UnbornTao

Is it possible that all of us do the same when it comes to perceiving any given object? In other words, do we assume our perception is reality or the same as what exists? (Not as a philosophy but as a factual happening?) How can we even recognize this as such, if it is true? Based on this assumption, it's virtually impossible to see any contrast by which to gauge what reality is, other than our perception of it - except as an intellectual possibility that neither touches nor alters what is experienced, or assumed to be.

1. Get enlightened 2. Profit!

Feel free to think that.

Ahhhh

Welcome to the Actualized.org forum. It can get tricky because the performance and the impressions made by the person can be deceptive, too. People lie to themselves even about this awakening business, presuming that a state change is the same as a direct consciousness. You can certainly pay attention and recognize in some way when someone has some sort of awakening, something authentic. At the very least you can smell it if you learn to be sensitive - beyond the terminology and experience being presented. This is the same with someone like Ramana, or Buddha.

Your position is obviously influenced by Leo or is downright coming from him, whether implicitly or explicitly, judging by your reaction. Take a look at this. If I shared some of Leo's videos, you wouldn't call me a Leo witness, would you? Especially since they'd likely confirm this view of yours that you seem to hold. Adi Da was one of the few who knew what he was talking about - it just saves time to share the video. I've shared my personal experience enough times, but it doesn't matter how many times it's said here. C'est la vie.

I was out of tokens anyway

I know how many r's are in Strawberry: five.

And honestly...

The real teachers weren't into psychedelic drugs either, and there's a reason for that. Unfortunately, it's easy to hear similar terminology from different individuals and assume they're talking about the same thing.

Here we go again. At some point this will get through to some of your followers, if they're willing to listen:

And honestly? That's rare™️

@Leo Gura What about sharing exercises and assignments? A more Socratic method could be useful.

You really do often ask people to believe you, even if unknowingly and in an implicit way, beneath all the rhetoric.

Sounds about right.

Tisn't an ism without an aneurysm.

I don't know. I think it can be made to work as it is currently arranged - with general categories, subtopics, and threads.

This could be a sincere assessment but if hurting yourself is the goal, then the assessment lacks objectivity, in my view. But I wouldn't be so hard on myself either way. Definitely. Although you mentioned ignorance here, which is different. Without any judgment attached, we're all ignorant to some degree. It's natural. By its very nature we're likely to be ignorant of the vast majority of our ignorance - we don't know what we don't know. A core aspect of stupidity might be an insensitivity to one's ignorance - failing to recognize it when opportunities and feedback are presented - defending it unwittingly, and getting stuck with it. Or: not learning, failing to see whether one is learning anything new. Finding learning threatening to one's identity and view of the world.

Awesome. It's also true that the current arrangement just works. Hopefully Leo considers this at some point.

I was wondering how feasible it would be to switch it to something like Discourse. https://discourse.org/

It's a forum guideline to disclose AI use.

My gawd. What would Socrates have thought of LLMs?

No one in the comments regards themselves as stupid. It's always someone else. Interesting.