Forestluv

I haven’t imagined it like that before. I now imagine that the interpretation of a subjective human experience could be limited to their pre-conceived assumptions of material existence. Immaterial is still integrated with material, yet kinda filtered out in the perception / contextualization of the human mind. For example, I am a physical being distinct from other physical objects like that chair over there. And my physical hand got bruised when it was struck by a physical hammer. This seems quite obvious on the surface. It seems to get murky when we discuss feelings. If I asked someone if a car was material, they would look at me like I’m crazy and say “of course”. Yet if I asked them if the experience of a feeling is material, they would likely pause and be stumped for a bit. To stay within their material framework of existence, they may respond with something like “Well I guess feelings are material - they are hormones and neurotransmitters and stuff like that”. Yet that wouldn’t be a very satisfying answer since there is something deeper they are catching wind of. . . Just some musing floating through my mind. . .

Absolute Freedom has no conditions. It is Absolute. No, it is one component of a much more expansive theory.

With each mind fuck, an angel gets their wings ?

@arlin You seem to like SD theory. In SD terms, Orange is a rigid intellectual mode based on objectivism. Yellow is a fluid mode of being, as it understands and has embodied relativism.

Two threads on Teal Swan’s teachings have been merged. Please discuss here ?

They are both chemicals - different chemical structures.

It’s not “bad” or “good”. Logic and reasoning is “within” something more expansive. Being contracted within logic and reasoning isn’t “bad”, it’s just limiting. As an analogy, imagine someone was contracted within Switzerland. There’s nothing “bad” with that. Switzerland is a lovely place. I loved it there - beautiful landscapes and people. Yet if a being is contracted within Switzerland, they will not realize Switzerland is within Europe. They will be contracted and limited to Switzerland and won’t get to expand and explore beyond Switzerland. To me, it sounds like you have a conceptual framework and could use some mystical experiences.

There seems to be a contraction within logic - wanting evidence, proof, confirmation etc. Eventually, the desire for, and attachment to, an objective external reality is transcended. All of this logic, reasoning, science etc. is “within” something more expansive. “Within” isn’t quite accurate, yet I can’t think of a better word. The words “integrated” and “inter-connected” are also somewhat accurate.

@arlin To me, you seem to be off-balanced toward conceptualization. Direct experience is really important. Without direct experience, the mind will be speculating, figuring and intellectualizing from “below”.

I think the brain naturally produces DMT after extended periods in darkness, not 5-meo-dmt.

I think you are asking genuine, thoughtful questions. You may find self inquiry to be helpful. For example “What is a problem?”. The key is not to get intellectual or analytical. I think Leo has done a video on self inquiry.

Seeking is also This. Seek or no seek. It’s all within Everything. Whatever arises, arises. Seeking is within Everything. Not seeking is within Everything.

Like taking a trip in a Self-driving Tesla. Just along for the ride.

The mind-body likes to seek. Didn’t you play hide-n-seek as a kid? It’s part of the human experience. Yet there is no “thing” to find. Everything = No-thing. From the perspective of a person, the journey is the destination. You have already arrived, yet the journey continues.

Time to make some popcorn and watch it unfold ☺️

Desire is an appearance within the mind-body. Rather than create thought stories about it, I’ve found it more helpful to explore my own direct experience of desire. To deeply observe it and deconstruct it. You need not other people’s theories - you have everything within you. You are your best experiment. Put yourself under a microscope and simply observe without criticism, judgement or analysis. The movement of desire through the construct of a timeline is fascinating to observe. The word “something” in the above statement is kinda key ime

It’s about good or bad truth. I found the teacher’s quote to be nonsense. That’s why I wouldn’t listen much. Find beings you resonate with and trust your intuition. You will get glimpses then a really good look.

I wouldn’t listen much to such teachers. In the way of what? Where are we trying to get to? What are we trying to attain? The personality construct is within Everything. It’s not in the way of anything. It’s like saying a fish is in the way of the ocean. . .

How is Everything “a trap”? That is a thought story of the mind. You made it up. The thinking mind loves to create problems and figure out solutions. All part of The Game. There is no problem in need of a solution. Everything is Perfect as it IS.

You get Everything and the ego says: “yea, but what’s in it for me?”.

Desire of Truth for Truth’s sake can be powerful energy for some humans.

A new thread about Leo going on the Joe Rogan show has been merged here.

Observe how thoughts go back and forth - past, future, past, future - back and forth to keep the story in tome going. And thoughts updates the story as it goes along. During meditative times, I like to let the extended story go and be with what is actual. I may sit in nature and observe. Here, thoughts may arise - yet they have a different flavor than the “me” story. A different flavor than the thoughts trying to figure stuff out. Here, if thoughts arise they are inter-connected to feelings, experience and what is appearing all around me right now. This flavor of thought is delicious. It is curious, appreciative, awe.

I love this one. Very nice.

@arlin Language can become fluid and break down. I think self inquiry might be helpful here to get to the underlying substance. When one says “existence is conscious of itself”, what is “existence”? What is “conscious”? Does existence mean “what IS” here? Does conscious mean “aware” here? Is it another way of asking “Is what IS aware of itself”? For existence/reality/ISness to be conscious/aware of itself - there needs to be a “thing” (existence) that another thing is aware of. That’s a duality. Nothing wrong with that, there are beautiful teachings of duality. If someone described existence and conscious in this manner we could understand the relative meaning based on context. . . . Or, one could say that existence/reality/ISness and conscious/aware are all One. Here, there is no separation into separation things. This would be a nondual teaching and it is also beautiful. Both have beauty and value.