Xonas Pitfall

It can! However, ultimately, you need to decide what "proof" is good enough for you. If I tell you, Hey! Pluto exists, look at it through the telescope, and if you refuse to look, then you will never get your proof. Maybe you're such an overly skeptical person that you'd think I photoshopped images of Pluto or stamped some fake projection onto the telescope. In that case, you'd need to physically invest in becoming an astronaut - training, getting the money, waiting for your turn to be flown out to space - and only then could you finally prove it to yourself. That would take years of investment, effort, and cash. So, if you're seriously looking to prove something that is so radically reality-shifting, then you need to invest the appropriate time - doing the contemplation work, deconstructing your values, narratives, and opinions about what you think the world is, and engaging in lots and lots of psychedelics, meditation, yoga, breathing techniques, or whatever you can get yourself into. (Even Leo himself recommends a solid 250+ breakthrough-dose trips of 5-MeO-DMT, which is quite a hefty amount.) Good luck!

Also, please be careful not to trap yourself in a victim mentality. Thinking: "Because I grew up like this, I’ll never be able to think clearly and properly." There are people who grew up in sheer poverty, alcoholism, and drug addiction yet transformed themselves into completely unrecognizable versions of who they once were. There are many scientists who grew up in strictly religious households yet became atheists. Your upbringing doesn’t have to define you forever - it influences you, but now that you’re conscious of it, you have a choice. Please do your best to remove yourself from victimhood. The best way to do this is by taking full ownership of your values, your mind, and the influences you allow into your thinking, as well as taking responsibility for your decisions. You have no idea how dangerous this sentence actually is. Careful! <3 Who says you need to follow rednecks? No one. You don’t have to have an ounce of similarity to anyone in your life - absolutely no one. If it helps, you can use this thread/forum for journaling and contemplation on what values resonate the most with you and why. I can go over it and help. But even then, you'd STILL have to ask yourself - Why trust me and not someone else? See how it always loops back to your mind? Hehe.

