Forestluv

@Matt8800 Sacred is also relative. You hold what you perceive to be sacred as sacred. Yet you don’t hold what you don’t perceive to be sacred as sacred. . . There is a sacrifice to be a person. . . . It has nothing to do with you.

A few musings, for what it’s worth. Philosophy is construction which can be deconstructed. The unreasonable is not seen through a lens of reason. Boundlessness cannot be captured. Awakening involves letting go and surrendering everything. In Truth, philosophy has no more relevance than birdsong. The words I speak are both true and false. The wise know Nothing. One word is too many, a million not enough. ♥️?

I would be careful with cause and effect. There are beings that have awakened to Being and Oneness through getting hit with a Zen stick. It wasn’t the stick itself and it’s not the philosophy itself. One cannot transcend reason through reason. Just as one cannot leave France by exploring Paris.

That is a thought story being creating. We can live with a thought story like that, or we can de-construct it and let go of it. Regarding value: most people use "value" in a relative context. You can construct your own relative value system. For example, you wrote: Here you say value is created. Based on this, not creating has no value. You can continue to build your model. . . Is anything created valuable or just certain things? If I punch someone in the face and create a black eye, most people would say this is not creating something of value. What about creating videos? Well, if I created a video on how to build bombs, most people wouldn't consider that of value - yet from the perspective of terrorists it would be of value. If I created videos on DIY plumbing, it would be of value to homeowners, yet not of value to plumbers. It's all relative. We could also say just being is of value. Yet this is relative as well. Last Thursday, I spent a couple hours sitting under a tree in nature, just being one with nature. Just observing life happen. That has value relative to me. I mentioned this to a co-worker and she was like - "Sitting under a tree for a couple of hours is unproductive". Relative to her, just being doesn't have much value. Yes, it is indeed a trick. It is the trick of conflating absolute and relative. For example, right Now in this moment - everything is Absolutely Perfect. Everything is exactly as it should be. It just IS. All the ISness right Now is Perfect. Whatever arises Now is Perfect ISness occurring Now. . . Yet from a relative perspective, all is not relatively perfect. I've slacked off on my yoga and I've been gaining weight. I still haven't bought a plane ticket to visit my family for Christmas holiday and they are getting upset . . .and I've been procrastinating at work. . . The trick of the ego is to conflate Absolute Perfection with relative perfection. Something like this: "If everything is perfect as it is right now, I don't need to do anything. I don't have to do yoga or buy a plane ticket and I can keep procrastinating at work". Yes, this would be self deception.

It is a term used to describe a perspective that is transcendent to the personality construct.

At a physical level, that can effect how your brain develops. Yet I wouldn't freak out about it. Creating a new thought story that I messed up my brain is just a thought story - which can also have a negative impact. Give your brain a break. Instead of smoking cannabis daily, cut down to once a week, or take a few months off. There may be some underlying issues you may want to work through. As well, provide nutrients to your brain. Healthy food, low stress, exercise, yoga, meditation, time in nature etc. Your subconscious is trying to tell you to chill out with the cannabis and to treat your mind with love. . . Not to get online and spending hours looking at brain scans and creating a new story/identity that there is structural brain alterations.

