Emerald

-

-

-

-

-

I recommend choosing a single partner for this undertaking if you want a deeper understanding. One night stands and casual sex are rarely good for developing skill in having sex, especially if you want a really deep experience. Often times, the awkwardness of the first experience can get in the way. I've found that learning the needs of a single person in a deep way to be better than trying new things out on many partners. Think more depth than breadth. But if you just want to have the experience of many partners and you like the first impression/performance aspect of it, then that's fine. But if you're looking to develop sexual skills that extend beyond just technique, I'd go with one person.

-

I'm not sure how this relates? These videos aren't about meditation directly, or concentration/lack thereof either. They are about reintegrating the ignored aspects of the self and reality through detachment, recognizing the inherent neutrality of all emotion/thoughts/traits, accepting the presence of all internal tendencies even ones that we don't like, and finding a beneficial expression for traits that were seen as negative wherever possible. Meditation and concentration play a role in this for sure, but Leo's most recent video and these videos are really apples and oranges. So, I'm confused. Can you clarify what you meant?

I'm glad that you enjoyed the videos. Thanks for posting!

I personally am very attracted to men who seem like they can make me feel how I want to feel. I like a man who is mature and makes me feel simultaneously accepted/comforted/supported and desired/valued. But I also have to get a sense that the man is responsible and dependable to be able to see him as someone who could provide me with a sense of comfort and support. I value stability and instability really puts me off. I also tend to be attracted to men who are very emotionally empathetic, warm, calm, deep, and reserved for this reason. Physically, I prefer a man around my own level of physical attractiveness or slightly less so. If he's too attractive, I will feel undesirable and like the ugly duckling of the relationship and I prefer to be the peacock of the relationship. Shallow though it may be, I don't want a man that's prettier than I am. If he's too unattractive, I will be unlikely to be attracted to him also. But ultimately, attraction for me is always a very organic thing. It bubbles up into my awareness from nowhere and takes root like a Cupid's Arrow. There is no rhyme or reason, it just comes up intuitively and without warning. All I can notice is personal patterns in myself and tell them to you. But this is unlikely to be helpful for a man. I've never consciously chosen a deep attraction to a man. It's always sprung up out of nowhere like magic. So, just be yourself, develop what's already there, get rid of deal breakers and the "right" woman/women will become attracted to you intuitively. And most will not. But if a guy is looking to have a lot of sex, simply look for women who want to do the same thing. There are plenty of women out there who are wanting to have hook ups and one night stands. But there's a stigma there for women, so there is less of a tendency to admit to it outwardly or inwardly. In this case, use the alpha male pick up strategies and you'll find them. But if you want to garner a deep attraction from a woman, then you have to naturally be the person who makes her feel the most like she wants to feel. For some women, that feeling might be significance. For others, safety, stability, excitement, rebellion, control, surrender, etc. I don't think many of these can be faked too well because it's so intuitive.

I felt the same way about her when I first saw her. She does look like the quintessential New Age guru, and that always sits suspiciously with me. I tend to have an allergy the New-Age-ness in the first place as a lot of it is marshmallow fluff. But as I watched her stuff, I found her to be very observant of human nature and very insightful. She said things that I had known deep down but had never put words to. It really helped me clear out a lot of garbage I had floating in my head. It was exactly what I needed at the time. But I still have my doubts about her and the sense of aversion is still there because of her personality vibe. But I think some of it is projection. I just know that I step lightly with her work when it rubs me the wrong way. But that's true of every teacher that I've learned from.

