can be realized in all states, but that would again just be a small part of those states, and so it is reductionist as you say. But this is not the Truth of reality and the universe which ALSO of course exists in all states. I am talking about that, not some neutral secluded idea of "If you are experiencing it right now it is truth." I believe you had an awakening which showed you that the word "truth" points to exactly what exists, and this is true, but that word itself is a human invention. Some human thought "Let's come up with a word that points towards existence", and then basically no one ever knew that it was possible to realize this on a metaphysical level. Realizing that the very fact of something existing is equal to truth is actually itself just one specific insight about the bigger Truth which is not a human invention and it is just enlightenment. On that note, anytime you realize a small or specific aspect of truth, this is mostly a relative human invention, because you have literally partitioned truth with your memory/imagination. Reality does not exist as partitioned truths. Again, reality is one. It's all pointing to one whole thing, like the elephant and the blind men. You are commiting a similar fallacy to scientists who fixate on the content and degrees of their experiences as if it is something fundamental related to Truth or reality as a whole. You do. You seem to have separated "Truth" from "degrees of consciousness" as if Truth is some specific aspect of a bunch of other states or something of the sort, but this is not the case. But I don't think we have the same definition of Truth, which makes sense, since you don't even seem to see enlightenment as a possibility anymore. It seems you have somehow convinced yourself otherwise, but if it is truly beyond your current experience, that means it is beyond the Truth and reality of the current experience, and thus it cannot be Truth, unless you concede to there being multiple truths or something of the sort. But I believe you have rationalized your perception of "multiple truths" as "degrees of consciousness", but this is not what is happening, you are really perceiving multiple truths and you think that reality is capable of creating an infinite amount of truths, and then you would probably articulate this as God "understanding itself forever." If you want to stick to this distinction of Truth and degrees of consciousness, I want to make it clear that the degrees of consciousness have nothing to do with Truth, they are just ephemeral states which existentially do not exist in your experience anymore. If you have to access memory or imagination to perceive it, it's not the case. This is not to discount the experience, it's just not Truth or enlightenment. Truth is not a state, a degree of consciousness, a higher understanding, or anything like that. It is meta to all of those dualistic notions. It's one thing that perfectly pervades itself across all experience. Once you see it, you don't unsee it again. And it is NOT a specific aspect or part of experience, it just always COMPLETES any single experience. It couldn't be any other way. It is a perfect experiential understanding of experience ALWAYS. Anything intellectual, no. Anything that is true metaphysically, yes. Of course it is instantly accessible from any moment. How could it be another way?

I want to make it clear that this is not what I am trying to talk about. Like I said before, I am not talking about some void state with no qualities, what I am talking about perfectly encapsulates any experience in existence and it is present throughout all experiences. No, it is probably not the case that Buddhists or enlightened people are naively clinging to some reductionist state. Some may have been fooled that way, but for the truly enlightened it is not like this. The idea that I am talking about some reductionist aspect of reality is a misconception derived from an inability to comprehend how a single realization can embody many seemingly "different" insights such as love, infinity, etc. I am saying that this one realization, which is enlightenment, perfectly embodies all the different truths and insights you are gathering over the course of your awakenings. It seems impossible and paradoxical in that way, but when you have this realization, it is just present throughout the entirety of all experience that occurs, and it perfectly embodies those experiences. You are confusing degrees of consciousness for Truth. I will reiterate, there are not degrees of Truth, because reality is one. I am not saying that the Truth IS that reality is one, that is just a small aspect of Truth. I am saying that by the metaphysical nature of reality being one thing, the Truth is also one thing/realization. It is impossible for Truth to be realized twice or realized in degrees over time, because there can only be one Truth. This Truth is NOT limited to one state, it paradoxically exists across all states in reality. I don't get how you can claim degrees of Truth/understanding while knowing that reality is just one thing. I find this to be a big discrepancy.

Who knows. You might find that your desire to love things is supported by the universe in a weird way. It's not very intelligent for anything to hate itself, and if the universe can imagine physics, it is smart enough to realize that.

