Gesundheit

@Thestarguitarist14 Oh sorry then. Now that you have mentioned your field of interest, there's clearly a higher chance of being biased on your side. Conflict of interest can blind people from seeing with clarity, and that's understandable. Anyway, I'll not comment anymore because it would be pointless.

I was hoping that just for once you'd be willing to get off your high horse and just meet me at my level. Sounds like you're not interested. Just letting you know that now it's become disturbing, and it's not welcome anymore, so I'll stop right here and hope that you will reflect on your ways, if not now, at least someday.

I just checked out Elliott Smith. Basically his song is about addiction, so I'll assume that most of his work is of similar nature. I wouldn't call it entertainment though. A 12 steps program is not an entertaining thing. And most importantly, you probably missed the entire point of my post, which is the definition of entertainment vs high consciousness. You seem to equate high consciousness with some sort of ideology that includes certain things and excludes others. But that'd only be your definition and it's not correct. If you want to, you can read my post again and discuss the definitions I provided.

I'm talking in general. Care to give a few examples of non-mainstream entertainment that is highly conscious?

Perhaps you took my feedback as criticism. Well, it's always up to you how you interpret it. Congrats on the empty head though. We were just talking ordinarily, and in a blink of an eye, you shift into non-duality. But I guess I could complete the sentence on my own from the many samples I have of you: God is not ordinary. The first believed thought it is is actually delusion. _________. I guess I'll do it as homework.

Sigh.

I agree with Nahm, and you're welcome.

Look, I am pretty sure it's not just me, but it's really hard for me to understand your posts. I understand that you are very well knowledgeable and that that may be your modus operandi in your ordinary life or maybe just in your head. Honestly, most of the time, your message is so over my head that I can't really see your point clearly. That's what I mean by "down to earth". Something the average person can read and understand clearly without much effort or problems. A little bit of effort is okay, but dude it's always too much effort and rarely do I succeed and really "get it".

@Nahm Yeah, I'm trying to talk down to earth, and you're getting technical about everything and deflecting the message. I could do the same but that would be lame of me, and it's not my thing. But just to give you a good idea of how you distort the discussion I could get technical with this statement: You're talking about me, but does "me" exist in your direct experience? There is no me, to say there is me is nonsense (no offence). .. I hope you'll get a laugh out of this and perhaps more importantly contemplate the productivity of a dialogue of this kind.

This is really great. See, you are aware that you don't know. This could mean that there's a whole another level you could operate at other than knowledge, which is awareness. The whole inquiry can be summarized in three simple steps: The first step in the inquiry is to know that there's something called truth (which you already do). The second step is to define it correctly and as clearly as possible intellectually. The final step is to find that definition in your direct experience, i.e. to recognize or become aware of the truth that you have identified intellectually. Some side thoughts that may be useful; If the truth is absolutely true, does knowledge/awareness of it affect its trueness? Or is it always true regardless? If it is affected, how can it be true? If not, then it should always be the case regardless of everything. What is always the case regardless of everything? He says: write down the question and then write down: "The truth is ____". And fill in the blank with the answer.

Maybe it has to do with skill, which means it gets better with time?

It's Actualized.org, not spiritualized.org

Entertainment is meant to be unconscious, it cannot be conscious, because otherwise it won't be entertaining anymore. In terms of speed, quantity, and quality; high consciousness means slow, low quantity, and high quality experience. Unconsciousness means the opposite, i.e. fast, high quantity, and low quality experience. Each the high and low consciousness serves certain purposes. And they overlap at times, especially during the non-dual states, which makes it interesting to see how they manifests at different degrees of each. Back to op; entertainment does not happen by being slow, empirical, and with the least possible number of stimulants. It happens by doing exactly the opposite. A cascade of stimulants is necessary to override the conscious mind and put it down into low consciousness modes. Then, from there, entertainment can happen, because one isn't aware enough to see the tricks played by the mind, simply due to being overwhelmed, and it's entertaining exactly because it turns off the conscious mind.

This is good. Have you ever wondered about the question: "what is ____?" (the blank ____ substitutes for anything at all). Did you notice that any answer to this question is ultimately always a story? The real question is, what is the thing that I am asking about? In this case; (what is the truth?); any answer would be a story about the truth, without actually addressing the truth itself, the heart of the inquiry. So look at the thing that you're asking about. What are you asking questions about exactly? And there will be your answer, but you may have to keep at it until it clicks. This is how you get direct consciousness of the truth. Another approach, suggested by Jed Mckenna, is to write down the question "what is the truth?" on a paper, and keep contemplating and trying to answer it. Says who? Or in other words, how do you know? If you don't yet know what the truth is, how can you say that you don't see anything the way it is? Also, notice that you're acknowledging something through expression here, regardless of how you articulated it with language. Could be a certain feeling, or a certain perception. Regardless, this acknowledgement is your truth. It's who you are, with or without the filters of thought.

@Leo Gura I love and appreciate your nakedness. Please keep up the strip show I can't say you're perfect, but still you have many great qualities that other teachers don't (example: the dirty joke above), which makes you unique and invaluable. It would be ungrateful of me to always point out your shortcomings. But don't worry, I'm still always watching you.

LMAO. You don't know me. I'm like Leo's top critical of all time. I have my history. Ask him, even he would agree on this.

Neither I nor Leo suggest neglecting the heart or the gut. I have watched most of Leo's videos and he's all about integration. Maybe this is something he's not integrated well, but like I said, it would be a great discussion opportunity. Go ahead if you like. We're all ears.