@arlin You are asking really good existential questions that dig into deeper layers. Be careful with accepting/rejecting sides of duality. The human mind is conditioned to think in opposites. Most humans are conditioned to believe that everything in their waking life is "real". This is attachment/identification to one side of a "real vs. illusion" duality. To break this attachment/identification, it can be helpful to see the opposite side of the duality: that everything in their waking life is illusion. This is a major breakthrough in consciousness. However. . . the mind will want to now attach/identify with the opposite: that all of life is illusion. This is still playing the game of the duality. The next step is to transcend the opposites of real vs. illusion. In what ways is waking life real? In what ways is it illusion? Have you ever been in a state of mind in which you could not tell the difference between real and illusion? Perhaps during a lucid dreaming state or on a psychedelic. . . Then we see that real and illusion are mental constructs we are creating. Real = Illusion and Illusion = Real. . . However, this doesn't mean that the duality doesn't have practical purpose. If I got a call that my sister was in the hospital after a car accident, at the human level I would consider that as "real" and I would go to the hospital and try to help. Yes, experience is a contextualization. From this perspective, experience never happened. The mind simply contextualizes it. "That was a beautiful bird that just flew by" is a contextualization. Adding in the "I" is further contextualization. "That was a beautiful bird that just flew by. It reminds my of my childhood in California. I've always loved birds. Perhaps I would be a good Ornithologist" Be careful here with "knowing" and "reality". There is an underlying assumption that there is an objective reality that can be known. This is entering a deeper level of "knowing" and "reality". The ladders of "knowing" and "reality" are useful to climb to higher levels, yet eventually they need to get discarded and we upgrade to new ladders. Also be careful with conflations of "you". The term you is so strongly associated with a personal identity, it can cloudy the picture. To rephrase: When awareness arises that the "i" is an illusion, there is understanding that reality can't really be known if there is still an "i" there. Here, I removed ownership of awareness, understanding and knowing. I think this is an important step to transcend the "you". Just notice awareness, understanding and knowing without any owner. Once this is realized, the transcendent You can be explored. Yet I think it's really hard to do before the "observer + object" stage is reached (in this case, the construct of a "you" is an object being observed). I think this is at the "observer + object stage" and is starting to see that the construct of a personal "you" is just a story. Yet the "observer" is being conflated with "you". This is dividing "you" into a "higher me (the observer)" and the "lower me being observed". This is an intermediate stage. Rupert Spira explains it very well. He refers to it as "enlightened duality". One of the keys is knowing what this "higher you" is. Yet it is at a stage in which it cannot be explained rationally. It can only be "pointed" to. There is another way to see this. "Are-ness" is evident during a psychedelic trip or while sober. Both psychedelic and sober is "Are-ness". Human minds are conditioned to see their sober perception as the "real Are-ness". Taking psychedelics can destroy the attachment to sober being the "real Are-ness". Once again, flipping to the other side of the duality in which the psychedelic state is "real Are-ness". Yet be careful about becoming attached to either side of the duality. For example "The psychedelic state was illusion and sober is real" OR "The psychedelic state is real and the sober state is illusion". Psychedelic and sober states are BOTH real and illusion. One power of psychedelics is that they can break the attachment to sober being real. However, we don't want to become attached to the other side of the duality that psychedelic states are real. BOTH states are real and illusion. It's all contextualizations by the human mind. You don't even need the "I" in there. That just adds in another layer. The "I" is at the personal level. Contextualization occurs at the human level (the personal level adds another layer). For example, "This was terrifying". Can simply be terror without a personal "I" identifying as being terrorized. It could simply be the feeling of terror with no owner. And yes, it goes through an interpretive filter. This filter doesn't need the personality construct. There is a filter at the human level. One human may interpret the felling as terror. Another human can interpret the feeling as an awesome adrenaline rush. . . The personality is an extra add-in. For example, a person can interpret the feeling "That was terrorizing. I have never experienced something so terrifying. I wonder if I went through ego death. I hope this trauma doesn't interfere with my personal development work". . . Notice how we have added in the personality dynamic to the contextualization. This is a trans-personal view. Notice how we are embracing opposites again. One may become attached to: It was wonderful, unconditional love, an incredible intelligent design. The opposite of that is it is NOT wonderful, unconditional love, and incredible intelligent design. This can be a huge step in consciousness to see the falsity of one side. The temptation is to grasp the other side as true. For example, one may realize that the coin is not the heads side and see the tails side. The temptation is to grasp the tails side and say "Heads is false, Tails is true". . . For someone conditioned to believe heads is true, this is a huge step up in consciousness. The next stage is to realize the whole coin is BOTH heads and tails. They are not in opposition with each other. Seeing it as meaningless is a huge step forward. Yet don't get attached to meaningless. Saying it is meaningless is attachment to one side of a "meaning vs. meaningless" construct you are creating. It would be more accurate to say there is an absence of meaning and the human minds assigns either meaninglessness or meaning. Because that is part of the human experience. That is part of the magic of life!! What else are humans going to do? Sit in a cave their whole life being trans-human Nothing/Everything? As a human, I'm not ready for that yet. It's a nice place to visit. Yet there are still things I want to explore and experience as a human. . . At the human level, growth and experience is infinite. I've barely scratched the surface. So much more to explore. Be careful with terms like "Never", "Nothing" and "Nobody". These terms can have existential value, yet are commonly conflated with rational usage. Never/Nothing/Nobody does not equal never/nothing/nobody. Conflating them together will cause confusion and inner turmoil. . . Never = Always. Nothing = Everything. Nobody = Everybody.

