Joseph Maynor

That's true. I like to feel like I have something totally figured out. In some situations it's good and in some situations it backfires on me.

@Loreena Yeah, the yin and yang readings are something that I compiled for myself. They are writings that I read everyday. They are a way for me to balance the forces of nature to harmonize with the Tao. So I can dynamically balance my unicycle over uneven terrain and have right idea and right time so I can take right action. This video explains Negative Visualization This video explains the Sedona Method

There's a Ralph Waldo Emerson quote that I don't remember verbatim but I'll paraphrase it like this -- every person has something that they know that you do not know and that they could teach you if you were open to listening to them.

Fer sure. I walked through Golden Gate Park for years to get my nature fix. I felt all my troubles melt away when I entered a little meadow and sat down on the grass and read a while.

@Girzo Yeah. Just consider this a brainstorming session. This is like a buffet of practices. You don't have to do all of them.

Interesting. There is no one right path to enlightenment. I see it as simply as unhinging from beliefs at the existential level, and a way of living a more virtuous and self-less life. I think each person can be guided by theory, but has to kick-off the theory training-wheels at a certain point and just observe within themselves how this stuff really works. That is critical. That's when you'll get the answer you're really looking for, not by clinging to beliefs or ideology like your life (ego) depends on it (I'm not saying you do this, it's just said generally). Clinging too much to beliefs is at cross-purposes to enlightenment. You gotta make your own enlightenment custom to your own life. An enlightenment that works for you, that gives you emotional mastery, that grounds you, that leads to the happy, truthful, beautiful, abundant life that the world needs from you. An enlightenment that enables you to live your life-purpose and contribute back to the world, so you can live a comfortable, financially-independent life, and so you can contribute back to the world in a Big way as your life-purpose becomes a reality. Enlightenment is a side-dish, not the entire meal. If you want to specialize in the side-dish, fine. But you would be a specialist then. Personal development is the bigger picture: How do we shape you up so you can go out there and do something on-purpose with your life. Enlightenment is the tool to helping you accomplish this. Yeah, it's the existential truth, but that truth don't take any action. You gotta rise to the occasion, dust the ego off a little bit, and go out there and take massive action to effectuate change. I realize my view might be unorthodox, but that doesn't matter to me. I figured it out for myself. I trust my own intuition after listening ad-nauseum to everybody else opine and opine about these issues. I'm still open to feedback and try not to cling too tightly to any beliefs, including these that I have stated here. What good are these beliefs? How do they advance my ball to be doing my life-purpose actions in the moment? See, that's the real issue. I can't emphasize this point more. We gotta keep our wandering eye-balls on the big-prize. The big-prize is your life improving so much that it's almost sickening. The paradox of growth? Maybe. Hell, do it for kicks if for nothing else. Just easy on the belief-clinging. That's the source of 99% of our problems in personal development. The cowboy doesn't marry his horse.

Curious. I mean, as soon as we start using language we are being dualists. Why is that? How do we see ourselves outside the matrix without dualistic thought rowing the boat, as it were. It's like trying to cash a check with a slice of salami, it's a non-sequitur. How can the monkey see outside the monkey all the while having the mind of a monkey? Do you see the problem here? Should we wear duality like clothing, whatever suits the weather is fine? I understand that my body is not my clothing, so no problem there. Couldn't we do the same thing with duality. Like a lot of self-aware, utilitarian monkeys dynamically balancing -- excellently I might add -- the primate infestation we call home-sweet-home. Would an alien species see us as scurrying potato bugs residing under the dried bark ramparts of a fallen tree? Or would that alien species see us as the majesty of God, or the Absolute? How would this change how we view ourselves -- considering this higher-order alien perspective on us? We're not used to contemplating like this. Maybe we should start to reverse that low-consciousness denial. How far can the monkey go to transcend his limited perspective, if at all? And how do we know that we aren't rationalizing things that are totally made up and don't exist in reality. Like a potato bug thinking it is the king of the world, until its life is destroyed one random day when an ornery kid rips that dried bark roof-top off his world and crushes his entire civilization in one brutish, seemingly irrational, low-consciousness act. --Are we the potato bug, the Hero, or God, or all and neither? --How does this contemplation exercise change how we view the potato bug and its infestation of a life? If any. --What is the true difference between infestation and civilization? How would an alien species answer this if they got a glimpse of "Earth" and "life on Earth"? NOTE: All of this language is dualistic too and came out of the mind of a monkey, me.

