Forestluv

@Tony 845 Which enlightenment rule book are you using to determine if someone is officially enlightened?

Of course. You seem to have contracted views on sexuality and love. Expansion in this area is so beautiful.

@CreamCat We are talking about unconditional Love, not rape. And love goes way beyond physical intercourse. Once a certain conscious level is reached, a mind-body can have direct experience with aspects of homosexual love without physical intercourse. There are deeply intimate states of love that don’t engage intercourse.

I’m referring to temporary death of the entire egoic structure. At one level, all personal stories and beliefs die. More importantly, the ego surrenders all control of the mental narrative . Zero control. Ime, it’s hard to reach this state with meditation or yoga, because there is a subconscious knowing the ego can regain control if it wants to, so the ego hasn’t fully surrendered. I’ve met many people that think they have gone through ego death with meditation, yet its at a surface level. With psychedelics there is no chance of the ego regaining control. It surrenders the keys to the car and there is no way it’s getting them back. I’ve reached this state with and without psychedelics and have worked through massive egoic resistance. On another level, the mind further surrenders all meaning, language, images. This can be hard for the ego to surrender as well. An even deeper level is the loss of all the senses - sight, hearing etc. At this point, the ego has burned away and there isn’t any resistance.

There is something grandeur here. It’s like being your own neuro-surgeon or being an ego-artist. For example, in my mind-body a trans-personal consciousness is developing the capacity to delete, edit and write memories. Some of them are as real as the “real” memories. Yet, the conditioned ego mind can still sniff out the new ones and tries to reject them. If the mind is still attached to the personal story, it will get scared and fight back. The first 10 or so ego deaths were some rough waters. Yet the ego lost some power each time. Once a mind goes through enough ego deaths, a higher consciousness may arise that can mold, shape and transform internal egoic dynamics. I’m not gonna wait 100 years for the methods and technologies to be developed, I’m going for it now. A human ego grants it’s host brain abilities and powers an ant doesn’t have because the himan conscious level is so much higher. Raise the human conscious level higher and new abilities and piwers appear.

Sometimes it's nice to talk to a casual friend outside one's inner friend circle. As long as she knows you aren't interested in a rebound relationship, it sounds like you could become better friends.

The awakening process can be uncomfortable and a struggle. Yet once consciousness has reached the re-creation level, some fun and amazing things appear

@ivankiss That’s not what the ego was expressing earlier in the thread. Be aware of the egos tendency to retreat into and hide in nonduality. . . . When light is shined on the ego it likes to say “Huh? Just nondual awareness here. No attachments or identifications here.” Then the fog machine starts blowing out ideas about nonattachment and nonidentification that the mind is subconsciously attached and identified to.

@Aakash Great insights. I’d just be aware of the mind’s desire to call and claim a thing as “enlightenment” ( A thing being any term, image, concept or experience).

It seems fundamental Buddhism has a Blue flavor to it. Similiar to a Blue-centered military.

Holding a lotus posture for over ten minutes would be an extreme Yin Yoga posture and duration. I rarely do one posture for over five minutes. It sounds like you may be at the other extreme for leg flexibity. How long are you holding leg stretch postures? Are you fully relaxing into the pose and allowing gravity to extend your edge over a few minutes? Or are you actively engaging and applying force to the pose?

Yes,. Yet, a distinction of the term “you” is important here. It can be used at different levels. I would re-phrase it as “surrending control of the illusion that has arisen”. This removes the variable of a “you” or “creator” and guides a mind to simply see attachment/identification to an illusion. One could also think of it as surrendering ownership of it. Deconstructing attachment/identification to a single illusion is simplier than deconstructing attachment/identification to all illusions. Yet, if a mind can completely deconsruct one illusion that they hold very dearly, other weaker attachments/identifications can unravel and dissolve. Yet, it’s much easier and less threatening to deconstruct more surface-level attachments/identifications than the deeper ones. It’s alot of work. The deconstruction process involves observing a dynamic from a higher state of consciousness. A mind can’t deconstruct effectively from the same conscious level of the dynamic.