@Daniel Balan I'm really happy it helped you so much - that brightened my day! Hehe <3 Hmm... if someone has been cheated on or fooled before, does that mean they should never try to find a genuine connection again? Probably not. You keep seeking love and connection, just with a stronger, more intelligent, and more cautious perspective. The same applies to you and your problem of seeking truth and building a moral system that you are truly proud of and certain about. Interesting, but why? And also, why do you want to align with Leo's views so much? If your father is a hardcore Trump/MAGA fan and Leo holds the complete opposite views, that suggests you have some deep searching and value rethinking ahead of you. If a person is easily swayed in one direction and then another, it suggests they haven't thoroughly evaluated what they truly stand for and why. If I can simply charm you into believing something, it’s not about what I’m saying but how I’m saying it. This indicates a tendency to be drawn to charisma and entertainment rather than prioritizing truth, correctness, alignment with values, and integrity. (But don’t worry - this is completely normal. Most people are naturally like this. You often need to experience being fooled and charmed before you start caring about it, tbh.) If anything, having those core memories and experiences of being fooled is actually a good thing because now you know to think twice before easily adopting a charismatic person's perspective. Take it as a blessing. I had a personal experience of being fooled, which is why it became crucial for me to develop independent thinking. As you heard in that Manipulation, Cheated, Exploited episode, Leo also had plenty of experiences himself, so it's nothing unusual. You first need to start grounding yourself in your own values and thinking. If you’re naturally easily persuaded, it's almost like living on autopilot - you have to slowly develop a taste for filtering opinions through your own lens. This feels like asking yourself: There are plenty of people who responded to you on this forum. Why did you like my response? What was it about it? What made my response helpful or enjoyable for you? What could I have said that would have made you hate it, discard it, or not respect it? Depending on your answers, you can start seeing what you subconsciously believe is right. If you say, "It seemed very genuine, and you have an interest in helping me," that might indicate, that I value genuineness and helpfulness. Okay, so what does that actually look and feel like? How do you ensure someone genuinely has those intentions? Why did you like Leo’s content? Why do you think Leo is more correct than your dad? Why not support Trump? Why not turn into a redneck like the people at your work? Why not fully embody everything Andrew Tate says? What’s so bad about that? Maybe Leo is idiotic and delusional - why should I trust him? You need to answer these questions honestly for yourself. The key here is for yourself. You have to genuinely question both the people you think are “right” and those you think are “wrong.” Once you truly answer these for yourself, you won’t have to worry about falling into "the charisma trap." No matter how persuasive or captivating someone is, you’ll be able to deconstruct their arguments and ask yourself: Why is this right? Why is this wrong? My guess is you haven’t deeply questioned these perspectives before - you’ve likely just been persuaded by the general emotion or archetype someone represents. This is completely fine because developing this skill isn’t natural - but now that you’re aware of it, you can start improving. As I mentioned, people often follow someone based on their vibe or archetype rather than what they are actually saying. Imagine someone selling you pure garbage - maybe a get-rich-quick scheme. But because they wear a suit, rent a Lamborghini, hire some models, and use fancy vocabulary, people trust them more than a simple guy in casual wear. A good example is how many people voted for Trump over Kamala just because he felt like a competent businessman, even though they never read his policies, investigated his past, or examined his character. The same goes for Andrew Tate - many people supported him because he embodied the “masculine alpha male” archetype without bothering to research his actual business model, how he got rich, or the manipulative tactics he used. Do you think this is true? Why? If Leo disappeared, it’s not like everything you learned from him would vanish overnight. You’ve gained new perspectives - you are not your old self anymore. I encourage you to investigate why you fear this and whether that fear is rational. I promise you. You can never truly escape your own judgment. Even if you only listen to Leo or whoever you find most compelling, you will still filter everything through your subconscious values. Two people can listen to Leo and walk away with completely different perspectives. You can never escape your own filter - you can only refine it, become more aware of it, and retune it over time. You have control here. Just because you were persuaded before doesn’t mean you always will be. Leo was once an atheist, and now he is a hardcore mystic. Do you think he fears reverting back to atheism? No, because he has lived through the direct experiences that led him to his current beliefs. He deconstructed his worldview independently and came to his own conclusions. He can reverse-engineer why he thought the way he did before and why he thinks differently now. This should be your goal too. If you can understand why you were persuaded before and why you believe what you do now, that will tell you a lot. Also, Leo only provides opinions on certain topics - but in life, you will need to make decisions about where to live, who to marry, what career to pursue, and who to trust. You can’t ask Leo to guide you on all of that. Those choices will be influenced by people who may be incredibly charming and capable of misleading you. So yes, gather insights from content creators, media, and the people around you to help make decisions. But ultimately, you will never escape your own filter and judgment. The decision of who to follow, when to follow them, and in what context will always be your choice - not Leo’s, not mine, not anyone else’s. You can never escape yourself. So work on refining your mind, judgment, and values to ensure you don’t regret who you allow to influence you. Take responsibility for your beautiful mind Daniel, and you’ll do great! I believe in you! <3

@Davino Please yes! I'd be so curious about that Thank you <3

These are probably the most useful Leo episodes for deeply understanding and contemplating this issue.

