TreyMoney

Thanks for the response! Greatly appreciated!

Hello, I have a question re the life purpose course. I was getting ready to purchase but at the very end saw "You are buying a streamed digital product. Internet connection required to watch." Does this mean we are not able to download the video/audio content to mp4 or mp3 format, and as such it is more a one-time fee subscription for access to the videos? Just want to understand before I pull trigger and buy. Thanks

@Terell Kirby ignore what Leo said. Leo is not god, despite what he says, he is just a perception, like all things you perceive in your universe of consciousness. Your question is a legitimate question that is asked on the path and in life: what is the point? why am I doing this? why do anything? etc. all these questions are legit questions. I started a thread a back in May called enlightenment is pointlessness. In it I recommended that people not chase enlightenment unless they had a burning desire to find the bedrock / foundation of existence, because what you find at the end of the journey because what you discover is that "nothing" is the foundation of existence. And a point, whether a geometric point or a philosophical point/intention/purpose, is something. Spiritual enlightenment is a very specific thing: it is the realization of the true nature of self and being/existence. And the true nature of self and being/existence is Nothing. Then you realization that the true nature of all existence is Nothing. And if the true nature of everything is nothing, then true nature of everything is the same as the true nature of everything else. This realization alone, may or may not reduce suffering, may or may not make you a more compassionate person, may or may not make you a more mystical, spiritual person. It depends on what you decide to do after realization. In words attributed to the Buddha: "Truly, I have gained nothing from enlightenment."

There are actually two types of solipsism: Metaphysical Solipsism and Epistemological Solipsism. Epistemological Solipsism is a knowledge claim: only the mind can be known to exist with absolute certainty, but this position leaves open the possibly that physical reality exists, but the existence of physical reality cannot be known to exist for certain. Metaphysical Solipsism is a reality claim: the mind is in fact the only thing that actually exists, and physical reality does not, in fact, exist. Epistemological Solipsism can be proven with introspection, autolysis, axiom regression. It is not a scientific claim. It is not falsifiable. Metaphysical Solipsism, like any scientific claim, can not be proven, but it can be disproven. It is falsifiable.

well done @iboughtleosbooklist

Leo's video Brains Do Not Exist is great for this.

Your question "who's sense perception" assumes that sense-perception is a subset of who. The question assumes there has to be a who that is a perceiver. But its actually the opposite. The self that is the who is itself a sense-perception. All things, including the self / the who, are sense perceptions. I am a perception, you are perception. All who's are perceptions. I am not conscious. Consciousness is conscious of me.

All of existence is a sense perception within consciousness

Have you seen the matrix? There is no cup. What we call a cup is a sound that represents a concept that represents a group of sense-perceptions.

If youre looking for a great book on chakras, check out Eastern Body, Western Mind.

Yes! I found it....YouTube recommended it as a similar video to the link for money as debt.. Thanks!!!!!!

Hello forum. I need your help. There is a computer animation that perfectly details how the Federal reserve prints money and buys bonds....it had an image of a banker on a bike going round and round collecting fees, it had money flowing out of pipes.....does anyone know the animation I am talking about? I thought it was in the IOUSA documentary but it isn't. If anyone knows which documentary this animation is from I would greatly appreciate it!

For me, Maximum Achievement by Brian Tracy

@asifarahim Hence "General Self Help"

So strangely enough Mason I agree with this. The will is not free. Let me work backwards and see if I can communicate this idea clearly. The body acts (similar to, although more complex than, the tree or the starfish) The actions of the body have 3 main causes all of which are intertwined - The environment - The body/brain/nervous system (physical / material aspect of organism) - The mind (non-physical / energetic / life force aspect of organism) The body's actions can be involuntary or voluntary. For example, the mind can voluntarily start or stop moving limbs, fingers etc, but the mind cannot voluntarily stop somethings like heart beat, breathing, blood flow, etc. Although these can be influenced by the mind. But let me get to the point, you know all the above. Who or what causes the voluntary actions right? My answer is "the will" The mind has specialized functions: like memory, imagination, emotion, concentration/attention/focus, introspection, and the will (aka volition) There is no magical free will or self hiding inside the mind that performs these functions, these functions just are what the mind is and does. And the will (or volition if you prefer that word, since it has less baggage than "will"), is that function of the mind that performs voluntary actions such as willing the body to move but more crucially willing and directing the concentration/attention/focus of the mind itself. And what causes the will to choose what it wills? The environment, the body and the mind. Kind of circular logic, I know.

Any question can be used as a loose thread to begin pulling on and begin the process of unraveling. Even the question "How do I know this isn't a simulation" is perfect. This question presupposes and assumes the existence of "I", which then leads to the more fundamental questions "What is this thing called I? Does this thing called I exist?" Eventually you conclude Existence exists or Reality exists or Truth exists or Experience exists or Consciousness exists or Perception exists, all of which really mean the same thing. Then come the dualities: subject/object duality, perceiver/perceived duality, self/other duality.