I don't dismiss outright the existence of psychic phenomenon. It makes sense to me how someone could potentially read the energy of a person, place, object, or situation to make predictions about the most likely trajectory. It especially makes sense from the non-dual perspective, as everything is one thing and that one thing is also yourself and also creates all of existence. It would make sense to me to think that, if everything projects from your true nature, then those who are not blocked from this aspect of themselves may experience premonitions and visions. So, I don't write off Teal Swan's claim that she is psychic due to the fact that her work has been incredibly helpful to me at particular times in my life, and that I truly don't know what another person's experience is or if they truly are or are not experiencing psychic phenomena. But I do know that she reads situations and people incredibly well, even in lieu of psychic abilities. So, I don't dismiss her predictions of how things may go down in the near future. It makes sense to me how things could come to pass in the way that she predicted. Also, earlier in the thread, I mentioned the entirety of her prediction. I'm sure that it's on page one or two. I personally believe that Teal Swan still very much has an ego. She's very attached to her identity and her work, and takes it very personally when she feels attacked. This is very normal and human, but given my past experiences, I sincerely doubt that someone who has no ego would truly care about these things. Or (in what I consider a less likely scenario) she may have no ego and may be pretending to care about these slights to her character simply to be more relatable and to dis-spell doubts in her own credibility and to discount her critics. It would be very calculated and a very manipulative PR move, but it's a small possibility as well. This is why I don't trust her despite all the help she's given me. She has a serpentine kind of way about her and her energy is very off-putting. It's a big reason why many people have an aversion to her. So, if her intention is to be a cult leader, her prediction does feed right into that. This is why I would not inhabit the same city as her, despite the fact that she lives in Costa Rica. But I still can't help but notice that her prediction seems to be potentially coming to fruition. This doesn't necessarily mean she's psychic... she could just have knowledge of human patterns throughout history and make an educated guess from that. Either way, it makes sense to me how things could go down that road. So, I cannot dismiss the possibility in its entirety as just smoke and mirrors to gain a more loyal cult following. Though it may very well be.

I begrudgingly admit, it is. But I didn't hide her name to protect her from scrutiny or anything like that. If a person claims to have psychic abilities but does not, then they should have their credibility called into question. But I did it for two reason, one a bit selfish the other less so. The first reason (the more selfish one), is because I know that many people don't like her and see her as a con artist, and will write off my own credibility if I take what she says seriously in any way. I also don't want to associate myself with her too much due to the fact that I don't always feel comfortable about her myself, and given that I am also a YouTuber who speaks on the topic of spirituality I would not want to give endorsement to the validity of her psychic abilities if I don't actually know if she really has those abilities. The second reason is because I feel a little weird keeping this information to myself if it happens to actually be true. If I keep it to myself, and the issue does come to fruition in the way she described, then I would feel very negatively that I didn't tell anyone about it. So, it was just simpler to keep the teacher's identity low key to not color anyone's expectations of the prediction to give it in a more neutral manner.

I'll definitely let you know if we decide to go. I still hope that it doesn't come to that. But I definitely have thought of the scenario the U.S. immigrants would not be super welcome in other countries if such a situation happens. However, I also have a confidence that most Americans would not have the idea right away to move, let alone to move to anything but another first world nation. So, most would set their sights on Canada as a first case resort. It's easier to immigrate there too. You only need $17000 or have worked in the U.S. for at least one year over the course of the past ten years and have procured a job for when you move to Canada. Also, you must have no criminal record. So, it's a lot easier to qualify for permanent resident status there, and all we would need is to get full-time employment to be there long term and legally. The only reason why I wouldn't necessarily want to go there is because they may end up involved in a large scale conflict despite being a country known for non-involvement n war. Also, Americans would be breaking down the doors there if an emergency were to happen.

I got all our passports renewed back in December and received them in January. I looked into several places in Central/South America. Costa Rica was the one that seemed the most stable and friendly. To immigrate there as a Rentista, I would have to have either a guaranteed $1000 a month coming in or $60,000 to put in the bank. Neither of which do we have. However, we do have a sizable nest egg put aside should we need to take an emergency vacation there and stay until we make further plans. And currently, the cost of living there is somewhat less than the cost of living here in Florida. So, our savings could probably sustain us for several months while we find out a way to make ends meet. The good thing is that both American and Hungarian citizens (my husband is a Hungarian citizen) can go there for up to a period of 90 days without a Visa. It's actually a very tourist friendly place. In fact, many Americans live there but just go out of the country for a few days every couple months to no exceed the 90 day rule. Though it is discouraged, some people have been doing this for decades. So, the plan is not to move right away but to lay low there and make plans at a safer location than here, if it comes down to it. I would hate to have to pull my daughter out of school. But if it becomes a matter of our personal safety, then we will do what we have to. Also, I took 3 years of Spanish in high school and pick up on languages easily if I'm exposed to them. My husband is also good with learning languages (he is fluent in English) and has immigrated to and worked in both Israel and America. He came here 16 years ago with only $30 in his pocket. He is a permanent resident in America now, but it took him a long time to get his green card, so he had to find ways to work in the interim between when his Visa expired and when he got his permanent resident status. So, I'm confident that we could both make it if we really needed to.