Simply put, you're coming at this from the wrong angle. You're looking for outside sources to define your "values, ethics, and morals," whereas these need to be intrinsically derived. Obviously, it's still fine to reference outside sources and consider other opinions, but fundamentally, all of these have to be filtered through your own values. If you don't define those clearly, you'll always end up taking on someone else's and being persuaded by things like charisma, seeming professionalism, intelligence, authority, or success. To give you an example: Let's say we have Person A and Person B. Person A’s ethics aren't well-defined, and fundamentally, what he cares about is "seeming right" or aligning with what "seems to be right" - basically, the current status quo. Person B, on the other hand, values things making logical sense. For him, truth has to be something he can break down and derive on his own. Now, let's say both of them take a math class with a charismatic teacher. This charismatic teacher tells wonderful stories about how 2 + 2 = 5, explaining the history of 2 and 5, the history of addition. He seems incredibly intelligent, adding humor and playfulness, making it sound like 2 and 2 always add up to more than they seem. People start clapping, and agreeing, and soon, the status quo in that class becomes "2 + 2 = 5." If both Person A and Person B enter this class, what do you think they'll take away from it? Most likely, Person A will believe that 2 + 2 = 5, because it aligns with what his values and personal filter tell him is "right." To him, what is right is whatever is presented as correct, whatever is presented as most truthful, whatever the most charismatic and intelligent-seeming person says it is, or whatever the majority agrees on. Person B, however, will think, "This is fucking bullshit." Because when he takes two objects and adds two more, he gets four. This makes no sense to him. He doesn't align with it. For him, what is right and truthful is whatever he can derive for himself. He doesn't care if everyone agrees or if the teacher seems knowledgeable - he'll either confront the teacher, ask others who weren’t in the class, or do more research. To be truthful, you actually have to put in effort. You have to care about aligning with what's right, which means putting way more effort into thinking critically. But the most important thing is actually seeing and deconstructing your own ethics and values - understanding why you think certain things are correct and others are not. This is the common thread among all great thinkers: independent thinking and filtering everything through values they've deeply questioned and deconstructed. That’s the difference between someone who cares about their health - someone who tests different products, exercises, diet plans, etc. - and an unhealthy person who just buys random pills from some guru to "prove to themselves" that they're healthy, even if they don’t feel any actual effects. The former has a filter and a deep value for real health. They don’t just want to look healthy or pretend to be healthy - they want to be healthy and feel healthy. So, they actively seek out what works instead of blindly following someone’s advice. I’d guess that all the people who "scammed" or "persuaded" you were people whose advice you never actually questioned or deeply tested. Andrew Tate is a good example. While his advice might help you get laid, it doesn't take a genius to see that his worldview is not a good foundation for meaningful relationships or a healthy society. A society needs loving parents and people who genuinely care for each other in order to grow and prosper - not men and women set against each other. If you look at his gym workouts, you'll see that he’s not much of an expert in either kickboxing or proper training. And if you ever entered his community, you’d realize that most of his courses just recycle common internet side hustle advice that you could find anywhere. My guess is that you enjoy being around entertaining and inspiring people - and as a result, you adopt their beliefs. But you need to separate those things. I can enjoy watching someone I disagree with because they bring me energy, humor, and entertainment, but that doesn’t mean I adopt their beliefs. And when I want to think critically, I go to sources I’ve personally vetted much more carefully. TL;DR: The most crucial step to fixing this is defining your values. What do you think a good society looks like? What is important? Is it a world where people are more spiritually aware? What does that even mean? Is it happiness? How do we increase human happiness and goodness? What policies contribute to that, and which ones don’t? Do we need more love or more fear in this world? What events, policies, groups of people, values, and leaders promote that? Which ones don’t? Another thing - don’t fall into the common mistake and bias of thinking, I need to align with one side; I must be liberal or I must be conservative. This is probably one of the most common reasons why there is so much polarity and adversity. There are important lessons to take from both sides, and you don’t need to define yourself as anything. Develop your value system, and when it’s time to vote, vote for the party that has more values and policies aligning with that. No one will ever be 100% aligned with you or perfectly agree with you, and that’s normal - that’s how it should be. It means you're thinking critically and not just parroting other opinions. Also, just look at the sheer character of the person you're evaluating. What are their values? Is it power, selfishness, personal gain, narcissism, manipulation, cheating, exploiting? Or is it genuine help, contribution, mission, goodness? And be careful not to just believe what they say - because everyone will claim they come from a good place. Look at what they do and implement. Do you think a guy who makes girls fall in love with him, then prostitutes them as cam whores, and then teaches them to steal money from clients has values of truth, goodness, and help? Or is it more about fast cash and self-gain? Do you think he’s more or less likely to scam you and be selfish with you too? Or do you think he’ll magically be kind now? etc. These are the questions you need to answer for yourself. Once you're deeply and genuinely grounded in your values, no one will be able to scam, manipulate, or cheat you, because if they fundamentally don’t align with what you believe, you simply won’t care about them. You can still watch and listen to those people for entertainment and curiosity, but you won’t be easily manipulated into adopting their worldview. I hope this helps

Can youCan youCan youCan youCan you?

