Joseph Maynor

The elephant in the room is not being addressed at all in all this talk — namely, the you who’s taking offense in the first place. For one to take offense one must be triggered. That’s the real issue. What’s causing that triggering? That’s the real question. When we lash out externally it’s because we’re projecting our internal issues outward. “Lemme tell you who you are” is really “lemme tell you who I am.” You gotta see this in yourself which takes mindfulness and high-consciousness. This is why watching ourselves deal with conflict is so instructive and is a great self-teaching moment. Most people never stop and say, “it’s me — the problem is me. What am I doing?”

I’m not talking about TJ. I’m talking about my own observation and experience with Turquoise and Coral in watching it in myself and in others. When you reach Coral you’ll get a perspective on Turquoise that Turquoise people are blind to. Similarly at Green you’ll get a perspective on Orange that Orange people are blind to.

It’s a mistake to think in terms of in the illusion and out of the illusion. Ditto for the distinction between relative truth and absolute truth. There’s only one actual reality and that reality doesn’t have facets.

Turquoise is still very much wrapped up in Ego — not in the Egoic self but Ego more broadly. It’s Coral that really starts to see through Ego at the deepest level. Coral is the stage where True Spirituality emerges when God is fully realized.

Nobody wants to actually do the work. It’s like pulling teeth to get someone to actually contemplate something.

There’s both nothing behind the scenes and something behind the scenes, it’s paradoxical. Can you explain how this paradox might make sense?

This is my final comment on this Forum drama, which has been revealing to me and therefore not useless. I do think people reveal themselves in times of crisis, so I’m always happy to see the difference between talk and actuality in people. I’m going through this with someone else too in my life right now where I realized so much about them due to a pending crisis. You start to see glimpses of the actual person and it can be scary because you see how the person actually is and how they conceal that most of the time. But here it is, this is what I wanna end with: Be the change you wanna see in the world. Let’s say you’re a drinker and pot smoker. You lecturing someone else about drinking alcohol is gonna have no force and effect with that person because they can see the disconnect between what you say and what you actually do. But let’s say you kicked drinking alcohol yourself 100% and you compassionately try to assist someone else struggling with alcoholism, that’s gonna be taken very differently by that person. Ditto for Enlightenment. You gotta actually live Enlightenment to effectively teach it. Talk needs to mirror actuality to create true credibility.

Start to contemplate these: What is Ego actually? What is Maya actually? Is Ego larger in scope than the Egoic self? What is actually there versus what the Mind takes to be there? What is the true Self actually? What is Experience actually? Are other people separate beings? What is external reality actually? What are Thoughts actually? What is the part of what’s there that never changes?

Start to contemplate these: What is Ego actually? What is Maya actually? Is Ego larger in scope than the Egoic self? What is actually there versus what the Mind takes to be there? What is the true Self actually? What is Experience actually? Are other people separate beings? What is external reality actually? What are Thoughts actually? What is the part of what’s there that never changes?

From my Journal: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONTEMPLATION WORK VS. MENTAL MASTURBATION IN ENLIGHTENMENT WORK Contemplation Work is necessary in Enlightenment Work. There's a difference between Contemplation Work and mental masturbation. Mental Masturbation is Thought focused away from self-observation. Contemplation is Thought focused towards self-observation. Contemplation Work is always directed 'in here' whereas mental masturbation is always directed 'out there'. For example, the question "What is Mind?" can both be Contemplation Work and mental masturbation depending on the intention of how it's asked. If you're looking for your own Mind, that's Contemplation Work. If you're trying to come up with some philosophical account of Mind that is not connected to you doing self-observation, that's mental masturbation. Ditto for 'What is Reality?' -- this can both be Contemplation Work and mental masturbation depending on the intention of how the question is asked. If you're self-observing the reality that you see in your own Experience, that's Contemplation Work. If you're trying to define 'reality' and aren't even interested in connecting it to your own Experience, that's mental masturbation. Ditto for 'What is Thought?', 'What is Truth?', 'What is Ego?', 'What is the True Self?', 'What is Maya?', 'What is Experience?', and even 'What is Contemplation?' -- all these questions can be Contemplation Work or mental masturbation depending on the intention of how they're asked and how they're treated.

I don't think so. Why are we moralizing about content on here? There's a huge gulf between your guy's theory and practice. Stop trying to control reality to your liking. You only cause yourself suffering. You guys are supposed to be teachers on here. A true teacher takes no offense of Ego. They might be pained by Ego, but that's different from taking offense to Ego. Pain is part of Experience and it's not clear that you have any control over Experience.

Only the contents of my own Journals would be worth that, and not even those.

Good. That sounds like Stage Turquoise metaphysics. If you live that, very good. What you wanna be doing now for everything in your Thought and Experience is to ask to what extent is this real, to what extent is this actual? Try to find out the grab bag of all stuff that the Mind sort of assumes is there but isn't actually there.

Who has ever survived suicide to tell us what Thought and Experience comes after the deadly act? Does Awareness survive suicide? Now you have yourself a great contemplation topic my friend. Look into it.