For sure. Spoken stories and thought stories --- all stories of creation. Lots of thought stories could appear. Rather than a thought story of "Oh crap, I'm feeling anxiety now, they must think this is weird. How can I backtrack out of this?" another thought story could appear like "I am playing the role of a mad scientist and I have my audience right where I want them. I'm feeling anxious because I can't wait to see their reaction when I tell them the Big Finale". . . Fun stuff.

@electroBeam Some nice introspective work. It sounds like you are getting close to the whole house of cards crashing down and gleefully shouting “Yahtzee!!” And you might be in a good space for Leo’s video on Truth.

Sometimes I’m with normies telling a story and suddenly realize this sounds really weird to them. Then I’m like “crap, how am I gonna backtrack outta this?.”. . . “Uuhh, then I woke up and realized it was all a dream. . . How about those Tigers? Heck of a game last night, eh?”

Nice video. You are dialed into an Orange audience. In some ways, I like this video better than the Gillette commercial. Gillette’s portrayal of masculinity came across as emasculating and triggered a lot of blue/orange men. I like how Teal portrays masculinity as forward motion, taking action and taking ownership/responsibility. That will resonate with a lot of Orange men. Teal describes deficient masculinity as lacking forward motion, failure to take ownership and passivity. And excess masculinity as controlling, dominating and overbearing. I like how she described how both extremes are unattractive to women and how a balanced male is most attractive. And I like the imagery you chose. Have you watched Leo’s video on re-contextualization? It seems like you are trying to preserve the original context and increasing the energy/resonance with imagery. Adding the images is itself a form of context and I thought Leo’s video might be of interest to you.

Wow, that was a weird auto/-correct error. I meant when there is anxiety/discomfort it is often in the come-up before the peak and perhaps part of the peak. If there is awareness of this, it makes it easier to ride out. One source of anxiety is not being able to differentiate between “real” and “unreal”. The “unreal” becomes “real” and that can be scary. As an example, I was in Medellin, Columbia with a gal I had just met the previous day. We planned to spend the day together and she was ok with me taking a light dose of shrooms. Due to the setting, I took a low dose, just enough to spice up the day. We are sitting in a cafe and the come-up is much stronger than I predicted. I’ve tripped enough to know this was going to be a major challenge. The anxiety kicked in that I was about to lose control in some cafe in Columbia and anything could happen. I turned to her and said “the next 45 minutes are going to be really hard for me. Please be gentle and go with my flow”. . . Then all of reality became a computer simulation. I was in a computer simulated cafe and I didn’t know who and what was real or unreal. Then the waiter came to the table and we looked in each other’s eyes and I knew we were the only two real things in this reality. And the waiter knew that I was tripping and we were the only two real things in the cafe. Yet I didn’t know the role or intention of the waiter. I was right in the edge of losing it and felt a desire to stand up and yell “It’s all a simulation!!! None of you are real!!!”. Then I remembered a very important piece of advice someone gave me “Noone knows you are tripping and freaking out on the inside unless you let them know you are freaking out on the inside”. . . So then I thought, “All I need to do is pretend like everything is real. If everything was real, how could a person get out of here without making a scene”. I then told the gal and waiter that I had stomach pain and I needed our food boxed up and I needed to leave. The gal and I walked to a park bench away from people. It took about 20min for the wave to pass and then a whole new world opened up. Everything was beauty and love. I felt inter-connected to everyone and every thing. We walked to an area of local art vendors. Their hand-made art was sooo beautiful and I talked for hours with them about how they craft their art, what it was like growing up in Colombia, about their families. And the trees, birds, flowers, sunshine and creek was so magnificent. I could barely handle all the beauty and love. . . So a trip may get uncomfortable, yet keep in mind - noone knows you are tripping unless you let them know. You can feel anxiety and appear normal. Also, the discomfort may only last for a little bit. It’s not forever. A change in setting can make a huge difference and anxiety can quickly be transformed into beauty and love.