Let me be a little glitch in your world! I will try to gaslight you into believing that I am realer than you are. I exist beyond your existence. I am the Other that will disprove your sovereCan youignty! WhatCan you now? Can you deny my existence? Can you Can you

This is good! This is bad! This is useful! This is useless! This is helpful! This isn’t! This is smart! This is foolish! This is kind! This is rude! This is efficient! This is wasteful! This is fair! This is unfair! This is organized! This is chaotic! This is productive! This is lazy! This is safe! This is risky! This is polite! This is disrespectful! This is clear! This is confusing!

@Vibes You think so? I see it more as trying to adopt a realistic perspective. It’s great to be optimistic, but if you believe everything is sunshine and rainbows all the time, you’ll likely be less careful and observant of the challenges and difficulties that could arise. This line of work often attracts very "Green stage-esque" people who embrace a hippie-like, somewhat delusional mindset—believing that unconditional happiness is possible 24/7 through peace, love, and plants. So, counterbalancing that with some practical caution, I’d say, is important. Leo is probably coming to his own realizations about being grateful and present during moments of genuine happiness and health and possibly wants to share that insight... but who knows. Either way, the perspective still holds!

@Vibes It’s just being realistic, tbh. That statement holds a lot of truth, and if you haven’t experienced it, that’s a good thing - it means you’ve been relatively fortunate in life so far.

Happiness in your "human form" is 100% conditional. To understand this, it’s best to observe yourself as an organism. An organism cannot grow, live, or sustain itself without the right conditions. Some animals need cold winters, others are more social and depend on having a group or tribe, and some require very specific reproductive strategies, etc. We are the same. And because we are one of the more complex organisms, our needs are far more niche, precise, and heavily conditional. Just turn off your heating or electricity for a day, and you’ll quickly see how conditional your happiness and well-being truly are. The more "meditative" or "enlightened" type of happiness is often described as unconditional. In this state, you’re in such a high state of awareness that whatever conditions you’re in, you recontextualize them as part of understanding yourself as an observer of reality, or as one with oneness, God, or existence itself. You’re so completely detached from your human self that it wouldn’t matter if you cut off your arm right then and there. You’d just perceive it as part of "exploration, understanding, and Love." That’s often what drug addicts, especially heroin users, experience. If you ask them why they keep running their lives the way they do and continue taking heroin, they’ll often say, "Well, it’s because heroin takes it all away and makes it feel good." These states are beautiful but highly dysfunctional and dangerous to your human self. However, this state is incredibly difficult to maintain, especially if you still want your human self to function and participate in "human society." It’s so impractical that it’s almost useless to think about unless you’re planning to fully commit to the path of a monk or yogi who meditates 24/7 and is supported by others in a monastery. If you don’t plan to go down that path, then yes: happiness is 100% conditional. You need to accept that and carefully define the conditions, preferences, and actions you want to build your life around in order to feel good.

Could you give an example of how to contemplate this further, maybe some questions to start? Sounds like a really interesting aspect of God Realization.

This. There is no such thing as ugliness; we simply don’t see the beauty in what we think is ugly. From an absolute perspective, it’s correct. Ultimately, you have two forces: one constructive or creative, and one destructive. For us humans, seeing a decaying corpse is ugly, with foul smells and gruesome features, because it represents the end of life and could be infectious or poisonous to be around. Seeing a deformed, unhealthy face is considered ugly because it represents degenerate, sick genes, which our instincts don’t want to propagate -- this is a subconscious evolutionary bias toward what is perceived as ugly or beautiful. Seeing a piece of artwork being destroyed is ugly because it’s damaging something we perceive as valuable. However, from an absolute perspective, if you don’t care about the survival of an individual species or ego, a corpse means a human has left their ego self and passed on to other forms. It’s beautiful and freeing. It signifies that evolution is happening, and a genotype that couldn’t survive anymore is not being propagated, while something more beautiful and stronger is. A painter’s artwork getting destroyed means there is now empty white space for another beautiful mural to appear, or perhaps something else entirely. Both creation and destruction are beautiful -- there is no such thing as ugliness. Evil is only everything that is threatening or damaging to us humans, our own ego-self, or our ideology. There are lower and higher forms of consciousness, but both need to exist, so they are equally needed and therefore equally beautiful in God’s eyes. If you want... (!) I encourage you to possibly indulge in forms of artwork that are specifically trying to convey something ugly as beautiful. Think of how much beautiful poetry and music have been created from heartbreak or unrequited love—one of the more painful and "ugly" things someone can go through.

