UnbornTao

Thank you! Good team.

My dog.

You should just contemplate the fundamentals, like what a belief is.

The principle itself seems to be applicable to many aspects of experience. In a social context, you might be a dick and yet be able to effortlessly question your own stance on other topics. But I don't know.

A lot of intellectual content is likely conflated with genuine comprehension, especially when it comes to the nature of things themselves -- self, mind, emotions, existence, relationship, communication, perception -- whatever. When you set aside the crap (everything that isn’t direct apprehension), what do you actually know -- within your experience or beyond it? What are you deeply conscious of -- truly and directly? So, it is useful to be honest about that.

Highly biased, low-quality.

@Osaid You seem to be holding enlightenment as something experienced. Experiencing is indirect as it is a process mediated by biological senses. You perceive, say, a pencil, but what is it? It can be easy to confuse state, beliefs and unusual experiences with enlightenment, it's better to remain open and to keep contemplating.

At last.

Speculation and make-believe, it seems to me.

What is this discussion grounded on?

Hey, relatable. Actually recently added an article to my reading list on this topic: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/25/style/sleep-problem-late-night.html You can bypass the paywall with a browser extension.

Experience is a process and about something, direct consciousness is realizing what the thing itself is. For example, we experience objects through our senses, and yet seem to be unconscious of the nature of object-ive reality, what objects are. That we perceive something doesn't imply we are conscious of what it is existentially. It is absolute, not an experience.

Experience is indirect. I'd refrain from conjuring up cosmologies around this topic however convincing they are; direct consciousness is what does the trick.

Replace "Gordon Ramsey" with "all of humanity".

You're exchanging opinions and beliefs, which is fine. @Osaid enlightenment ain't an experience.

@Yimpa go ground yourself.

If they ask and are open to it, you might as well share some of them. Aren't universities supposed to be comparatively open environments?

Or, metaphorically speaking, the creation of self is hell.

Fine, then contribute positively by engaging in mature exchanges, not so much reactivity.

@bebotalk sounds like you might be hurt in some way and might be venting. Just don't go around looking for fights and blaming others, whatever you feel is OK. Again, ask yourself why you started this thread. A better place to vent is the Journal section.

Stop the childish emotional reactivity. Reframe the conversation so that it achieves a fruitful end, reflect perhaps on why you're posting, and be clearer on what you mean.

As a practice to start developing integrity, commit yourself to doing a relatively simple act habitually, something you'd ashamed not to do. For example, meditate everyday for 10 seconds. With time, as you keep your word, your self-esteem is going to increase. As a result of you acting with integrity, your word will begin to have power, and you'll get to know yourself as a person that can be trusted. At that point, you'll have to be careful about what to commit yourself to, as whatever you give your word to, you are going to get it done. Notice, too, the consequences of being out of integrity. You don't need to give your word; you can remain bound to your impulses, going after gratification and running away from pain and discomfort, although this will create a disempowering experience. Being out of integrity is "evidence" that you are someone that can't be trusted since everytime you give your word, you fail to be loyal to it, and you know it in your experience. Therefore, you don't trust yourself. Whenever you give your word, even if casually, keep it. Otherwise, don't give it.

Decide for yourself what sport you like. Does tennis cause head injury? Soccer, basketball, etc.

Might be enlightened, doubt it, not interested. You'd be better off studying Ramana's material. Why not study the best material?

@StarStruck That's probably why it doesn't let you make pictures of people. I've found Copilot to be a bit more restrictive.