What do you think Enlightenment is? Gimme a paragraph.

Give us some reasons to support your conclusory statement. You never give any reasons for your conclusory statements.

(1) Give reasons to support your claim that I'm doing a Straw Man; and, (2) Answer my initial question about your claim that I've misrepresented Leo. You completely evaded this question. I'm not gonna play games with you. I've been there, done that with you. I'm not gonna waste my time engaging with you unless and until you can give reasons for your claims and rebuttals.

Why the thought control in the first instance though? That's the elephant in the room here. Look, if somebody's trolling or otherwise violating the basic forum guidelines, that's a different issue. But what Leo and you seem to be talking about is banning people who disagree with Leo's opinions about metaphysics. That's religion bud. It's religion that turns metaphysics into an ideology that people wanna fight for. Leo shouldn't be clinging to any ideology at all. And this isn't a moral should. It's a should that comes from realizing that clinging to ideology is an illusion, it's Maya. It's pointless suffering. You thinking you've got metaphysics figured out and clinging to that is you being stuck in Ego, stuck in Samsara, stuck in Thought. Remember, what reality actually is has nothing to do with Thought or Experience. Don't cling to Thought, don't cling to Experience. Just detach and watch this stuff and try to help others on their paths, wherever they are on their path. And try to learn from people to try to advance on your path. But I welcome diversity personally. I want the people on here who disagree with me. As long as you're not an abusive troll, I have no problem with you. And the few truly abusive trolls on here seem to have nine-lives too, which is paradoxical.

I referenced Leo's actual quoted language which I cited, but you've failed to even say what exactly you're alluding to. Give reasons for your conclusions and maybe we'll have something tangible to discuss.

I hope this isn’t taken the wrong way and I don’t want to be banned, but the above statement raises a big red flag for me for several reasons including but not limited to the following: not everybody shares the same meaning for the word ‘God’. And actually the word ‘God’ is optional anyway. If you’re coming from Ego you’re gonna think of the word ‘God’ as pointing to something ‘out there’ and not ‘in here’. The above quote also sounds very characteristically Stage Blue thinking to me. Are you trying to protect people from misleading ideology? That sounds like religion to me. Anyway, it seems out of character for a Stage Green, Yellow, or Turquoise person. The Green person would value the diversity, the Yellow person would be interested in discussing the matter extensively, and the Turquoise person would try to help the person on their path very gently and compassionately. But this banning idea sounds very Stage Blue, very ideological, very rigid to me. It’s also kind of heartless. Put yourself in the shoes of someone getting banned for disagreeing with you. There needs to be more empathy there which seems to be conspicuously absent, which actually surprises me with your new video on ‘Love’ where you talk about being compassionate and loving. It’s one thing to talk about love and compassion, anybody can do that. But do you practice love and compassion? See, the practice is what’s actual.

Truth is the true Self that sees through the illusion Maya a.k.a. The illusion of Thought and Experience. Truth is very real, it’s not just a mere concept. Truth is actuality. Truth is God Awareness.

Exactly! That’s a great insight. Be mindful of what those imaginings actually are.

Why so little detail about Coral? I could write a book on Coral alone.

What’s weird is the percentages thing never really resonated with me. I feel like I’ve made clean shifts into and out of every stage. There’s usually a beginning entry into a stage, a full flowering period, and then a period where you start to become aware you’re moving into the next stage. This whole idea of being 20% this 60% this and 20% that never comported with my actual experience. It’s more like a stair step than a percentage thing. It’s like a paradigm shift. You don’t straddle three paradigms — you move from one paradigm to the next paradigm.

Here’s the paradox. You gotta fill your cup completely before you can effectively start to empty it. That’s the necessary perfect circle of seeking. ⭕️. It’s the exhaustion of Ego that paradoxically causes Ego to burn away in a highly-conscious person. If I wasn’t so addicted to knowledge in my 20’s up until my late 30’s I would never be able to give all my books away and burn all my Philosophy freewriting at 39-40. See, people wanna do the emptying the cup part before they’ve exhausted the filling the cup part. This is like trying to be an old man when you’re still an adolescent. If you’re still clinging to books and learning — you’re not ready to empty your cup — you’re still filling your cup. A hungry man is not gonna swear off food. It’s the satiated man who says no thanks and gives his food away. Some people fill their cup with all kinds of notions of emptying their cup but never actually empty their cup, so watch out for that trap. That’s the person who gobbles up a bunch of Enlightenment theory but is not actually getting the results from it yet. For me, my cup started to empty on its own, it’s not something I forced. All of a sudden about a year ago I gave all my books away because I didn’t want to be distracted by them anymore. And then recently I realized that writing a bunch of essays was more about me emptying my cup rather than filling it. The writing was me letting go of my ideas. Before age 39 I assumed my writing was me preserving my profound insights; the writing was for clinging to my ideas not for releasing them. Stuff like that is how you know you’re on the emptying your cup leg of the circle rather than the filling your cup leg of the circle.