@jacknine119 If you have absolutely no preferences and just want skills and cash, anything in sales, marketing, or trades will work for you. Otherwise, find something you're actually interested in. Exactly!

@integration journey How did this feel to you? What have you found you were "merging" into, what traits were you so pulled by? I'd love to hear more of this... had some similar experiences.

🎭 What do jesters really mean or represent? It seems like they’re such a common experience... Are they laughing at the ego, mocking it, and revealing how silly it is to take ourselves so seriously? There’s something about their degrading, mocking laughter that feels so humbling, even cartoonish, like they’re making fun of all the seriousness we let our egos impose on life. Or maybe it’s their exaggerated, cartoonish faces, with the bright colors and silly hats. It feels like they bring us back to a simpler way of processing reality, like when colors were brighter, and faces were easier to understand. The jester’s face—often a painted smile or comically twisted expression—might be tied to that early recognition of faces and emotions, especially since the “jester face” or “joker” is such a common symbol. Could this be why some people fear clowns, too? They snicker at our cherished norms, taunt authority, and prance around in chaotic hats that jingle to the tune of their own absurdity. Each stumble, each tiny embarrassment, they morph into a spectacle, a dizzying dance that deflates our seriousness. A path not to solemn wisdom but back to raw, untamed joy. Maybe the jester exists as a cosmic nudge, a prankish whisper: all our heavy, important things are just part of a cosmic gag, an endlessly looping joke. And here we are, spinning in its kaleidoscopic punchline, swept up in a mad tangle of absurdity and awe! 💖🧡💛💚💙💜💟 There’s also something wonderfully goofy and oddly “real” about certain art that captures psychedelic experiences. Often, these pieces feel cartoonish, almost 2D, yet the bold shadows and vivid colors give them a surreal, three-dimensional depth. It’s like they evoke a sense of “hyperspace nostalgia,” reminding me of old video games or quirky 2D cartoons with their exaggerated animation and bizarre perspectives. What are your thoughts?

@Exystem OMG, yes! This is exactly how I see it, I just never knew how to express it this clearly - thank you so much! 😊✨

Oops! Read the last question wrong, you can remove my vote if possible! 🐭🐾✅☝

@Buck Edwards Could you maybe share what you specifically enjoy about it, if you're willing to answer? Thank you!

