Gesundheit

Feeling is desire/attachment/delusion but you probably won't be able to understand that because you're deeply deluded.

The only answer is God, which in fact does not really answer anything, because God cannot be understood. The mind cannot comprehend reality.

I don't mind that. Meh. Forgotten. And no, thanks.

That's a far-fetched fantasy. Because unfortunately, God is not that powerful.

There is no escaping the mind, and you cannot do anything about it. The mind is not a trap. It's you. To deny yourself is the trap, but not really. There are no traps. You'll get wherever you wanna get, or maybe not. But you'll die in the end anyways so it doesn't actually matter.

Yeah yeah, but that still does not explain how the world works when you're not perceiving it. You may say that there's no world when you're not perceiving it, but you'd have no evidence for that claim. Just because you can't perceive something doesn't mean it doesn't actually exist. It only means that you are simply not perceiving it. This "only the present moment" paradigm is faulty and cannot hold water. All these nice theories and explanations fly out of the window when you are out there in the world doing things, or for example, when you run your PC or phone to post something here. These theories only make sense when you're alone mentally masturbating. Of course when I say you, I actually mean me. So don't get offended if my style sounds a little bit harsh or very direct. I'm just expressing my self.

Oh, Leo ??‍♂️

It's all relative, man.

Q: Why am I? A: What the hell are you even talking about?! Practicing self-inquiry with shamanic breathing. LMAO

On an open-ended vacation/retreat. Will report later, or maybe not. I like being alone.

No words can communicate.

The same old response; I disagree with one of the "godly" team, and suddenly, I'm simply not awake or maybe even a devil, obviously. What happened to your ability to speak in depth?

Hmmm.. So when Leo talks about God, he does not actually imply everything? If what you're saying is true, then it must mean that the god that Leo wants here is limited to certain things and not all inclusive. What I mean is, if the forum has certain agendas and God has no agendas, can limited agendas contain unlimited God? This creates a dilemma. Because it will be a hypocrisy to talk about God and then not live from that place. If you want to have your agendas for the forum, by all means go ahead, but leave God outside of it. If you can't handle God, that means you are trying to use it. When you divide God into "high consciousness" and "low consciousness", that's ego, not God. And limitation, not infinity.

Isn't that exactly how spirituality was "moderated" by materialists a few centuries ago?

This is such a bizarre way to frame it. What if they're actually discussing video games that teach Spanish?

I wish I could be able to break things down like you did. I swear I could correct many misconceptions if I had similar capabilities. But what can I do? I simply suck. Anyway, back to your post. I agree, I guess that's similar to the pre/trans fallacy. The funny thing is that some people in A use the pre/trans fallacy narrative against B without even trying to see what they're saying. They don't seem open to the possibility that there is more. Like you said, some people in A they fail to make that subtle distinction between the two types of B. And even though that's not all of what makes this thing feel strange for me, it's very good to point it out. I don't have enough clarity at this point so I will try to contemplate more until I am able to understand that feeling. Thanks.

Shadow work is essential in spiritual awakening. But Leo rarely talks about it, and his attitude towards it seems anti-shadow instead of integral. Leo's attitude is always more progressive than integral. This is something that should be made aware of. @DrewNows Thanks for pointing this out.

@Carl-Richard Congratulations! You win the top Leo supporters award.

@Farnaby Ah, I see. So basically it's similar to procrastination. You can do anything at ease unless you have to do it. I don't know, maybe research into that if you haven't already. Stress hormones like cortisol affect your emotional system and they tend to close you off. How would you describe your situation regarding stress?

Some of my Muslim friends know that I'm no longer a Muslim. And a few of them try to talk me into it. I used to find it irritating at first, but now that I have grounded myself in my perspective, I no longer care whatever they say. I flow with them a little bit and then change the subject at some point. Sometimes I joke lightly and play around. My final card if nothing else works is to tell them that I'm completely fine, comfortable, and at peace. And that I don't feel bad or wrong about my choices. If they respect me, they will stop here. If not, I leave regardless of who they are. The rule of thumb here is to never try to convert them or to be right. Never enter a religious argument. However, it can get really problematic when it comes to my parents. They're too involved in my life and feel threatened everytime I leave them out or hide something from them. There's no solution here. I take whatever they say and don't talk back or argue or try to convince them with anything until they get tired and leave me alone.

Well, I am. I am both of these and much more. The only difference is in the appearance. Whatever is being right now, I am that. If you're asking "why this appearance and not that appearance?" that means you're still falling into the trap of appearances, i.e. you're giving too much value to thought. Because any other appearance is being imagined within this one. However, there is an answer to this question, but it's very direct that it's not going to be satisfying. But before answering, keep in mind that whatever answer that the mind is used to is going to be indirect and therefore beg another "why?" question, which will eventually end up in an infinite regression pattern. This means that the question of "why?" itself is problematic. Contemplate it on your own. Because every "why?" assumes a reason. And reason assumes duality. And duality is an appearance. Plus, "why?" assumes a goal. But what is a goal exactly? Anyway, here's the answer: You are you so that you can be you. And I am me so that I can be me. This is the bottom-rock. I can't get any deeper than that. But maybe you can, who knows?

I can't really comprehend the dilemma within this subject. All I know is that at some point when I was a kid, I realized that I am a human being. And then I learned that there are other human beings like me. And so I assumed that they should be having similar experiences to mine. And now after over 20 years with that simple assumption, I'm here. I don't see where's the problem. Why do some people find such things difficult? Why make things more complicated than they are? Life is simple. Just live it.

What are we even talking about? Will? Freedom? What are these things? Do they actually exist?

That's exactly how someone at an individualistic stage would think. This, however, does not compute for people at collective stages.

@Farnaby I think the problem at its core is one of different spiral dynamics stages. You're probably at some individualistic stage, and they're at some collective stage. But perhaps spiral dynamics isn't the best model to use here. Have you watched Leo's new series on ego development? I have only watched the first part, but they're 3 parts in total. I think there is a great chance you'll find the answers you're seeking there.