This points to the heart of the issue. Who decides what is “respectful” and “disrespectful”? Who decides what is “appropriate and “inappropriate”? Who decides if the line is “correctly” drawn. Regarding issues of ethnic/cultural oppression, a problem arises because the majority group has more power in controlling the narrative over what counts as “disrespectful” and “appropriate”. They want to maintain their privilege and power in deciding how the majority can treat oppressed groups.. . White slave owners wanted to control the narrative on how to treat black slaves. This power dynamic has been present throughout human history. This is why it is s important to include BOTH groups in deciding what is appropriate and inappropriate. . . . To me your perspective has value, yet it is limited to a majority perspective. For example, there is value in the concept of “respect” yet it is limited in term of the intent of respect and impact. It is important to consider impact from the perspective of the minority group impacted NOT from the perspective of the majority group doing the impact. . . I spent about a month living with a local family in a Belizean village. One day I was in a small local market in the village. There was a shirt for sale that I that I noticed some of the local men wore. It really captured the history of and essence of their culture. I tried the shirt on and took a photo and sent texted the pic to to my gf to see what she thought (who is black). She responded with two words I hadn’t even considered: “Cultural appropriation?”. . . I had such deep respect or that culture that it blinded me. I looked in the mirror and looked at the locals around. I asked a Belizean woman what she thought of me in the shirt. She paused. I saw the look in her face. There was a sense of sorrow and resistance. There was underlying emotion, empathy, intuition and understanding. This was masked as she submissively and politely replied “I think it looks nice on you”. . . A new “something” was revealed to me about cultural appropriation. I saw through the minority lens. It’s not an intellectual thing. . . .I respectfully took off the shirt, respectfully folded it, respectfully placed it back on the table and respectfully said “thank you” to the Belizean woman. She gave me an important lesson on cultural appropriation. And she knew that I “got it”. I could tell by the way she looked at me and her energetic shift. . . . Context is super important. In this context it was cultural appropriation and the most respectful action I could give to the sacred shirt was to leave it on the table and walk away. At times, the most respectful thing we can do for the sacred is to let be and not take ownership of it. Importantly, what counted as cultural appropriation was not decided by the view of the majority group (me). There were three voices involved. Two of those voices were from the minority group perspective (my black gf ad the Belizean woman). Collectively, this allowed for expansion of my understanding of cultural appropriation. As well, the expansion was not ntellectual. I think if you immersed yourself in minority perspectives your perspective would expand. For example, if you took a course on cultural appropriation taught by a Native American professor. Or if you lived in a Guatemalan village and observed the interplay between native Guatemalan locals, white expats and white tourists from developed countries. . . I provided a link that was an entry into this, yet you didn’t seem interested - which is fine. Everyone has their own interests.

@randomguy123 This can apply to your life as well. We could see our lives as a balance between analysis and creativity. How do we analyze our life? How do we create our lives? When you contemplate getting a job, fixing work schedule and habits, doesn’t this involve both analysis and creativity? How might you balance/integrate analysis and creativity together when addressing these life issues? . . . Sometimes it may feel like there is too much analysis happening and more creativity is needed. Other times the opposite. As we observe ourselves engaging in analysis mode and creative mode a deeper understanding will be revealed. Deeper than theoretical constructs of what analysis and creativity is. Because we are being creativity and analysis. When we are actually being creativity, a realization may arise: so that’s what creativity IS. The ISness of creation, rather than an intellectual construct. . . . Further, we may realize the creativity in analysis and the analysis in creativity.

For sure. Direct experience and embodiment is very important for understanding. Yes, of course I think this distinction is really important and is a point I’ve been trying to make. From the perspective of Orange or Green, this distinction will be really hard to see. From the perspective of integrated Yellow, this distinction is super easy to see. Imagine that Paris is Orange, France is Green and Europe is Yellow. An integrated Yellow understands how the different levels of Paris, France and Europe inter-relate. An integrated yellow could be speaking about the infrastructure of Paris, city taxes, the city mayor - this is all at the city level of Paris (Orange). However, an integrated Yellow understands the relationship between Paris, France and Europe. If someone asked “How might the upcoming French election impact Paris infrastructure?” and the person said “Huh? I’m talking about Paris. Where is France and what does France have to do with Paris?”. . . It would be clear the person is contracted within Paris and does not understand the inter-relationship between Paris and France. Another example would be a conversation with Deepak Chopra and Richard Dawkins. Deepak Chopra can discuss Orange level science , yet he is not contracted within the scientific paradigm and this is completely obvious, even when he is talking about the science of genetics and medicine. In contrast, Richard Dawkins is contracted within the scientific paradigm and it is completely obvious. If Chopra and Dawkins we’re discussing the science of genetics and medicine, a Tier2 perspective could easily see Chopra has a broader understanding of context. And it’s not just about intellectual content and knowledge. Obote Orange there are energetic shifts in modes of communication and orientation. Stage Orange is more restricted in mode of communication than integrated Green/Yellow/Turquoise. Tier2 can use intellectual modes, yet also intuitive and empathic modes. As well Tier2 is trans-personal and meta - and prefers not to engage in personal “me vs you” debates. So even if Yellow is using an Orange mode of communication such as science, the essence of Green and Yellow is still apparent from a Tier2 perspective. These are simplified metaphors to make a point and don’t capture nuances such as people being a mixture of various stages and multiple lines of development.

