UnbornTao

Oh, I was just randomly coming up with ingredients. Good to know.

Mmm hmm.

No cinnamon, lemon, or mint. What were they thinking?

👍

Breathing your way to enlightenment.

What is anything? As a distinction, 'bear' is relative. A thing comes to exist by virtue of being relative; otherwise, it would not take a discrete or particular form. Difference and language are not the same. Difference comes prior to language, it seems to me. What comes to mind when considering 'bear', for example?

Agree for the most part. I'd also make a distinction between an experience and a philosophy. Communication is about the former. Notice that no philosophy or additional conceptual structure is required for experiential insight; in fact, they can get in the way. Our deep need for, or reliance on, belief suggests that we (the entire world) may not truly know what we're talking about. In this existential context, one might attempt to mask that fundamental ignorance by adopting certain systems or practices such as nonduality, idealism, scientific hearsay, atheism, religion, ritual, psychedelics, materialism, solipsism, Scientology, Buddhism, "no-self," or any of the rest.

Get him!

Still, why use an abstract term for a presumed breakthrough? Why wouldn't Ramana use terms like X or Y? In fact, for a long time he reportedly remained silent unless asked, if I recall correctly. Anyhow, even if it was a genuine breakthrough, one might not be entirely clear in their mind about what it is they became conscious of. Also, the mindset behind phrases such as "my truth" can be problematic, in my view. We could think of truth as impersonal, even the truth of one's self and of existence. The way language is used hints at the experience someone is coming from. The way I see it, such claims tend to suggest the person is speaking from intellectual conclusions. What is not a concept? According to Wikipedia, the term derives from Latin as a combination of solus ("alone") and ipse ("self"). Again, why would abstract terms be necessary to communicate an experience? I imagine that experience is still what one is referring to. It's useful to observe that everything that happens occurs in your experience. But to claim that this is ultimately true is premature. This is not too dissimilar to when someone talks about "no-self" and all that, claiming they understand it or live free from their selves. Sure thing, buddy. (As a general remark, not directed at you, since you admitted that this was a memory and not a presently operative realization.) I appreciate the honesty. The chances are slim that this is an actual reality for the one claiming it. More often than not, they are stuck in an intellectual world without even noticing - especially when it's taken trivially or as an aspect of a cosmology. That suggests a concept being believed in and adopted. The reality of it is very different from our conception of it. And even though we already "know" that difference, do we really know it in our bones? Granted, it's also possible they may have achieved some degree of freedom from self, though that's still a long way from "no-self." Perhaps it's like rationally explaining the event at the very moment one is being kicked in the balls, abstracting it, instead of simply going "ouch." By their own account, it makes one wonder whether the person was actually kicked at all. Not the best analogy, but it may help clarify the contrast. That said, hopefully it was genuine and real, and/or had a positive impact on your life - which it seems it did. As for the arbiter, whatever is ultimately true is the final arbiter; you, me, or anyone else have nothing to do with it. The video on listening I shared in the blog thread may be helpful here.

@Miguel1 It's locked now.

There's no way for me to convince you that X is true. However, based on my direct experience for the last seven years, I am completely certain of its truth. The only thing I can ask you to do is keep an open mind. Question all of your assumptions. I hope you find the truth.

@Sugarcoat @Yimpa

Linux Mint is calling, then

Let's keep the proselytizing going:

@SQAAD I wasn't attacking your situation, but the victim mindset you seem to have fallen into. Ask yourself whether you want to continue whining, or whether you're willing to do something about it. Otherwise, what are you doing - complaining and blaming "the world" for your experience of life? How is that higher consciousness?

MILF: Man I Love Food.

I hope they are as healthy as the fresh varieties. I like to buy plain cooked legumes, except maybe lentils, which I get fresh, and then add a couple of stir-fried vegetables, like onion and red bell pepper, along with sauces, water, spices, salt, and some tomato soup to make a hearty meal in about 10 minutes. So yeah, I don't know

Not sure why dairy would be included in a pyramid like that. I get that commercial interests play a role in its design, though. Dairy is a relatively recent development in human history, and most adult mammals don't drink milk. It's not necessary for health at all. Probably neither are bread and pasta, strictly speaking. That said, I do drink full-fat milk daily, mostly in my coffee. A bit out of the blue, anyway.

👏👏

I hope you know what you're doing by randomly picking and eating wild mushrooms. Don't be negligent. Otherwise, it's a recipe for disaster. And do not combine alcohol and mushrooms, just in case it were to occur to you. Oh, and don't fool yourself. If you just want to get high, be honest about that. This is my advice, based on how I interpreted your post. God, I'm drunk with mod power!

Fanaticism is a function of repressed doubt. — Dune

Sorry I didn't respond to your post earlier. I really can't tell what you may have become conscious of - if anything. Hopefully it was true and profound. The point is that the mind can pretty much make things up and distort whatever insight may have been had. I could retroactively attempt to confirm my belief system - if I were a Scientologist or a Buddhist - and with enough fervor, I probably could. I would be able to "move with the map", so to speak. I could think in such a way that any other conceptual structure like idealism, nonduality, and so on would be "confirmed" in my own mind. This is a fundamental point. For example, consider that Ramana was not talking about solipsism. As far as I can tell, he was attempting to communicate the truth he was directly conscious of. Huge difference. The realness of the consciousness is what is in question. I guess the point, once again, is basically this: we're biased. Our minds are biased. I've realized that, generally speaking, people are not very good at discerning what is a real communication and what is something else - and how to tell when someone is speaking from an imaginative intellectual world or a conclusion, rather than from direct consciousness. As an example, revisit the thread on Teal Swan. Also, you mention Bashar, and to me it is not much different from the former. Like seriously, why are you listening to him? It's a waste of time.

Blueberries is all I care about. Fuck the rest.

Hey man, I hope your situation improves. But lighten up on yourself. Your shit smells too. Stop being a whiny bitch all the time. It's OK to fuck up, everyone does it from time to time. Try to own the actions you take and their consequences. If you want to do something about it, ask yourself: What can I do right now toward this goal? How can I conduct myself to create a new living situation for myself? Then go do it. Best.