Ivan Dimi

Sorry, it wasn't my attention. I just don't get the over identification with the forum and the fear of being banned by just saying an opinion.

I absolutely get your opinion and agree / resonate with almost all points you've listed. But what I don't really undestand is why do you have such extremely high expectations from Leo? Hi provides tons and tons of content, some of it is fucking brilliant almost a touch of genius, some of it is amazing, some of it is good and some of it is pure bullshit. So everybody should critically evaluate any peace of content he publish out there without the expectation that everything what he is saying is the ultimate truth. For example do I think he is a brilliant teacher about life purpose, about creativity, mastering your craft, thinking outside the box etc.? Hell yeah. Taking his life purpose course was the best investment I've ever made. So I am gonna be thankful forever... But does hi resonate with me on the spiritual path? To be honest not that much as for example Eckhart Tolle or Alan Watts. The biggest leap in my consciousness was 100% because of Eckhart, but mastering my life / life's purpose is completely Leo's fault And yes, I see here some cult-like-tendency, but to be honest not because of Leo, but rather because of the expectations of many guys here that he is a saint / guru whatsoever... The other guy was funny too, he is afraid he could be banned from the forum because of saying his opinion ? c'mon man why do you care so much? You register again and hopp you are in again Don't identify with a fucking forum. I don't get the super seriousness too. Yes, Leo is pretty arrogant sometimes... so what? Yes I think too that for some strange reason Trump triggers him a lot and sometime he may act from a lower conciousness being that triggered. But Trump is not his shadow whatsoever, the guy just hates Trump so let it be ?

Exactly! Thanks for the good input! Now I've got the correlation clearer. Achieving entlightment doesn't mean automatically you change the context of the culture / time you are born in and become let's say a monk, but rather leads automatically that you operate from a higher state of consciousness. So if I use the same example with the Japanese warrior: Even being enlightened he may still be a effective fighter, but probably not the kind of warrior enjoying torturing the enemies...

Lately I am thinking a lot, if there is any real correlation between reaching higher level of conciousness (spiritually) and becoming ethically 'a better person' (more compassionate etc.) as a result. All the religions say yes, my intuition says yes as well, but I don't get it logically / intellectually. The ethics is a social construct and nothing more than a few human made rules (that change always depending on time, country, culture etc.), on the other side we have spirituality and conciousness that are the rock solid TRUTH. So the big question is can a person be a terrible human being (let say a torturer) and at the same time be truly enlightened? Here a interesting video of Slavoj Zizek philosophizing about this issue. Pretty interesting thoughts...

@Zigzag Idiot beautifully put!

Sure, without a self, you will do less selfish shit. Actually without a self you wouldn't do anything driven by the self / ego, because it doesn't exist. But does it automatically mean, that you aren't going to do any bad shit? I don't see the logic and the direct correlation. Without a self you can do whatever you want to do just for the sake of doing it. Let's say you are born many years ago in Japan and trained since your childhood to be a hard core Japanese warrior. Let's say as a Japanese warrior you achieved through Zen Buddhism the state of 'no self'. Doesn't really mean that after achieving this state of no self you would stop fighting? Or after becoming no self you become even more effective worrier, sure not driven by your ego (it doesn't exist any more), but just driven by the will / fun of mastering your craft.