That is true. And I have been doing a tremendous amount of useless worrying. But I also want to remain vigilant so that I can make wise decisions regarding my family's safety. So, it can't hurt to have a plan and to know the signs of when it is wise to leave. Though it is true that I've been biting my nails about it. This would be relevant, if I believed that the world were coming to an end through complete nuclear warfare. In that case, I would just have to accept the situation and let go. But I don't really believe this... though of course there's always a chance. But this is something I have no control over, so I'm not even devoting any thought to it. I am not concerned so much about the total decimation of the human race, because if it happens it is meant to happen. What I fear is for war and devastation to show up at my doorstep and to cause much destruction here and abroad, but not a complete and total apocalypse. I want to be aware enough to protect my family if there is a means to do so. My fears are much more grounded in history, as there are constantly situations of upheaval and warfare peppered throughout human history. It would be silly to believe that my country is immune simply because the United States has not been afflicted too much in the recent past by attacks or extreme economic disasters, barring the 9/11 attack and the economic collapses of the early 2000s. This is why I am considering a move to a neutral country that is far away from potential conflicts and not just accepting the inevitable decimation of the human race. I don't believe that we're there yet.

This passage reminds me of a parable that I heard a while back. I don't remember it perfectly, so I may get it wrong. There were three men of God walking in the forest when they saw a tiger on the path. The first man said, "I am one with the tiger", and continued toward the tiger. The tiger ate him. The second man thought, the tiger got him because he had weak faith. He also continued toward the tiger. The tiger also ate him. The third man of God escaped the tiger, for it was he who was truly wise and recognized God in all things. or there is a Christian joke that resembles this parable. There was a ship wreck in the middle of the ocean. There was only one man who survived, who was floating on an old piece of wood. He prayed to Jesus, "Jesus, please come and save me!" Suddenly there appeared a large ship to save the man. They threw him a life-saver. The man refused. He said, "No thanks. I have faith that Jesus is coming to save me." The ship sailed on. The man prayed once again, "Jesus please come and save me!" Suddenly a helicopter appeared ahead dropping a safety ladder down to the man. The man refused once agains saying, "No thanks. I have faith that Jesus is coming to save me." The helicopter flew onward. He prayed once again. "Jesus, please come and save me." A man in a small lifeboat came rowing past, asking the man if he needed assistance. The man said, "No. I have faith that Jesus is coming to save me." The man in the boat rowed onward. Then the shipwrecked man died. It was there that he met Jesus. He was like, "Jesus... what gives? I had faith in you and prayed to you to save me. WHY DIDN"T YOU SAVE ME!!!!" Then Jesus replied, "I sent two boats and a helicopter, what more did you want?" It is fine to escape inwardly, if there are no other options. But if there is a train coming toward you, it is wise to move out of the way, if you can. Sometimes, practical wisdom is the most relevant in a particular situation. I'm not one to always defer to enlightenment-based insights as the only relevant answers to the issues of life. I find it to be a form of bypassing and avoidance, when it isn't coupled with actual enlightenment. I am not enlightened, so I do have concerns for my family, my personal safety, and the state of the world. I would imagine that enlightened people would avoid negative situations as they arise as well.

Thank you for the compliment-ish words. But yes, it's very difficult for me to let go of my intellectualizations. The only time I ever felt satisfied with what I knew and didn't experience the constant thirst to figure things out or seek new knowledge was during my experiences of ego-transcendence. It was only then that I already knew everything, simultaneously didn't care about knowing everything, and felt no urge to seek more knowledge or understanding. Otherwise, it's been a constant craving to feed my intellect.

1st Scenario Panic Get Depressed Try to do other things that I want while resisting awareness of my near looming death Try to accept it and let go 2nd Scenario Try to process through feelings of panic quickly in order to get into a better and more clear-headed emotional state. Observe the environment for clues as to whereI am, what time of day, and other surroundings that may be helpful. Observe the perpetrator's behaviors carefully to determine their motivations, level of skill at kidnapping/killing, intelligence level, and presence of empathy. Make a plan of escape based upon the information that I glean if possible... especially if the perpetrators are unintelligent or make sloppy mistakes or have emotional weaknesses that can be played upon. Think about why they are doing this in the first place. Is it difficult for them? If there are signs of empathy and this behavior is not the norm for this person and they're having moral misgivings about it, try to subtly make myself seem more human to them by complying, being non-resistant, and making myself relatable. If there are no signs of empathy, lay low and try to blend if there are other hostages. Focus on taking care of other hostages, if there are others, to empower myself and break out of victim's mentality. Act compliant and submissive and never let on that there is a plan to escape. Determine whether or not they're trying to kill me. Are they feeding me? Are they revealing themselves without a mask? Are they keeping me there for companionship? Sex slavery/human trafficking? Ransom? Serial killer stuff? If it's anything but the last one, they're most likely going to keep me alive for a little while. If the person seems like they are about to kill me, try to escape right away even if circumstances are unfavorable. If there is no escape possible, accept my fate and try to let go. This was a fun hypothetical scenario to think about.