Relationship #1: Simon is in a relationship with Ally. They genuinely care about each other and make a good team, but their sexual connection has never been fulfilling. Simon feels like Ally is never fully present - embodied and emotionally connected during sex. Ally, on the other hand, feels that Simon lacks initiative and dominance. This dynamic leads to consistent dissatisfaction, especially on an emotional level, whenever they engage in sex. To understand their struggles, let’s look at their childhoods, where the foundation of their sexualities was formed. Simon grew up with a mentally ill mother who lived in her own reality. Despite being in a safe society where basic needs were met, Simon felt deeply lonely. This loneliness created a strong desire to merge with someone on a physical, emotional, and spiritual level. One day, he stumbled across a medical image of a penis inside a vagina in a textbook, which captivated and aroused him. Unconsciously, this image held the promise of connection and merging with another person. Simon’s budding sexuality evolved from there. As an adult, Simon desires a deep, telepathic connection with his partner. He enjoys prolonged physical closeness, eye contact, and simultaneous orgasms. He dislikes talking during sex, as it makes him feel separate. This desire for merging extends into other parts of his life. Simon adores privacy and exclusivity, which make his connection with a partner feel more special. He struggles with communication because it feels like a barrier to true unity. He wants to make decisions together and share responsibilities, as this enhances his sense of togetherness. Ally’s childhood was very different but also lonely. Her father was disengaged and failed to protect her from her mother, who disliked her. Unlike Simon, she grew up in an unsafe environment where even basic needs were a struggle. This created a strong desire for care and containment. One day, while watching TV, she became enamored with the relationship between a dinosaur and its owner. Unconsciously, this relationship symbolized positive ownership and care - the kind her parents never provided. Ally’s budding sexuality evolved from this imagery. In adulthood, Ally enjoys power dynamics in sex, fantasizing about being a cherished pet or an animal being bred without choice. She desires to surrender completely, letting her partner take the lead and responsibility. Signs of ownership arouse her, even if they come from men she is not in a relationship with. She dislikes anything during sex that reminds her of herself. This sexuality manifests in other areas of Ally’s life. She isn’t naturally exclusive and prefers to have many people in her life to avoid ever fending for herself. She surrounds herself with others, is flirtatious, and spends hours talking to connect with people. She invests heavily in her appearance to increase her chances of being wanted and cared for. Ally commits to sexual monogamy only because it’s often a condition for men to take responsibility for her. She stops driving her car once in a relationship because autonomy feels like self-reliance, which she avoids. Her most fulfilling relationship is with her personal assistant, who consistently meets her needs. These differences create a fundamental incompatibility between Simon and Ally. Simon feels insecure, longing for closeness and merging, but struggles with Ally’s need for multiple connections. He feels in competition with others in her life. Ally feels overwhelmed by Simon’s need to handle responsibilities together and isolated by his desire for exclusivity. On a subconscious level, their sexualities pull in opposite directions. No amount of practical counseling about their sex life can resolve the deeper issue - their sexual incompatibility. At best, they can take turns accommodating each other, but this often leads to compromise rather than true harmony. Relationship #2: Another example is Nick and Tanner, who initially believed they were sexually compatible but have grown increasingly dissatisfied. Nick feels frustrated and angry, often wanting to take it out on Tanner during intercourse, leaving him guilty and withdrawn afterward. Tanner feels constrained, spending too much time conforming to Nick’s needs to keep the relationship secure. Nick’s childhood shaped his sexuality in a unique way. He grew up with a terminally ill sister, and the family’s attention revolved around her. Nick was never considered important enough to receive focus or support. As an adult, Nick feels a strong need for sex every day, as it ensures he becomes the center of attention. During sex, Nick prefers to dominate and make everything about his own pleasure. He enjoys directing his partner and feeling in control, as this satisfies his repressed need for importance. Tanner, on the other hand, has a very different sexual nature. Growing up, he was unable to express himself due to strict parental and societal expectations. This suppression of his authenticity led to a deep desire for freedom and experimentation. Tanner’s true sexuality revolves around trying new things, from bondage and Tantra to swinging and group sex. His list of desires is endless, reflecting his curiosity and zest for life. Conflict arises when Tanner presses Nick to try swinging. Nick, who needs to feel like the sole focus of Tanner’s attention, is triggered by Tanner’s desire to involve others. Nick feels threatened and angry, while Tanner feels limited and stifled by Nick’s needs. Tanner longs for a partner who will explore life’s wonders with him, while Nick desires a partner who prioritizes him above all else. These examples show how early life experiences shape not only sexuality but also deeper desires for life and relationships. Sexuality extends far beyond the bedroom, influencing many aspects of life. To truly understand one’s sexuality, people must explore what arouses them and, most importantly, why. For example, someone who enjoys taboo experiences like piss play might uncover deeper emotional layers beneath their arousal. They may feel empowered by defying societal norms, intrigued by the idea of capturing another’s essence, or relieved by exposing vulnerability and shame. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I absolutely loved this video -- especially the format. Starting from the fundamental incompatibility and difficulties in relationships, unmet needs often trace back to childhood, where deep-rooted desires were formed. These desires are shaped by experiences where we first felt love, or perhaps where we realized the way we want to be desired and loved. It’s about understanding how we desire others, how we want to be loved, and how we unconsciously or semi-consciously seek these feelings in our everyday lives. Does anyone have resources that delve deeper into how childhood experiences shape ego desires and ultimately influence sexual fantasies? What’s your experience with this? I’d love to start a thread where people share what they find most desirable and the positions - both figuratively and physically, teehee - they enjoy being in. What needs do you feel like you’ve been neglecting, and how do you navigate that in your life and relationships? It’d be great to hear others' experiences and perspectives on how unmet needs or childhood experiences manifest in their adult relationships. What do you see yourself longing for?

