eye_wanderer

After much suffering, I had the insight for myself that morality (which I would prefer to call ethics) can never be formulated as simple rules, since there will always be exceptions. Instead I like to conceptualize morality as a process: the process of balancing between the various principles at play. The highest process might be attempting/desiring to do the will of the One. A more accessible process I've developed for myself combines Love (heart) and Truth (honesty). The characteristic of honesty, in my opinion, is being open to considering all perspectives without bias (not censoring or devaluing any particular perspective). The process involves, first, grounding the self in the open heart (where an accessible form of unconditional love flows in an authentic manner); second, not resisting the in-flowing ideas of the mind (such as arguments that might favor one action or the other); finally, using the intuition/resonance of the heart to continually update our guess about what action is the most balanced in promoting the interests of Love.

This might be helpful: https://www.llresearch.org/wiki/magical-defense "Thus we see protection being very simple. Give thanksgiving for each moment. See the self and the other-self as Creator. Open the heart. Always know the light and praise it."

This question of doing vs being has been on my mind for months. Through great suffering and lots of contemplation (and meditation), I've come to the answer for myself that our primary service is our being. Many many lines of inquiry ultimately led me to this conclusion. In summary, 1) being is independently valuable and 2) the quality of our doing (actions, plans, etc.) is proportional to the quality of our being. For instance, becoming more loving may allow us to be more honest (as love can soften the sting of ruthless self-honesty), and this honesty can allow us to more powerfully evaluate and prioritize our actions. I think it's possible for us to develop modes of seeking in the moment (ie improving the quality of our being) that both meet our spiritual desires and also emanate "productive" actions (without us being too attached to the actions). The masculine doingness is integrated as the seeking component of our state of being.

Great idea! +1 for Toronto, and I’d bring 1/2 friends. We’re younger though, all 20 yrs old.

@Revolutionary Think Can you elaborate on the harm it did to you? How are you a casualty??

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/16/us/politics/pentagon-program-ufo-harry-reid.html Unfortunately (or fortunately?) there will end up being a human explanation for this. But that got me thinking, what are the implications of extra-terrestrials on earth for our lives? It would certainly mind-fuck my view of the world.

@Coraline What I meant to say was that in a given day we have a finite set of resources, our willpower being one of them. The point of goals and habits the way I see it is to simply direct these resources. If a goal or habit isn't met perfectly, that's okay, because that's not their purpose. So deviations from routines are okay. There's no need to get attached to them and stressed about them. ... my mind has sort of accepted this logic and I don't feel guilty if a habit isn't performed perfectly.

I'm in a similar position as you are: university student with similar routines. And I've really struggled with those problems as well, especially the first one. I get so attached to the routines that it stresses me out to the point of breaking the routines... so in the last year I've partially solved your two problems for myself. 1. I realized that running the "perfect day" is impossible or near impossible. Even if you sleep 10 minutes too late or meditate 2 minutes less you're technically breaking your routine and don't feel the full gratification of having a productive day. So what I've done is shifted my mindset away from following the routines literally to following them in spirit. More specifically, the routines give me a direction to exert my willpower towards, and so long as I do that, I have followed them in spirit. This shift has relieved a lot of stress and attachment. 2. I don't have much of a solution for this, but what I personally do is occasionally switch up the place I work to make them more exciting. For instance, my campus is downtown and I go to the top floor of my building, which has an incredible view, and study there sometimes. Of course these two solutions have their own traps. In essence they're a trade-off between efficiency and resiliency of the routines. If you find that your routines are too rigid maybe the solution is to sacrifice some efficiency for flexibility, without going overboard.

@Gavalanche I had a similar problem, but @Leo Gura talked about this issue in his recent vid "The 3 levels of self development work." IMO he did a great job of bridging together the different realms of personal development. You should definitely check out it out. Thanks Leo To summarize, he connected the pursuit of enlightenment vs. Life-purpose by implying that success goals (which I interpret as traditional life purpose work) are at a more intermediate (newbie?) level, whereas enlightnment is more advanced. And you need to go through the stages somewhat sequentially. (Or maybe you don't necessarily need to but that's the most common progression.) His solution to the motivation problem you mentioned was to keep enlightenment at the back of your mind and know that one day you'll reach that level if you take enough action. He also made the important point that enlightenment work and different areas of self development aren't mutually exclusive. All in all, great vid, great content. Cheers

Your videos are split by a clear dichotomy: many of them describe tactics people can use to achieve concrete goals, while others say we need to live in the moment. Which is it? Should we be focused on building our futures or focused on the present? Specifically, you're enlightenment videos and life-purpose videos are fundamentally at odds, and I think you recognize this fact. For instance, in a life-purpose oriented video you may claim that we need to experience a lot of pain to succeed and be happy, but in an enlightenment-focused video you will claim that this suffering is our very problem. In one video you will say that everyone should be on their unique "hero's journey" and in another you will say that the only legitimate journey is towards becoming a yogi. Of course, this question can be resolved. You have been asked about this paradox and you have skirted around it; I think it would do a lot of people a lot of good if they understood how/where specifically enlightenment and self-actualization intersect.Making this video would uphold your contents' integrity by connecting your older work (more life-purpose centered) with your more recent work (more spiritually centered). I have no idea how to fully resolve the paradox, but a possible solution (coherent mental model) based off of your statements could be the following: the desire to self-actualize by following a life-purpose would be the natural result of achieving - or approaching - enlightenment. Therefore, enlightenment work (dissolving what you call the 'ego') is not only fulfilling but aligns people with their true purposes as well. One could simply strive to achieve a life purpose without practicing any spirituality, but doing so would be like swimming a race without goggles... you don't know where you're going and it can be painful. Thanks.

@Ayla @Leo Gura Thank you for your responses. I'm still skeptical about whether enlightenment is real (or even desirable) but I can totally appreciate the benefits of suppressing our egos and calming our monkey-minds. I think you're right: suppressing neurotic thoughts will probably enhance, as opposed to diminish, the fun of life.

Until enlightened, we are all our egos. Enlightenment is ego-death. Why should we, then, want to seek enlightenment? As Leo stated in his video about the nature of our existential selves, true enlightenment is not an experience; it doesn't make you happy or fulfilled. We will have plenty of time at death to become one with "nothingness" (if such a concept actually exists in the way Leo describes). So, shouldn't we actively avoid ego death, so that we - even just as illusory beings - can enjoy the beautiful peaks and crevices of human life? Isn't the pursuit of "enlightenment" inherently an egotistical one - a false (albeit comforting) belief that ultimately distracts us from living life fully?