"Only the President can direct the use of nuclear weapons by U.S. armed forces, including the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP). While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense. If the Secretary of Defense does not concur, then the President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary. The Secretary of Defense has legal authority to approve the order, but cannot veto it.[1][2][3]" - quote from Wikipedia Unfortunately, there is no such process that prevents the president from launching nuclear weapons at his caprice. He just has to get General Matthis to agree. And Matthis was selected by Trump and is very war friendly and even stated that he doesn't rule out war with China. Though, the military officers that actually do the launching have to confirm as well. So, I don't want to alarm you, but we are far less protected than you believe. The president has a lot of power to launch nuclear weapons, even if it's a terrible idea that the House and Senate doesn't want him to, as they have no power to block it other than to plea to Trump, Matthis, or the two code-holding officers. Trust me, it's not my intention to be hyperbolic. But we're swimming in some potentially dangerous waters.

I am incredibly worried, given the nature of the lack of diplomacy displayed by the current U.S. administration, about the potential for North Korea to launch long-range missiles at us as the technology still exists for long-range attacks even if North Korea is currently in the 1950s tech-wise. I see it as a possibility that they could easily call upon more technologically savy and militaristic friend countries (like China) or coerce neighboring countries into providing them with better weapons by threatening to attack them. In North Korea, it is believed that Kim Jung Un is literally a God and he's been raised to believe this of himself. So, he may simply choose to terrorize the U.S. due to some perceived slight or threat to his power. It is a good bit paranoia on my part that he may target sea-side cities, but attacking areas along the border of a nation can be a military tactic that makes sense if the intention is to terrorize and show strength, perhaps even more-so than attacking a handful of large cities that are in disparate areas in the nation. But it's also paranoia. I don't trust any of this stuff going on, and I hope to have the wisdom to know when it's best to stay and when it's time to go.

Now that it comes to this, it's hard for me to draw the line and leave. But I have to keep it in my mind that now is probably the right time to do so, while the getting is still good. I have to mull it over and discuss it with my husband tonight. Also, Tillerson was criticizing China's support of North Korea, so it seems like the spiritual teacher's predictions are becoming more and more likely to come to fruition. I also live on the Eastern coast about a five minute drive from the beach. So, I have this apprehension that my town, despite the fact that it's a relatively small town, could be a very opportune place for a nuclear strike. It is the oldest city in the nation too. I would feel much better if I lived in a place that didn't feel so close to the sea and felt a little bit more anonymous. Best of luck.

Thank you! I'm glad that you like it.

I might do some kind of video about relationships in the future relative to projection and seeing the person without the projection factor. It's very important. For a few years (years 2 through 4 of our relationship), my husband and I were doing really bad because I was projecting my own baggage onto him and it was aggravating a lot of his baggage. Then, he would get really angry at me which would cause me to project more and him to get aggravated more. It was a really vicious cycle and I was almost considering divorce. But then, I found some really great psychological/spiritual resources that helped me recognize the illusions that kept me feeling disempowered and I realized that I was just projecting onto him that he was the cause of that feeling of disempowerment. Since then, we've been doing much better and he's been working on himself as well, but it's still very much a work in progress. But it's surprising how big a difference illusion and projection can make in a relationship between two people. Experience has shown me, that it's the biggest barrier to a loving relationship between people (friends, family, romantic partners, etc.) that there could ever be.

From my experiences, I found the reasons for the barriers to self-love to be unawareness due to unconscious purposeful ignorance via constant self-deceptive self-talk. I already knew that I was lying to myself deep down, but I had convinced myself that I was not and ignored all signs of self-deception. I was able to keep up this charade of self-deception because of the fear and emotional discomfort that I would have to face simply by facing the truth of myself. So, the primary task is to either let go of fear completely or cultivate the courage to be brutally honest with yourself even when it paints you in a negative light or undermines your world view. Meditation and spirituality can help with this. But the task is to be open, aware, and accepting regardless of what you find out about yourself.