If such a thing exists beyond the swirling of thought you’ve spun into a loop, this endless now that you carved and named "new." You decided there would be this - this day, this moment, this construct of “year” spun out, wrapped in your invented rhythm, a rhythm imagined and reimagined, traced over countless times, yet always feeling like the first. So here’s to this endless spiral, this ever-turning, ever-repeating hallmark of the idea of beginning-again-again-again in a world that never began or ended - Happy New Year! ✨ 🎁💫💛💚💙💜💗💞

It serves three primary functions (though there are many more, these are broad categories): 1. Survival Imagine two cavemen or organisms. One ventures into the woods to hunt and notices a human being mauled by a bear, while another bear lurks nearby. This caveman lacks self-reflection or understanding (think of how donkeys or similar animals can’t recognize themselves in a mirror) and foolishly walks into danger. The other caveman, however, has the capacity for self-reflection. He recognizes the human as like himself, assesses the threat, and flees. This caveman survives, fucks, and passes on his genes. Now, picture two cavemen with some level of self-reflection. One can only think a few days ahead, while the other can think weeks into the future. The latter builds a small mud shelter to protect against the rain, while the former gets cold, falls ill, and dies. Again, the more reflective caveman survives and propagates his genes. This trend continues: greater consciousness and self-reflection that enhance survival get passed down. Even today, you see these patterns - people who gamble excessively, overeat sugar, or neglect their health often face early death, difficulty finding a mate, or struggles with safety, love, and purpose. These individuals are less likely to propagate their genes successfully. Evolution isn't perfect, of course - harmful traits can still spread, and people can reproduce despite those flaws - but the general trend is that traits beneficial to survival, including self-reflection and consciousness, persist. This is why the self, or ego, exists. 2. Expansion of the Universe Simply put, as I mentioned earlier, God’s mind is infinite. It holds no bias, and therefore, it has no boundaries regarding what it can or cannot be, or what it can or cannot experience. If it wishes to experience a human ego or a conscious mind, then it does. You happen to be the one "observing" this specific human experience - not, say, an alien kangaroo-flamingo hybrid skipping through the Sahara Desert. 3. As Previously Mentioned: This ties into the second point: the infinite nature of God’s mind.

Because nothing would then exist to be "experienced" or differentiated - it’s the classic "If a tree makes a sound and no one hears it, does it make a sound?" Consciousness, or "observance," requires two differentiated selves or points of view for each to exist. If no one were there to know of Sugarcoat, and if Sugarcoat weren’t defined by any bounds of reality, as an individuated self Sugarcoat couldn’t exist - she would dissolve into nothingness, emptiness, or God. Something must stubbornly remain one way and not another; this principle manifests in both the physical, emotional, and spiritual realms. If all physical objects were infinitely fluid, changeable, or transmutable, there would be constant chaos and no stable structures or rules to define reality. Similarly, if emotions lacked weight or meaning and were infinitely fluid (like a fleeting joke) then the depth of love, beauty, the pull of passion, and other profound feelings would not necessarily exist. This concept, though cliché in non-duality teachings—"without darkness, there can be no light"—holds deep truth, especially when contemplating the nature of the self in the highest spiritual sense. God "needs" to experience everything because He is everything and can only be everything. Hence, limitations and rigid, concrete, stable forms must also exist. Limitation provides depth as much as expansion can. We, as humans, (sadly or luckily) happen to resemble God more in this sense. We possess metacognition - the ability to think about our own thinking - a self-referential quality. Since God is infinite, those creatures in God’s mind had to eventually exist. Having a self or awareness is profoundly beautiful - the ability to take in the beauty of others into your own consciousness and merge with it to a delightful degree. The difficulty comes with suffering, but that’s the "deal" we get. You have a defined self that is conscious and can explore, take in the world, parts of God’s mind. But in being defined, vulnerable to change, needing specific requirements for a good life and survival - and in a universe that is infinitely impermanent - we suffer.

Oh, I also didn’t see the teaching job part – that could be a great option too! Just make sure it doesn't drain you to the point where you feel unable to create things that truly fulfill you. If you can find a balance, though, that could be the perfect and easiest option, honestly.