UnbornTao

Or turn you into the Lisan al-Gaib.

Hey, who's hallucinating whom?

In our experience, the truth is profoundly unknown, is it not? That said, your post is somewhat vague. While bias is likely universal and the tendency to deceive oneself should be guarded against, I would argue that as long as you uncover what is really true about your subject of inquiry, other concerns are largely secondary.

Cheers! Still, you should've asked more and better questions.

God helps those who help themselves? God-help - a new subgenre.

You have a point. The power of a belief comes largely from the fact that it's seen as "reality," not as an adopted or made-up notion. It makes sense to say that recognizing your beliefs as such can feel threatening to your self-identity. Still, I think there's room for someone to consciously hold a belief and operate from it while remaining aware of what it is. For example, you might think of yourself as a kind person (or reserved, loud, whatever), and behave according to that self-image. Yet you can also see that as a "belief" - an aspect of yourself that was adopted at some point and isn't inherent to your person. It isn't who you are, existentially. The main distinction to be made is that no belief is, or can be, the truth. Even when a belief is valid or sound, it's still a thought about - a representation - and in that sense, untrue.

Check whether it's truly existential. Is it actually there? Pay attention to your objective, physical surroundings, and ask where the suffering can be found. Certainly, existence itself seems quite "unconcerned and at peace." So where is the suffering?

Unsolved riddles everywhere.

The first "supplement" in his stack is a joint.

The term awakening gets thrown around willy-nilly.

We keep looking for an answer. I don't know.

Hmm, how accurate is that? For example, you can't have 'positive' without 'negative.' Perhaps what you're referring to is the experience of equanimity, or a kind of peace. But this shouldn't be confused with the absence of emotion, whether positive or negative. If something is regarded, recognized, or distinguished as positive, then negative - and vice versa - is created when that initial assessment is made.

And your state never stays the same. The contrast is what allows you to recognize one state from another. You might ask what the substance of such open-mindedness is - what it's based on. You're essentially asking for a drug high to be permanent and then complaining that it wears off. It's best to see whether you could generate for yourself a state of radical openness, this will be different (perhaps more real and grounded) than a chemically-induced one. I'll agree that it is an experience - hopefully, you gained some insight from it.

Having been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and on his deathbed, Ramana was basically 'whatever.' He even refused treatment - for the cancer, not death. I get OCD-like symptoms if I don't mention the guy every three posts or so. Just an anecdote.

You likely think that you are a mind. Even in the title of this thread, notice the separation we often create between "me" and the body. We tend to look down on the body. Sure.

States come and go.

- asked Socrates.

Thank you, though it was meant as a meditation rather than a questionnaire.

So, who wants the retreats?

Do we really know what we're talking about? By definition, until it is "experienced," it remains only a notion for us. Even after a few enlightenments (or many), it still can't be what is thought about it. It is not a perception either. The mind will try to pin it down, to turn it into a knowable form - that's its job - but it's worth remembering that no matter what we think of it, it isn't it. Whatever possibility comes to mind right now is not the possibility of "enlightenment" itself. And you can throw the ideas in the trash, really. They'll only get in the way. It's best to stay completely and utterly open regarding the subject of your own nature. Just a rambling - maybe not directly related with your reflection, but anyway...

From my limited experience with some of these AI models (Claude, GPT, DeepSeek), I find that the technology is essentially a more evolved, smarter version of a "search engine." To me, the hype is disproportionate to what the technology actually delivers. I haven't tried Sora, though.

Why wouldn't it be? Still, I'd try to pin your strength down to an action or something more specific. As a term, beauty sounds more like a value, since it's a bit abstract and ill-defined. What do you mean by beauty, exactly? Drawing, decorating, rearranging patterns, photography, writing poetry, creating music, developing software? What are you skillful at or passionate about that makes you regard beauty as your main strength? Some questions to ask oneself.