The observer

Why has God forsaken me? It hasn't. God is not a state. Do away with this ignorance. Do away with this attachment.

@WhatAWondefulWorld Insanity is the absence of a complex of relevant thoughts when needed, i.e. a failure of the mind to operate properly and seamlessly inside its environment. Relevant thoughts are the only reason that makes one "sane". The relevance is attributed to the status quo/environment, which is relative, of course. From the pov of an insane person, their insanity cannot be identified because there are no proper thoughts to identify it. But they might think others are insane because of some thoughts arising about others not matching the internal environment of the insane person. Sanity is simply consensus and the ability to exchange information and interact with others and environment. Who's insane and who's not? Like you said, it's all relative. However, I believe there is one form of insanity that is final and absolute. It is when a person completely loses their mind forever. But instead of perceiving that person from the outside, you would have to be that person experientially. The person disappears forever, and the body remains for some more time. It's a complete death of the ego with no going back. That, I would consider true insanity.

@James123 Okay.

Reading this sentence just opened my heart a little bit. Thank you.

So, I guess in a sense if someone is not integrated enough, life will rule them out automatically since they won't find much encouragement. And in this case, you originally were simply stating the obvious by somehow reading into the future.

@Keyhole Is integration a final state? Or is it a work in progress kind of thing?

@LastThursday Relax. I wasn't talking about you. I was saying that the spiritual ego is justifying Anna's manipulation by using a double standard, i.e. by allowing her to deceive and giving her the right to manipulate.

Sly spiritual ego. Calling out control as illusory, yet using it to manipulate others. Why the double standard? Why? People don't need a way into spirituality. Spirituality is the only way there is. And even if we assume that spirituality is the right path out of all, we cannot force it on others by marketing it in clever ways. I was a Muslim, and my portal to spirituality was through atheism, paradoxical as it sounds.

@LastThursday Don't trust a priest who wears his robe outside the church. And I would like to add that in this case a lot of women can't tell the difference.

Perhaps by dressing up specifically like that, even though she could have dressed up normally. Looks help hiding flaws, like make-up does. For example, if I see a beautiful woman wearing make-up, it's difficult for me to imagine that she might have a bad breath. Similarly, yet paradoxically, dressing up as a hippy and shooting a video out in nature makes it easier for her to gain the trust of the audience, as that portrays her in the ideal image of an enlightened woman who couldn't care less about looks and who is in tune with nature, which, if true, would be ironic since she'd be using manipulation while calling out the ego. Maybe she's authentic, maybe not. Who's to say? But her message could be a lot better. She clearly didn't bring anything new to the table. Everything she said sounded like recitation of wisdom she heard from here and there without direct experience. Even if she had direct experience, she didn't add much of her personal touch to it. That's easy. The real challenge is be able to create something new. So, misusing femininity in this case is in thinking that looks make up for mediocre quality content. Perhaps if a guy did a video like that, he would be perceived as a naive person and he wouldn't get much attention.

Because God created it. Deal with the fact above. What other choice do you have than surrendering? It is Love for the ones who surrender, because it's designed to kill the ego. Notice that cruelty makes less than 1% compared to God's Love and Mercy. It is the perfect amount for keeping life going because without it, there would be no life because the devil would have had destroyed it long ago. Also, keep in mind that inside the yin, there is yang. And inside the yang, there is yin. There's love in cruelty, and there's cruelty in love. These two little dots are necessary to keep the balance ☯️

Actually, it sounds like a great opportunity for looking inwards. And trust me, it is totally worth it. Even if you merely withdraw without much inquiry, it's still worth it. Also, don't trust this. That's probably just because you've consumed so much and now you're full. Just like with food. You will get hungry again. So, expect that.

@DrewNows I got this feeling too. She sounds like a beginner on the path.

You could try a whole month without the internet, if it doesn't affect your work or study etc..

