ZzzleepingBear

*Breaks open the thread again because of low quality lock*

It doesn't need to be one way or the other. If some degree of mutual understanding is the goal or of any interest, then context and distictions matters. While agreements doesn't require mutual understanding. So you don't need any common ground to feel that you know what is being said. I have for example experiences of using a smartphone, so I know how to use a smartphone in various ways. But my experience with a smartphone doesn't require that I understand how a smartphone works. Only that it work in a way that I personally want it to work. So I could not talk about any insight of how the technology itself works. And that understanding part can probably better be reached through watching videos and books, instead of trying to open up the smartphone without any knowledge at all, despite my constant daily use of one. I think this is some fiting quotes to what I try do higlight with my ramblings. "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." - Scott Fitzgerald "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle And I found this gem on google as well. "How do you entertain a thought?" "When you entertain a thought, you're bringing it in, but you're not accepting it. You're not immediately saying it's true. You're entertaining it with the idea that you're going to mull it over, think about your past experiences, and think critically about it to see if it's something you can accept."

Well said! If only more forum users took this approach that you described, then there would be alot more interesting and fruitful discussion, instead of miscommunication and arguing around buzzwords. As mentioned. There is clearly a desperate need for nuances in this forum to establish a common ground of understanding. And less of the parroted agreements based on the latest popular belief thrown around in here.

@Shambhu I've been following your replys and clarification with great interest in this thread. And I must say that you made it very easy to follow your examples and explanations, so I don't think you can take on any part of failure in terms of communication. Everything you adressed hits home. The only issue I can see, is that not everyone may take a genuine interest in what is being said, or take their time to reflect. Not everyone, but alot of forum users seem to have their own interpretation or ideas of certain words, and that would makes it more or less impossible to go into any deeper understanding in a mutual way. I'm no buddhist and are only somewhat familiar with vedantic teachings. But you made yourself very clear with everything said, with simple and coherent communication all the way. And it's also obvious that you found yourself a great teacher. ?

This is a great example. And non-duality is perfect for reminding us of the pardoxical nature of our thoughts and use of language. The core issue as I see (within this forum in particular). And why I personally bearly see any point in bringing up something like non-duality in for discussion in the first place. Is that I have a sneaky suspicion that plenty of forum users here will be tempted to nullify this non-duality example by accusing it for "being imaginary fairy tales.." When all words are being scrutinized and reduced down to fall under the lable imagination. Then there are simply no ground for even relative truth to be spoken about in a sincere way. Since any sentence at any point in time, can be adressed as to be merely imaginary as if that would be helpful in every on going discussion at any time possible. There certainly are times when you may want to discuss the absoluteness, where as consciousness is the final boss of any ultimate claims. Disagreements in and of itself are fine. But when disagreements on how language is supposed to be used or not, that needs to be properly adressed by finding the common ground. Or otherwise any attempts for communication will be devoid of rules and meaning altogheter. And that is what I see happen alot in the spiritual section here. But maybe that's just me idk.

This advice is for most part easier said than done. But the most direct way, no matter what. Is to invest in your overall health, sleeping, exercising, eating as nutritious as you can, etc etc. It is also possible that you have some sort of vitamin deficiency. Vitamin deficiency is a djungle in and of itself to pinpoint. But you could look into the most common vitamins your body needs. You mentioned that you living in a 3rd world country, but if possible. See if you can get your hands on some multivitamins of some sort, that may be your best option regarding that part. And it could make a difference over time, it probably may take a few weeks to notice a noticeable difference.

There is no difference between reality and imagination as long as we don't care to make any distiction between what is wise or foolishness. Or in other words, if we simply don't care what is real or not. How ever. I haven't made it clear enough, but I am personally in full agreement with your example. There is a actual difference within the example you gave, since I also care about meaning that words in the relative sense serve. To take a real butcher knife and cut your tongue would be foolish for obvious reasons that we both clearly acknowledge. With my first statement, I simply tried to showcase how nonsensical it is to persistently argue that everything is consciousnes, when that has already been established and understood by most people in here. Since I now admit that I believe that there is a important difference at play regarding distiction between reality and imagination, I can only expect other to want to correct that as to say "But you only imagine any distinctions". Yes, I get that. You basically have to show the majority here the absolute absurdity that one is left with, if we constantly revert back to a never ending argument that all is consciousness everytime we find our selves in any minor disagrement of any kind. All things is consciousness, that is clear. But language will always be a dividing tool, that also has to be taken into consideration if there is any interest to establish coherent meaning through words.

I had to see what those words meant for the AI, and here is the first result of that :-D

Speaking of truth, there is no difference between what we call reality and imagination. This can be directly observed through wise and foolish actions. However, as far as language goes. It is a big difference between reality and imagination when it comes to actual consequences of actions, depending from what frame of mind you believe you are acting from. To be aware of language as a way to merely make distinctions. Is to acknowledge the certain self-imposed limits that language brings with it. And stil be able to utilize language in a way that matters within that self-imposed limit.

Thats a great summary. Regarding the internet, I find it a bit more abstract since it's a global phenomenon. But rules always need some sort of maintenance, so maybe there needs to be some more regulation, but that could depend alot on what kind of site we are talking about. Different games, different rules kind of thing.