Yeah, I understand. It can be tough at times. But hang in there, my friend, you will get through this. Also, what is the truth? If you're interested. I understand if you prefer doing it solo.

No. It's just stating a fact objectively, from my pov lol.

The mind is part of the body, eh?

Problem? What the hell is that? I don't. When did I say I do?

I never said anything about relevance. Now I'll say that relevance is context-dependent because value is relative. Imo, you can and should discuss Leo's emphasis on understanding with him, that would be a very interesting and valuable discussion. I don't buy into that paradigm in the first place so I'll excuse myself from further representation. Then how do you reconcile the fact that what you perceive as Leo's arrogance, I perceive as intimidating and challenging to grow? Is my perception invalid? I've never once perceived his arrogance in the way you describe, even though I pointed it out at times just to make him aware. But anyway, if he's truly arrogant regardless of our povs, then that in and of itself is its own punishment, and unfortunately there's no way out of it except through it. You can't just tell someone to stop being arrogant and they will stop. That simply ain't gonna happen because they think they're doing the right thing. I find pointing out that problem to be enough, and since he admitted it, there's no need to be neurotic or push any further. He already acknowledged his arrogance and he's working on it. For me, that's more than enough.

I'd have to disagree here. Eckhart is nowhere near Leo's intellectual understanding. That's like the most obvious fact. And what makes you think that Leo isn't actually just being himself? As if anyone can be anything other than themselves. Just because Leo has a different style and energy does not make him less, or Eckhart more. Just different. And different people will resonate with different teachers depending on styles energetics. And btw, the gut lies but it cannot distinguish its lies from the truth. The mind can, but mostly it does not. So, the feeling that gut feelings are true is just a fecade. It's not different from being deluded, except that it claims not to be deluded, on a more subtle level. If you want to be 100% objective, arrogance is a projection from the recipient that has nothing to do with the speaker. Nobody is obliged to listen to Leo. If you don't like his tone and style, that's okay, find another teacher, or wait until he changes if ever, or change your preferences. Now if Leo was exclusive and the one only teacher, this concern would be valid. But since both the internet and real life are overbloated with teachers, there's a huge freedom for everyone to choose whoever they like. In fact, I would argue that getting triggered by a teacher is a good learning opportunity that carries lessons on multiple layers. Otherwise, great discussion overall and I agree with almost everything you said.

@wakeup ?? to everything you said.

No you don't, really. If you understand what I mean you will not be miserable. But it sounds to me like you are, so you don't yet understand but you think you do. The difference is very subtle it's tricky to pinpoint. Right now, you live in rejection of yourself, however it may be, and you believe that at some point you will be happy with yourself, only if you can change this thing or that thing. Meanwhile, other people live with decent levels of acceptance (although unconsciously) and with a certain amount of rejection enough to keep them moving forward. I believe that somehow you're doing the same thing, but perhaps you're taking it to the extremes and so you're here. But what most people don't understand is that there's no where to go. Most people are merely following the ideals they collected from here and there, in an endless chasing manner, without realizig that life is not perfect and never meant to be. You can't have the good without the bad, or the positive without the negative. The only reason you hate yourself is because you think you lack some "positive" things and/or have "negative" things. You don't yet realize that the things you're seeking are right here in front of you, and that you can't avoid the things that you're afraid of. You only lack the courage to stay still and see through the illusion. Understandable. But you're paying for that fear through your suffering. So if you want out, I have shown you the way. Now it's up to you. You can keep seeking whatever you're seeking, and live that way forever, while paying the price with your peace of mind. Or you can opt out and have the ultimate peace of mind, aka liberation. Or you can simply aim for anywhere in between. It's all up to you. But regardless of your choice, if you still don't love yourself, you're still gonna be miserable. Good or bad, best or worst, etc... are all judgements. But the problem with judgements is that they rule out half the truth every time. For example, saying that stealing is bad leaves out the good that the thief gets. Stealing in this case is only focused on the victim's half of the truth. In reality, the good creates the bad, and the bad creates the good. They are literally identical in that sense. But to a self (ego), it is hard to see this because it's very threatening because a self is biased to itself and it lives in constant fear to keep itself alive. But perhaps the stealing metaphor is not accurate enough. Let's take the ego's perspective and remove the criminal from the picture and then only focus on the ego's (victim) part, good and bad will still behave in the same way. Because, money in reality is not anything other than potential. It does not have value in and of itself. It's just potential that we can use turn it into other things. So, more money = more potential ---and less money = less potential. Now, to an ego, potential might seem like the best thing in the world because well, what's better than having more potential? Right? More potential = more power = more freedom = best things in the world --- right? Wrong. I could list some negatives for having more money: Addiction to gathering more. Fear of loss. Attachment/neurosis. Unhappiness/suffering. Delusion/uncertainty. Disconnection from oneself and others. Greed, aggression, violence, etc... Wars and Mafias. More responsibility. Drug abuse. And many more, but these are the top 10 that popped up in my head for now. I can explain each one in detail why it would be the case, but no thanks I don't want to go there, but you can contemplate it on your own. And I can guarantee that for the most part, these are inevitable symptoms of being rich, especially the first few ones. You see what I did there? I've only focused on the negatives of having more money. I could now list all the positives in opposition to the negatives I listed above, but there's no need to, because it is the obvious part. The hidden part was the negatives that I brought out of the shadows. That was just a demonstration of how the mind works and how it hides the other part of the coin for its own purposes (mostly for surviving the identity). Now I realize that this might be the longest post I've written here, so I'll just stop lol.