@Member You have got a long ways to go. And I am SpongeBob

Surprisingly, these latest 3 days of Ramadan has been the most difficult. It's probably due to the heat wave. But I also had my wisdom tooth removed yesterday and I feel ill. I feel extremely weak. I'm tired. And yet, I can't help but go out and walk for at least 2 hours every day. Insight: Don't play God in front of a sufferer. You don't know what they're going through. Pain makes people vulnerable. You should understand and never forget that. It's easy for someone whose health is perfect to just recite wisdom, but your true strength gets revealed in your times of weakness. Respect where other people are at.

Yes. Now just realise that you are saying the same thing that I was saying only in different words. That's how understanding is metaphorical. And that's how the tree exists independent of your awareness/perception.

Of course. But that particular insight is kinda irrelevant to our discussion here. The collapse of all duality means that time is an illusion. Are you directly conscious of consciousness right now? Are you directly conscious of the tree falling right now? These two questions must have the same answer. Otherwise, you're using a double standard.

Because; what is matter? How can I think I am made of something which is not? What is matter, really? This is the core assumption that creates the whole problem. What does science have to do with not being able to walk through walls? Science basically says we can't walk through walls because we can't walk through walls, and then it creates some other ways of saying the same thing... Scientists simply use different ways for expressing the same information. Literally like translating to multiple different languages, no more no less. When you think that reality is made of matter, that right there is a thought creating reality. In reality, there is no such thing as matter. You're imagining it. Unless you can point to it, it doesn't exist except in thought.

Quantum field theory is still a paradigm. It assumes fields of energy, and the proof is, like usual, a bunch of equations. The map is not the territory. Not even 0.0000000000001% of it. The territory is the territory. No thoughts required. All understanding is metaphorical.

You think so? Voila! That's your paradigm. Yes, it is good for materialists, but I am not one. I am not even a non-materialist. I don't subscribe to any particular paradigm. But apparently, you do. That's why I've been having this discussion with you in the first place. I'm not arguing from below, and neither from the same level. I'm arguing rather from above.

Of course. That's the problem with all paradigms. The conclusion is always identical to the assumption. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a valid paradigm. Imagine if I create a paradigm where I assume that the world is made of little SpongeBobs, but instead of eventually finding SpongeBob, I end up finding Patrick laughing at me. My paradigm would then prove itself wrong and therefore it would be invalid and useless. I know it's a silly example, but just to give you an idea. Physics originally assumes that the world is made of particles, without proof, then it goes on dissecting reality based on that assumption. And guess what? Reality turns out to be made of particles! What a surprise! Anyway, you might say that reality actually is made of particles because it works according to certain physical rules, etc... Except that what you'd be missing is that it actually isn't made of particles, even though it seems to be working according to certain rules. To assure that reality is actually made out of particles, you'd need to provide proof for the existence of particles. So far, all the evidence we have is a bunch of equations. But we have never seen, tasted, heard, smelled, or touched a single atom. So, in a sense, atoms do exist if we accept the equations as enough proof. But in another sense, atoms do not exist if we require physical proof (direct perception). Which sense of the two is correct? Neither. There does not necessarily need to be one particular correct view. Views are views. Thoughts are thoughts. Perception is perception. Every extra layer of thoughts we might add upon the actual thing is not the actual thing by nature.

Imagination is absolutely infinite.

@Leo Gura At least this time we are still on topic

And here's exactly the problem; According to your paradigm, if you aren't directly aware of the tree, the tree does not actually exist. So, how can you conclude that your thoughts that are derived from direct awareness are true? After all, they're just thoughts (memories), not the actual thing that you became directly aware of. In other words, since the insight is not present right now in your direct awareness and is only present in your thoughts, how can you say that it is true? You can’t have it both ways. You either have to admit that the tree exists regardless of your direct awareness and then you can say that your insights are true. Or, you can deny that the tree exists and deny your insights as well because all of it is just thoughts and thoughts are not to be trusted.