I think that is a good summary of the core problem with calling it a teaching. To have a very imaginative mind. If that where the case that a very imaginative mind is the answear. I could simply say that all Einsteins callculations was wrong, they can be summarized by 1+1=3, this is such a profound answear that it would boggle the mind of all scientists except the most greatest mind in the universe. "Look, I am the greatest Math genius that ever lived, you just can't grasp the super advanced callculations I have computed for expressing this seemingly impossible calculation.. Yet! But I'll teach you if you are willing to stay with me, inorder to learn this advaced math that even Einstein couldn't grasp with his limited mind. 1+1=3 you just don't see it yet!!" You can bask in all kinds of absurd claims, as long as you keep them alive with a very imaginative mind.

So if I where to admit that I suffer sometimes. Then what else could that be called if not the truth? This sounds like some sort or neglectful gatekeeping of truth as a black and white state of being. I would much rather word it like this. "If you are suffering even in the subtlest of forms, you are then presented with a unique oppertunity to acessing richer truths." Everyone has some sort of level of acess to truth, wheter they are aware of that or not. If you have ever helped anyone for the sake of helping alone, you have then acted on behalf of goodness and truth.

I think the biggest problem is that Leo is so persistent in refering to his talks as teachings. I like to listen to all kind of people and their experiences wheter that is someone tripping balls or NDEs etc. Alot of those with NDEs for example, are more often than not, making a disclaimer that this is just what they have experienced for themselves and what is shown to be true for them. As soon as you call something a teaching, you put yourself in a whole other relationship with your average viewer, and there will be certain expectations in such a relationship. I have listened to about half of his latest video, and as a trippy experience it sounds fine, it's all good. But if you as a creator insist on lumping in your trippy experience as a teaching of some sort, that is where it turns into wordsallad when put in such context. Some like to eat it up, some don't, and that is probably why actualized.org get a bit of a cultish vibe from those people who are not spellbound by Leo's personal insights.

It's all reasonable until those bubbles pops

The bunny is my favorite!

If I have understood Leo right by now. He says that everything is imagination.. Right? And by doing so. There is a implication of no distict or fundamental difference between what you believe to be true, claim to be true, inner knowing, or any prior understanding. You then proceed to make things up either conciously or unconsciously, and wheter you agree or disagree with something, you only need to apply the word imagination to either credit or discredit any statement as you feel fits your own worldly narrative at that particular moment. What is so convenient with this approach, is that you can basically never be wrong if you don't feel like it. Something can be claimed to be true in one moment, and the same claim can be said to be imaginary another time. You will be able to flipp flopp between any number of gods, or one god, back to more gods and back to one god again, to different level of gods as if any of these imaginary positions is of any help in yours or others day to day experience.

A very healty and grounded sceptisism.

Everything is your imagination... With various levels of consequences. If you pick up something from the ground that looks brown and imagine that it's a fince piece of chocolate. It may be true or not, until your senses tells you otherwise. That could potentially be quite a wake up call..

@Reciprocality I really like this critique. And there is a desperate need for certain statements that are casually thrown around in the spiritual part of the forum, to be dissected a bit. It just seems like a far reach, to get peoples full attention and interest into this self inflicted critique. This may be a bit ironic, but while I like to read your lengthy post personally. I do think that all that what you describe and express so well here.. Is simply flying over most peoples head in this forum. So while your critique imo is desperately needed, it is probably not attention grabbing enough to be mentally digested by the majority on this forum. If you try to boil down your posts a bit, then I think there is a higher chance for a dialog to be unfolded. Questions tends to easily get lost, or being overlooked in long entry posts. But that's just my inkling after have observed what kind of posts that easily fly or not. The majority here has probably a short attention span, and I don't say that as a implyed insult. But rather as something to be mindful of, in how this forum seem to opperate in a practical way, for there to be any exchange of words to be flowing at all.

I wouldn't nessecarily call a "universal now" a contradiction, even though I partially agree with your take on it. Since neither universal or now can be described as emergant. They are both timeless and present in time. I think it's rather OP's quesion itself that is unclear of it's aim for a straight answer in this case.

If you really do. Then consider that letting go of her, is the most loving thing you could ever do for her. For the (I love you) part. You don't owe it to anyone but yourself, when or how to say it. Just use it with care, for anyone you happen to care deeply about if it feels right to you. And as @puporing mentioned, if you are to be a hopeless romantic, then just be aware that you also have to be hopless to be romantic in that kind of way, just as the description entails. ;-p

It may depend on what the reason for lying is. Telling white lies may be a preferable option if you know that the person you speaking with, can't comprehend or accept truths that you hold. In other words, it would be exhausting to go around and confront people based on telling them exactly how you see things. Another way to avoid lying, is to see if you can respond in a way that is true in a relative sense. An example could be if someone who casualy asks you "How does this dress look on me" even though you may hate the dress, you can always find some aspect of it that you do like. So you could say, "It fit's you, and I like the blue colour of it" knowing that it is the right size so it fit's well, and you may actually like the blue colour it has. All while disliking the overall design of the dress. There is many ways to communicate in a guilt free, and semi-true way, and even more oppertunities to speak more directly when you want to do that as well.