@Matt8800 Again, I don’t disagree with that. I’m not saying your perspective is wrong. I’m saying your perspective of cultural appropriation is incomplete. There are other aspects/perspectives available if you want to deepen and broaden your understanding of cultural appropriation. As you wisely said in another thread: “It is a more nuanced situation than you are presenting”.

Welcome to the forum! To me, it sounds like there is a genuine calling toward psychedelics. I felt a similar calling and in spite of anxiety issues, I went through it and glad I did. One thing I’ve learned is that mindset has an impact. If my mantra is “I’m an anxious person. This process of ego death is going to be hard. I’ve read a lot of rough trip reports. I’m going to get anxious. I hope I don’t panic”. That sets up a self fulfilling prophecy and increases the chance of a rough trip. Yet the process of transcending requires a form of letting go and surrender. Part of the growth and awakening for me involved anxiety, yet we don’t want it so intense that is is traumatic. You can start low and incrementally increase the dosage as you get experience. You can create a comfortable, safe setting and get yourself in a good space during the come up. Rather than worry, you could put some music on dance, be silly, dance and giggle. You can have various options of activity. If too much anxiety and you get into a dark place, do something different. A change can make a huge difference. Go into a different room. Put on some music. Close your eyes and watch CEVs. Put on a movie. Become immersed in observing a painting or a flower. . . . Also, the nI etymology period is only part of the trip. During the trip, there is loss of time and it seems forever, yet it’s often just a half hour or so. And realize that anxiety is just one component. Trips also involve depths of beauty, love and amazement beyond description. Also, some psychedelics have less headspace than others. Al-lad and 4-ho-met are gentle headspace.

This is a good example of the limits of Orange rationalism. Dawkins is a high level Orange when it comes to genetics and evolution. Yet when it comes to trans-rational existentialism - like consciousness he is contracted and at a low level. With his attitude, toxic orange.

@halo I’m not sure if time ranges. For me, a tolerance reset is much longer than two hours. I do 24hrs to make sure for a full reset, yet it may be shorter for others

I don’t think the issue is not being able to understand it. If a normie visited a website for calculus professors, they won’t understand any of the calculus. There is no problem. . . The problem occurs when there is a misunderstanding. If a normie visits a calculus website and interprets the math to mean that an alien is stalking him, then that would be a problem. A couple examples of misunderstandings on the forum that cause people problems: You create all of reality is misunderstood as solipsism. . . . There is no objective meaning is misunderstood as nihilism. I would say that an adult would have much higher chance of misunderstanding problems than a child, because the adult as more filters through which misunderstanding would occur. For example, if we teach a child about nonduality and that we are all interconnected and One, it would not be traumatic to the child. Yet if we teach this to an adult, it can trigger a traumatic existential crisis since the adult has been highly conditioned into a self construct. They will be very threatened by nonduality because they want to protect their sense of self. I would go one step further and say it’s actually beneficial to teach children about nonduality before they become fully conditioned into duality, separation and contraction into a personal self. This conditioning creates the suffering and trauma. As well, the de-conditioning can cause discomfort. Yet through it comes liberation and love. If children learn about nonduality before dualistic conditioning, it would be beneficial. This will be part of education in the future. As the average conscious level of society increases, parents that are self-actualized will naturally teach their children about constructs of self and nonduality. This will lead to healthier people and healthier societies.

I don’t see value as something to do properly. It’s just what you value and different people value didn’t things. Sometimes when I walk through nature, I don’t feel any interest or n understanding anything. I just want to be one with nature and appreciate / experience it’s beauty. Sometimes when I walk through nature I am fascinated about hw all the parts of nature is inter-connected as a whole? It’s impossible. It’s magic! I want to learn and understand how it works. I observe butterflies and bees interact with flowers and better understand how they help inter-connect nature by spreading pollen throughout nature. It’s amazing to learn. Understand satisfies curiosity and feels good. Plus I can hike with others and share it with them. In practical terms: if someone is a brain surgeon, it’s of value to understand how the brain works and to understand how to use the surgery equipment. If I needed a brain tumor removed, I wouldn’t see a car mechanic. A car mechanic’s understanding has no value when I need a brain tumor removed, yet his understanding has value when I need my car brakes replaced.