Will is the ability to direct one's consciousness / awareness

The Enlightenment Triology and The Theory of Everything are absolutely must reads for anyone that wants a direct path to Truth Realization. "If someone (like our dear friend tatsumaru above) says enlightenment doesnt mean truth realization, then its enlightenment they are diminishing, not truth. There is nothing more than truth and anything less than true is false, so to say that enlightenment means something other than truth realization necessarily means youre saying it's within delusion, which doesn't sound very enlightened.” Jed McKenna's book were how I experienced the enlightenment of no-self realization. Your question about love will be answered in Book 3. Books 1 and 2 are all about the awakening process, which is a total war of self vs truth and it is a damn bloody battle which love has nothing to do with really. Book 2 is my absolute favorite....Call Me Ishmael. Book 3 touches upon love, but in a very obscure way. Whatever is, is right. Keep reading my friend. Especially Book 2. Cheers.

from the non-enlightened state there is such a thing as the will.

the ability to introspect and evaluate the amount of relaxation being experienced is evidence of the existence of the will.

@kray hello friend....I don't recommend pursuing spiritual enlightenment unless you have a BURNING DESIRE TO FIND TRUE NATURE OF REALITY AND BEING......the kind of burning desire that makes you wake up in the middle night asking yourself questions like what the hell am i, who the hell am i, where the hell am i, when the hell am i, why the hell am i? If you don't find yourself asking yourself these questions, then I strongly advise you NOT to pursue enlightenment. Focus on creating a great life for yourself! "Truly, I have attained nothing from enlightenment" - quote attributed to the Buddha, but no one knows for sure because the Buddha didn't write anything down.

@RMQualtrough my dear friend, I do not know you, but we are very like minded. I define spirit as the nothingness from which everything arises and to which everything ultimately returns. I define spirituality as having reverence for that absolute, eternal, infinite, objective, ultimate nothingness. A cute little AEIOU mnemonic. The Buddhist saying "Form is Emptiness, Emptiness is Form" perfectly encapsulates the idea of everything being nothing. Nothing is the only thing, which is simultaneously everything. That may seem like a duality, but only from our unenlightened pov. "Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes." - Walt Whitman Nothingness is Brahman....undifferentiated, undivided, indivisible, indescribable, devoid of attributes or characteristics. Somethingness is Atman....differentiated, divided, divisible, describable, containing attributes or characteristics. Brahman is truth. Atman is false. Atman is everythingness. Everything is Atman. I am Atman. You are Atman. Rocks are Atman. Brahman is nothingness. No thing is Brahman. I am not Brahman. You are not Brahman. Rocks are not Brahman. (which is why I vomit in my mouth a little, every time Leo says He is God, or You are God!) But ultimately, Atman, (which is everything), is also nothing fundamentally. (Duality) And if Atman is nothing, and Brahman is nothing, then Atman is Brahman, and nothing is nothing (Non-Duality). I hope this helps....but if not, just ignore it. Cheers to health, wealth, peace and love. Trey

Let's start with a definition: Will: the faculty by which a person decides on and initiates action. From the enlightened pov, from the absolute pov, there is no such thing as person or action. But no things exist in the absolute state. From the relative state of existence, person and action do exist, as does the will. Will is a subset of consciousness. A strong will has the ability to direct the attention of consciousness. A weak will does not have the ability to direct the attention of consciousness, resulting in consciousness simply responding to stimuli. Will is a faculty that must be exercised like memory or imagination. The will is only an illusion from the absolute state where nothing exists. But you don't live in the absolute state, no thing does. You live in the relative state where the will does exists and it is absolutely necessary for the healthy functioning of consciousness. The existence of the will is not a belief. The will can be perceived and experienced. Stop believing that the will is an illusion. That's just another belief, and a very dangerous unhealthy belief. And notice not once did I use the word free. Cheers to health, wealth, peace and love

Rape is immoral because it violates a persons volition. No person wants their volition violated. If a person wants their volition violated, that is volitional, and thus not a violation of their volition. Since no person wants their volition violated, any action that violates a person volition is an immoral action. Rape violates a persons volition. Therefore rape is immoral.

Rape exists, because sometimes human animals value sex/abuse over respecting the autonomy of the person that is object of their desire. Agree? Then the rapist can justify their actions in 1 of 3 ways 1. Might makes right, the strong have the right to rape others. If I am stronger than someone, I can rape them if I choose. If others are stronger then me, they can rape me if they choose. This is the amoral stance. It is a consistent stance. One set of rules for all. 2. It is ok for me to enforce my will upon others, but it is not ok for others to enforce their will upon me. This is the immoral stance. It is an inconsistent stance. One set of rules for my behavior, but different set of rules for behavior of others. 3. It is neither ok for me to enforce my will upon others, nor is it ok for others to enforce their will upon me. This is the moral stance. It is a consistent stance. One set of rules for all. 1 is animal. 2 is selfish. 3 is moral. It is not a 21st century opinion. The golden rule "Do not treat others in ways that you would not like to be treated" has been around since the dawn of civilization.