No, it's a bigger contention than that. I'm saying he's not enlightened, which is why he disagrees with me and Ralston. What I have said from the beginning of this thread is probably worth reading first, but it is long. If there is one argument I want people take away from this thread to focus on, which I don't think Leo can really refute, it's just this: If reality is one, then you can't realize truth twice. This is impossible. There can't be "two truths" or "more truths" or "multiple truths being realized" or "higher consciousness" or "deeper awakenings" or "more awake." There is one realization that is true throughout all of existence, and that is enlightenment. Either you get it or you don't. Truth cannot depend on memory or imagination or past experiences, as these are relative features of reality. Also be wary of the usage of dualistic terms to describe truth. "Higher consciousness", "deeper awakening", "more awake", etc. These are dualistic and anthropomorphic terms and thus can't have anything to do with truth since truth is absolute. Truth is not something that has to be refined, integrated or understood over time. The fact that there are any misunderstandings should be a big red flag. This means that the method of accessing truth is corrupted. If you are constantly "refining truth" and having "deeper awakenings", it should be contemplated how this is even possible in the first place. The states which allow you to view enlightenment temporarily are being put on a pedestal. Hence, "higher-consciousness states", hence "more understanding", hence "chasing truth forever." There is a phenomenon happening here where people are clinging to enlightenment-inducing states. States that are intense, frightening, profound, tear-jerking, and the rest of the dualisms. I am not saying that all of the truths from Leo's awakenings are false or anything like that, I've made no such claim, but it's more the case that all the truths he's trying to piece together paradoxically fit together into one singular insight, or something of that sort, and then that is enlightenment. So I am not necessarily discrediting everything. Don't take this as that. At the very least, just look at it with an open mind and contemplate.

Like I said before, I totally get his sentiment. My sentiment is the same, he is guiding people away from truth/enlightenment, which is "love." And to be fair, he is equally dismissive with his comments about Buddhist rats or whatever. But really, enlightenment has nothing to do with Buddhism or the like, those are just methods for reaching it. I also find this idea that I am not able to counter any of his arguments laughable as he has basically done nothing to argue against me aside from either ignoring it or making that spiel about the color red or whatever. Not saying that he HAS to argue against me. I am just saying this point of yours makes no sense to me. It doesn't, this is a misconception. Buddhism and Ralston are not clinging to some state of consciousness that is void of imagination or anything like that. They're both pointing to the same thing, which is truth/enlightenment. That empty/pure consciousness, or "turiya" as it is sometimes called, is simply a specific state of consciousness which makes it easier to see your true nature (similar to a psychedelic state), but that is not enlightenment at all. Enlightenment exists in all experience, no matter how alien or non-alien it is, because it is truth, so of course it would.

True I heard he puts spongebob quotes on people's threads

I think the psychedelics did it to be honest. What a devious play it is to mix genuine profound truths in with symbolic egoic experiences. It's like telling someone a half-truth, but on a profound metaphysical level. Clinging to enlightenment-inducing states, as said at the beginning of this thread. Psychedelics should only ever be pursued when enlightened, or to open the mind of someone who is seriously closed-minded as a desperate measure.

Maybe. I found that episode in particular odd because it wasn't very clear. It was basically a different version of his solipsism episode, a more holistic one because it tried to account for multiple experiences being in one, but still kind of redundant.

I didn't learn it, I was literally on the same boat as you until I became enlightened. None of what I'm saying is learned I'm literally just describing my current experience. Yeah sorry I guess I'll pass on the AWAKENING™. I am curious about Alien Love and the alien stuff in general though, sounds like a very interesting experience. I'm not doubting any of the profundity of your awakenings to be clear, I'm sure they're great.

The reason why enlightened people seem to diminish your revelations is because it becomes so damn clear who knows what they're talking about when you're just directly conscious of it all the time. It's like someone is seeing the color red in front of them and you're like "No, there's more to perceiving red than that, there's an alien red, and this red, and that red..." And then you understand, oh ok, this guy can't see what red is.

No gaslighting, just a misinterpretation of what Ralston is saying. Enlightenment encompasses all the different aspects of truth you talk about, because there really is just one truth. To define it strictly as "love" becomes misleading for someone who is looking for that and has NOT achieved it yet. This is so obvious. Your forum is 100% proof of this. Hence all the confused and disturbed threads about solipsism and love. You yourself are confused, so you interpret the confused threads as just "part of the work." You think, "Oh, I've been there before, they'll get over it and become as awakened as me eventually." No. They are misunderstanding things, full stop. The fact that this could happen in the first place should raise alarm bells. Their method of accessing truth is corrupted. You yourself are constantly "refining truth" and having "deeper awakenings", it should be contemplated how this is even possible in the first place.

Combine it with swiss cheese ?

Extra flavour. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

Teriyaki chicken for me, I don't eat out to be healthy. People get mad at Subway for having fake tuna and then go home and binge on 10000g of sugar.

IIRC it's actually the opposite. The lawsuit was based on some dumb method of identifying it like looking at the genes, but apparently the genes denature when cooked. Their tuna is 100% tuna. Their chicken, however, has soy filler or something of the sort, so it's a mixture.