Within this dynamic, surrendering control of the narrative of how things are and how I am.

Even though I’ve got a lot of experience with nondual states, there are still subtle egoic dynamics playing in the mind. Once a mind becomes aware of a dynamic in their own mind, they can now see it appear in other minds. Yet other minds will resist if they have not become aware of the dynamic. Every level higher requires a re-newed willingness, openness and surrender to keep maturing.

After my initial exposures to nondual realms there arose games of egoic conflation between trans-rational and rational. For me, rational explanations would strengthen newly-evolved defense mechanisms - which is counter-productive. I needed to first establish clarity within nonduality before understanding distinctions and then integrating nondual and dual. The early stages of nondual maturation involve realizing separations and distinctions from duality. As well as attachments and identifications with distinctions. There are realizations of this and there is embodiment as well. The ego resists maturation at every stage, yet it’s tactics get more subtle the deeper we go.

@ivankiss There is a dynamic here your ego doesn’t want to look at. There is an impressive fortress surrounding it and I can’t enter because you won’t lower the drawbridge.

@Belay kelemework Ask yourself the same questions for heterosexuality and see if you come up with the same answers. If not, contemplate the differences and ask yourself why they arose in your mind.

Generally with embodiment, there would be a dissolution of attachment and identification with “the rant against science” introduced in this thread. It would be no different than saying “a rant against bird chirps” or a “rant against gablish”. To me, I get the sense there is more theory than embodiment here. There seems to be claims with atrachment and identification. Would you be equally as comfortable making the opposite claim for every claim you made in this thread? And would you be equally genuine with those opposite claims? If you are conscious of this, observe the underlying motivation for starting a dualistic thread, taking one side of the dualism and then bypassing with nondualism. It’s like you invited me to play a game of baseball and each time you pitch the ball, you evaporate the ball into nothingness right before I swing. Then, you stand on the mound pointing out that I missed the ball and that you are aware the ball evaporated. I’m assiming you aren’t conscious of this dynamic because that would be an ingenuine game and most minds are unconscious of their own ingenuine games they play.

@MM1988 I would first challenge and examine your assumptions.

@ivankiss Without science, it is a nondual mode of being in which everything is also science. There would be no distinction between “science” and “non-science”. From a nondual perspective, the claim “I don’t do science” is the same as saying “I do nothing” and “I do everything”. As the infinite, You are everything. You are all the scientists conducting experiments in laboratories right now. From a dual perspective the claim “I don’t do science” introduces a distinction and would need a very creative relative definition of “science”. It would be like saying “I don’t do breathing”. From a relative dual perspective, that would need a very creative definition of the word “breathing”.

@ivankiss . It seems like you are trying to step outside of science and objectively evaluate it as if it was a seperate “thing”. Once you go nondual and claim it’s all One, then everything is science and nothing is science. Once you claim “that is science”, then that is introducing a dinstinction and duality. Then, one enters relative storytelling. There is also an integrated nondual/dual perspective, yet I don’t get the sense of that presence here.

You do science everday. Even simple things like figuring out why your coffee maker isn’t working uses the scientific method. Hmmm, the “on switch is on”, so it’s not that. Maybe it’s unplugged. Ah yes, it’s unplugged. Let’s plug it in and see if it works. Voila! It works now. . . That’s science. Spirituality is filled with science. Try out yoga and see if it resonates with you. If not, try something else. . . Exploration involves science.

Of course. From a rational mindset, both the irrational and post-rational will appear similiar and be unsatisfying. Imagine going to a circus to have a rational discussion on tax policies. Of course you would be unsatisfied. I often got frustrated during discussions in my Buddhist group. At times, I would get exasperated and ask “Can you please explain it in plain straightforward English?” Then someone would say “Well, it’s kinda like. . . “ and several others would start nodding their heads as if what he said made sense.

@Manjushri It’s not just time. Openmindedness, sincerity, humbleness and willingness are keys.

@Aakash I’m just playin’ with ya ?