The quitter the antisocial The outspoken person The person who doesn't give a shit The rule breaker The weirdo The arrogant person The person with low self-esteem The lone wolf The nice guy The dick The wounded bird The perfectionist The person who lacks confidence The person who permits being abused The loner The outcast The abused one The insecure person The fuck up The mistreated one The person who's angry that someone didn't come to their defense The iconoclastic personality -- I will be heard! The person who is super sensitive to being abused The person who has a defensive barrier as to try not to be viewed as vulnerable or not smart The spoiled brat. I don't want to do this shit. I don't have to do this shit. There's gotta be a better way The person who feels like something about their appearance holds them back Watch:

Curious. Is your success like a logarithmic curve or like a series of spikes? Can that series of spikes be averaged out into a curve? What kind of curve would that be for you? This is more for the math nerds out there like me. Ignore this part if you don't understand this. As I am 39 turning 40 this December, I am kind of looking back at my life. Say from age 15 - 39. And I am fascinated with the question: Have I done enough? Could I have expedited anything? Have I wasted any time? Have I screwed-up my life in some kind of irreparable way? Have I been living the dream the entire time, faithfully trudging along, plugging-away, the entire time? Or were there periods of growth set off by seas of stagnation? What does that picture look like? How would I optimize myself if I could go back in time? These are fascinating inquiries to me right now. And I wanted to share this line of inquiry with you and have you go through the same kind of inquiry on your own life. What does your life performance record look like? Not based on external metrics, but based on your own standard for yourself. You know you. How have you been faithful to you, and how have you dropped-the-ball? We tend to bullshit ourselves about this, so you really gotta set your ego aside, sit down, poor yourself a glass of tea, and think through these issues for a while to let the objective picture, the true picture, start to emerge. And the ego does not want to do this. You don't want to do this. It's threatening because it could cause some self-doubt which releases negative emotions.

Your paradigm. The only one that truly matters. It's a bit counter-intuitive. All truth is internal not external, personal not impersonal. Physics, or any conceptual body of knowledge for that matter, only matters to the extent that it matters to you. To the extent that you can take those insights and weave them into your ever-evolving worldview, that's what matters. Much of what we learn dies away. It's what we keep that is important. And that always comes back to your paradigm. That toolkit of concepts, heuristics, and expectations that you carry around with you and actually work with on a daily basis. What's in there? How can you improve it? How can exposure to Leo's ideas help you to improve that toolkit? Conversely, how can that bum on the street that tried to hustle money off you help you improve that toolkit? See, it's all you optimizing your knowledge grab-bag, your toolkit. It's all about your paradigm and taking responsibility for improving it, for honing it. It's all about what does this information do for you that is the relevant issue. Always. And then when you get a broad paradigm built, you might be so abundant that you condescend to advise others, because you've likely made every mistake in the book by that point and want to reduce suffering of others. This is, in part, what makes person want to be a philosopher or teacher or guru or whatever you want to call it. Mastery of that knowledge grab-bag and seeing that worldview for what it is. Nice! I got away with using a sentence fragment there.

You know what is a better question -- does he think he is enlightened. Not whether he would say so publically, but how does he feel about it in his own heart-mind? If he is satisfied with the answer, then the issue is moot. There is no objectivity in reality. Objectivity is still egoic. Enlightenment is a highly personal thing I find. Highly personal. You can half-objectify enlightenment, but at the end of the day the shoe has to fit the wearer. And that's what makes a great shoe. There is no objectively right shoe. There's room for variance built into enlightenment. A monkey's perspective is not the perspectiveless perspective. So, create and optimize your own enlightenment. You are toying with Maya either way. Don't believe the hype. There ain't no right answer. That's what is so paradoxical about enlightenment. Enlightenment is no-thing. You see all these books about enlightenment. And then you go -- yep, no-thing. When you have that realization it will hit you in a comical sort of way. You will still want to cling to the theory though, naturally. The ego wants to cling to theory. But just go -- yep, no-thing! That's hard to do. The ego has a need to know, need for certainty, and need for conceptual clarification. When you see that about the ego you can't unsee it. And you'll release all the judging and trying to cubby-hole enlightenment. I've heard the word "spiritual ego" before, and it may or may not apply to what I have said here. I'll let you decide if it does or not. All perspectives are existentially relative and dwarfed by the Absolute, the perspectiveless perspective, which laughs at all of our little distinctions. Good, bad, right, wrong, true, false. All ego. All illusory, myopic beliefs at the existential level. Now, in monkey-ville all of these distinctions have practical import, but monkey-ville ain't true reality, not even close. Even so-called enlightened monkeys still half-reside in monkey-ville, within our bodies, beliefs, and cultures.

Because it takes a life-time to mature. I am 39 years old and would you believe that in the last year alone I have grown so much. You will see that you will learn and grow your whole life-long. You will gain some knowledge, then gain some perspective. And this little engine will work itself your entire life. I feel like I am the same person I was when I was 20, but I just have a lot more knowledge and experience. You ever wonder why a lot of older people look so grounded and happy? That's knowledge and experience. I look back to how neurotic I was when I was 20 and younger. I am much less neurotic now. Don't worry about it. You are likely heads above your peers. Don't let that go to your head though.

I need a good one.