I don't know what you understand. It's definitely not enlightenment or truth though. I think you are wise enough to see that there can't be "two truths" or "more truths" or "multiple truths being realized" or "more consciousness." Reality is one. Truth is one thing. You can't realize truth twice. Existentially all your "truths" and "awakenings" are just thought forms, as real as Santa Claus, as of this moment. You are just clinging to profound metaphysical experiences and then diminishing other experiences once your ego settles back in. Please consider this as a possibility. Use it as fuel for your next trip or something. You are constantly using dualistic terms to describe consciousness and truth. "Higher consciousness", "deeper awakening", "more conscious", "more awake", etc. These terms are very relative and anthropomorphic. Truth does not deal in the anthropomorphisms and hyperboles of human egos. Of course it doesn't. Truth is not dependent on memory or imagination. It's just experienced. There is no need to consult memory and imagination for truth to be realized or experienced, those are relative features of reality. I get where you're coming from, we both have the same sentiment here.

Not really. Dude was obviously stuck in stories about how other people are zombies or something of the sort. Tends to be what happens when you try to turn truth into a language. It was basically one of those solipsism threads you see around here. I found it by the way:

On the one hand you say Ralston is correct for not saying "Love", but then you fault him for not telling his students "By the way, other people don't exist." It's the exact same fallacy on both ends. Both will confuse the students. The former will probably do even worse, and it has, look at all the rampant solipsism threads on this forum. And it's not even that good of a way of describing it, a poetic half-truth at best. Someone did ask him, it was posted on this forum, and he had a good response. Can't be asked to look for it though. He basically said, "dude, you're stuck in intellectualizations about how other people are just zombies, wake up and do the work." The guy was a follower of Leo as well, that's where he got the idea from in the first place. So, case in point. It's nothing like that, it's just that Ralston is enlightened and Leo isn't.

Correct. If you are not conscious of an alien squirrel right now, you are disconnected from truth. Such is the tragic humor of God. (sarcasm)

No, big misconception spawned from a misinterpretation of enlightenment. Awakenings happen many times. They hint at or give insight into truth, God, reality, etc. You can have an infinite amount of awakenings. Every single time you take a psychedelic you will instantly have an awakening. Enlightenment is just truth and what is always the case, and being conscious of that. It is one thing experienced forever. You don't learn more insights about yourself afterwards, and you don't gain more clarity afterwards, because all of these imply "more truth." You don't have multiple enlightenments, because that means you are becoming conscious of multiple truths, which is not possible. Enlightenment happens once. Awakenings can happen basically until the day you die.

Because it can never be understood by anything, wrong medium. Any concepts or communications are simply tools for pointing you "there", but they are absolutely not the thing itself and don't have much to do with it, in the same way that your understanding of the color red has nothing to do with the color red. You don't need any logic or understanding about the color red to see red. You might feel like whenever enlightenment is described it feels like the description is jumping around something, and this makes perfect sense when you consider the above. For example, try describing the color red to someone who can't see, and then look at what your description looks like. It's always "jumping around" the experience itself, because of course you cannot convert it into a communication. This is not to say that it is complex or out of reach, I am saying the opposite. It is super simple, and you literally need zero intellect for it. Cats are enlightened, worms are enlightened, babies are enlightened. It is precisely not intellect, in the same way that the color red is not intellect. When humans develop the capability to imagine strongly, they extend that imagination as an "extra limb" so to speak, and they begin to act as if they are not infinite because they believe so. If you imagine that there is an alligator under your bed and you believe it, you will panic. If you imagine you are "a human" who is "this" and "that" and then believe it, you will panic. You will imagine tomorrow and be affected by it. You will imagine bills that need to be paid and be affected by it. You will imagine things that never happen and be affected by it. Enlightenment, or the end result, is purely an experiential phenomenon, as if you are perceiving the color red or listening to music. No need to integrate any ideas or philosophies. It's just experienced. Either you're experiencing it or you aren't. There are no levels to it. Any "levels" experienced are not enlightenment and are instead awakenings/hints/breadcrumbs towards it, or just something else altogether. Relatively, it is a permanent psychological recontextualization of your experience that is triggered by something, and then you just stay there forever. Not that it is inherently related to something relative like a brain, but that is how the universe "dreams up" the experience, so to speak. Perhaps, to put it more succinctly, you are confused about spirituality because 99% of people who talk about it are also confused about it. Straight up, if you are not enlightened, you have no idea or clue what it is, and anything you claim about it is going to be from memory or imagination. This is why private workshops are done, where there is a teacher-student dynamic with someone who is confirmed to be enlightened. It has come to a point where people care more about their ideas about enlightenment rather than enlightenment itself.