One way to think about it is through contextualization. Imagine a Christian, atheist and Yogi visit the Grand Canyon together. When they see the magnificence of the Grand Canyon, they are awestruck. The sense of “me” and “time” dissolves. There is One magnificence happening Now. . . After 10 seconds, they all “return to themself”. Let’s assume their was one happening of awakening they shared in that moment. When each returns to their personal mind and body, it will be contextualized differently - influenced by the person’s prior conditioning, karma and baseline consciousness: The Christian: Whoa, what happened there? I just had a religious experience. I felt the presence of god and saw how god created the majesty of the Grand Canyon in a moment. Jesus just showed me he is eternal truth. That was a profound experience. The atheist: Whoa, what just happened there? I just had what neuroscientists refer to as a flow state of consciousness. The default mode network in my brain was disabled allowing a temporary absence of my concept of self and time. This allowed space for clarity. I saw all the evolutionary forces that gave rise to the Grand Canyon over millions of years. That was a profound experience. The yogi: Whoa, what just happened there? I just experienced Samadhi. My kundalini energy in my chakras became united and then expanded to merge with the energetics of the Grand Canyon to form a formless interconnected holistic Whole. I saw how the Grand Canyon is Me and You and the Universe. That was a profound experience. A direct experience of awakening was contextualized differently - leading to three different “experiences”. Notice how none of the “experiences” actually happened. Rather the contextualization into an “experience that happened” is happening Now. A similar phenomena occurs with psychedelics. People will contextualize psychedelic happenings into an “experience”. This contextualization is influenced by previous conditioning, karma and baseline consciousness. It’s one reason why psychedelics usually aren’t that effective for PD and awakening until someone has reached upper Orange - Green on the SD scale.

This might be helpful

I think that quote is great for contemplating relativity. In particular, that each person has their own relative perspective (dream) that has been influenced by personal life history. The quote is great imagery to see one’s own perspective is relative and can allow us to see another person’s perspective. No dream is “right” and no dream is “wrong”. No one owns the Truth of dreams. . . In terms of SD this is upper green to yellow. Complementary to this is that we are all interconnected: all the individual dreams of people are interconnected into One dream.

I hear you. If I start talking about fliglits, it won’t be a productive conversation because a fliglit hasn’t been defined and no one knoes what a fliglit is. If everybody makes up their own definition of fliglit, there will be mass confusion because everyone is using different definitions. So it’s helpful to have some grounded and sense of consensus on what a fliglit is. . . .Yet there is also a problem on the other side of the coin. There is no single, objective universal truth of flignit. However, people will assume there is. This is problematic as well. It is also beneficial to questions our assumptions. Regarding terms like enlightenment, awakening, consciousness, ego and God - it can be useful to have general definitions for grounding and also be fluid with groundlessness. For example, sometimes people use “self” to mean a personal identity and “Self” to point to an essence transcendent of self personality. Quite often, using lower case refers to a more “contracted” state and upper case is an “expanded” state. Similarly with god and God as well as you and You. Much of the time on the forum, “ego” is used in the traditional sense that it is self-centered thoughts that are generally negative. For example, someone might say “My ego is interfering with my relationship with my gf. How can I reduce my ego and become more spiritual?”. Other people may pause and think “What a minute. . . When I say I want to get rid of my ego, who/what is that *I* that wants to get rid of the ego? Is that *l* also ego? Is there a good ego and a bad ego. Or is it all one ego?” This is also a great exploration that involves groundlessness. Yet this exploration can also be a distraction in some contexts. If someone is asking for their because their ego is out of control, they have been harming others and want to stop - it would probably be more helpful to introspect underlying feelings and causes, such as insecurity and past trauma then to get into an abstract existential discussion about what is an ego. As we contemplate deeper, it becomes apparent that it’s really hard to form concrete definitions in sand. It all becomes circular and collapses. Humans have been contemplating ego and God for thousands of years. . . In terms of getting a general sense of the forum, Leo has made many hours of video defining ego and God. The usage of the terms still vary on the forum, yet the videos can give a sense of perspective on a higher conscious context of usage. Such as the below vide