@Shin I remember making the same observation myself about 5 years ago. When you read written text you will see that you are really reading aloud the words in your mind. So, it's the vocalizations that are more primary than the written marks. This even applies to mathematics. 2+2=4 is sounded-out. This is a major insight. You might read some Derrida. Derrida was an interesting and often misunderstood philosopher who was interested in these issues. This is a cutting edge issue, not much explored. Even Derrida was too focused on oppositions, which both helped him and screwed-him-up in equal measure. But he's worth reading. You'll clarify your own view when you see why his view is wrong.

What do you do and for how long do you do it?

You can discuss and debate, but hold your positions loosely and don't have your identity tied-up with your views or arguments. You shouldn't be getting worked-up in a discussion. That's really the test. And always assume that the other person could be right. Try and learn something about why they believe the opposite from you. That's fascinating. That's human variance going on there. Probably the truth is somewhere in the middle anyway -- in some ethereal space betwixt and between your two positions. Humility really is a virtue, but don't be afraid to argue. For one thing, it's damn fun and funny sometimes too. It's better than watching flies fornicate or watching television even. It's probably better than half the internet stuff we do on a daily basis. You can learn something in every situation. And every person has something they can teach you. Your true takeaway is what is key -- not some misplaced egoic desire to win or to be right. Any run-of-the-mill enlightened person knows the foolishness of being a know-it-all. That's a big-trap that a lot of very smart people fall into. They wanna be right. But thats' illusion-city goin' on there!

@Loreena I don't know. My guess is it's the result of a lot of spirituality work.

That might be a good reason to back off the spirituality stuff for a while. Give it a breather. Too much of a good thing sometimes turns into a bad thing.

You know what's crazy, I don't even know what this is. Shows how out of touch I am.

True. Except the rare person might dream to become a yogi, teacher, guru, or philosopher.

We are no-thing. That is the answer. But we like to play charades. It's in our interest to play charades -- we don't want to live a painful reality. We want to maximize goodness, from a certain perspective. The mind can transcend monkey-ville, but the body has something to say about that. So, we straddle both worlds, the human and the godly. The solution is to realize all this is ideology. You just need to get on that unicycle and dynamically balance these notions where they fit in with your excellent agenda. Mindfulness on the mind is key.

Finding the dynamic balance in personal development is critical. You don't want to cling to any ideology. To get the picture right takes quite a bit of exposure to theory, and then you gotta make sense of it yourself and apply it to your life. Then you feel qualified to advise others based only on that experience. So, I have a perspective that works for me. But it's not the only perspective. It may or may not resonate with you. Watch all of these videos on point:

@Socrates You can both be and not be superior. Practically speaking, you can be superior, but existentially speaking you can't be. So, you can cling to the belief that you are superior, but just hold it loosely, and don't assume it is part of your identity. Just because you are enlightened doesn't mean practical good and bad go out the window. But just realize that even being a good, excellent, or virtuous human is a perspective on reality, an illusion at bottom. Reality is the perspectiveless perspective. But we half-live in the illusion, so thus the paradox: Be superior but don't be superior. Ain't nothin' wrong with realizing you are smarter or better than other people. Just don't cling too hard to that belief and don't assume it is part of your identity. Your identity is nothing (or no-thing) existentially. You don't exist existentially, and neither do other people. All reality is one existentially.

Create your own boot-camp for yourself. That's the way to go.

@egoless Yes. Enlightenment isn't any different from real life. The only difference is the enlightened person sees through many existentially false beliefs. Enlightenment is the key to emotional mastery, to resilience. You can't stop me if there's no me and there's no you. And I can't get offended if there is no me. I can't have any beliefs if there is no me. And that includes limiting-beliefs. I can't be depressed or neurotic if there is no me. I can't transcend the ego if there is no me. See? Nothing means nothing about a separate sense of self. Reality is one. You are entire reality believing you are a piece of reality. The illusion of ego is there, and none of us can escape it entirely. All we can do is see through the illusion. This benefits our little monkey lives in an assortment of ways. Most people lack emotional mastery because they cling very ignorantly to existentially false beliefs. This is why enlightenment is a key element and threshold-guardian for true self-actualization work. You gotta let go of your false beliefs about yourself which causes you to hold yourself back. Enlightenment is a tool I find. A tool for emotional mastery. But it's the existential Truth too, not just a tool. Emotional mastery and life-purpose enable you to go out there and do true emotional labor and optimize your little monkey life to live a full, abundant life, where you are so abundant that you give back to humanity in a very beautiful way. That's the view of enlightenment that resonates with me. There is no existentially true way to live. You are the music-maker with your life. You are the dreamer of dreams. Don't let anybody's theory of enlightenment make you forget that. Reality is but a dream. Reality is truly free. Reality laughs at our cute little beliefs and theories, even the ones about enlightenment. So watch out. There ain't no objectively right answer existentially. Reality laughs at the rationalist paradigm trying to understand and cubby-hole it. It's like trying to design a real human being via artificial intelligence. Ain't never gonna happen. Some engineers might believe this, but they are in la la land -- way off.