Carl-Richard

When the person you're "debating" doesn't know how hypotheticals work, that is when you exit the conversation.

Many people think they're different (I've even talked to these people), but only recently, I came up with an interesting thought experiment that shows that they're the same thing. Imagine that you have a normal treadmill, but instead of the usual length, you extend it many times the usual length (let's say a mile). Stand still on the treadmill and gradually turn it to running speed. Now, before you start running, the material you're standing on is obviously stationary relative to your body, so when you start running, it's just like if you were to start running on the ground (because the ground is also stationary relative to your body). So the only real difference between running on a normal treadmill and the ground is what happens before you hit running speed. On a treadmill, you might jump on at high speed or experience some inertia before you start moving your feet (and of course, there is a difference in air resistance). And if you're confused by the background being stationary while on a treadmill vs. moving while on the ground, imagine that the material under your feet on the treadmill also has walls on the sides (so you don't see the background, and when you start moving, you'll be moving relative to the walls). That would be just like running on a moving train.

Nah you have to be trolling.

So I guess it's an intention to do those things. You can argue that awakening leads to the ego being healed in a spontaneous and intuitive way, rather than an intentional way. But that is just one way to heal your ego, and I don't see it replacing the role of shadow work. You can still do shadow work while being awakened, and you will probably be more inclined to do so (or at least be better at it, as @SeaMonster pointed out in the other thread). You'll still be able to form intentions, plan things and set goals, despite being awakened. Awakening is not a lobotomy of your higher mental functions. It only frees them from certain constraints. So I don't see shadow work being "bullshit", just "different shit" than awakening.

I don't even run at all, because it makes me feel like a sissy afterwards ? (for the next two-three days, probably due to increased cortisol and a subsequent decrease in testosterone). My dude, I'm arguing against people who think they're different for the same reason that I would argue against people who think the Earth is flat.

Because it's a physical reality.

When you become very aware, everything in your field of perception becomes as vivid as the sensations in your body. It's as if the field of perception becomes your body. When you're in a more contracted state of consciousness (more survival oriented), the body feels more central to your experience, because survival limits resources and narrows attention, and the body is very central to survival. But when your survival is largely taken care of, you can enter more expanded states. Of course, you can also enter expanded states when you expose yourself to extreme situations that disrupt normal functioning, but those states are usually not sustainable for long periods of time (unless they're integrated into your normal functioning). Most people struggle with being stuck in some type of survival mode all the time, and they're unaware of how they can turn it off, because the nature of human problems is that they are largely unconscious and requires deep penetrating work to untangle.

@Javfly33 How do you define shadow work?

@Leo Gura @gettoefl Here is another thought experiment that is comparable to jumping onto a treadmill set to high speed: Imagine being on a train that moves at the same speed as the belt on the treadmill. Let's say you're hanging from some handlebars to where you're able to drop yourself off the train and onto the moving ground. There is no real difference between the moving belt on the treadmill and the moving ground with respect to what you will experience as you jump onto it and start running (in terms of moving your legs). People only think they're not the same because they instinctively treat the ground as some absolute reference frame of motion. The ground is of course not really stationary either. It's spinning in space at 1000 miles per hour as Earth rotates around its own axis. So running on the ground should also be like "only lifting your feet", as it's moving so fast, right? Nope. This is basic relativity of motion ?

Agree. I was mainly focused on the physics.

Nice.

@Dauntment If you grant that everybody uses the same cognitive functions in various degrees, and that the variation is normally distributed in the population (like with all personality traits), you should expect most people to fit into many MBTI personality types. You could also expect a statistical best fit, but you shouldn't expect it to be seriously different from other types (e.g. 12% ENFJ > 11% INFJ > 9% INTJ > 9% ENTP > [...]).

Your life as a biological human on this planet.

What — you want to add to that? ?

You can break the identification with your body, but the body still needs food and care, and it will affect your llfe. Shadow work is similarly about taking care of certain aspects of your mind, and it will affect your life, regardless of breaking identification with your mind or not.

Locked for being an endless cycle of contempt and abuse, kinda like the ego. If you want to teach, teach yourself some manners.

Trueee.

So what is wrong with my thought experiment?

JustPearlyThings says things like (paraphrasing) "Women have to be stupid or something. If you're in an abusive relationship, why don't you just leave? I think women subconsciously want to be abused", or "abortion should only be legal if the abuse was one-ended", or here: "some slaves had positive things to say about their masters, so slavery must not have been as bad as it's made out to be". These statements are examples of not being aware of how context works as a general phenomena, in particular with relationship to human behavior and the human mind. In the first statement about leaving an abusive relationship, there is for example a lack of awareness of how abusive relationships aren't just abusive (there are positives as well as negatives), and that leaving a relationship in itself is not an insignificant decision without its downsides, and that there are various interpersonal dynamics and psychological mechanisms (both normal and pathological) that complicate the situation further (e.g. manipulation, cycles of fighting and making up, power imbalances, financial dependency, etc.). The second statement about making abortion legal only in cases of one-ended abuse shows a lack of awareness of how abusive relationships are probably very rarely purely one-sided (based on the fact that relationships are complex in general), and that investigating or let alone defining one-sided abuse is probably extremely difficult, and therefore making it into a law is probably practically impossible. The third statement about slaves saying positive things about their masters shows a lack of awareness of how people in tough situations learn coping strategies to get on with their lives (e.g. seeing something positive in a dire situation), as well as getting habituated to those situations and maybe even accepting them. You could imagine that if you took the same person and let them grow up in a Western 21th century context that has abolished slavery, that they would say very different things about the same slave owners. You could probably find even better examples than this from other people, but I just think JustPearlyThings is a particularly notorious example of this. It would be interesting if you guys could post your own examples.

Hilarious

What do you call a state which lacks acceptance? Not enlightened; the normal state of consciousness. Acceptance is synonymous with letting go and an antonym for resistance.

I think somebody who is conscious is able to conduct themselves in a way that is appropriate to the situation, and raging at people on a forum is not that. You're using ideas about non-duality to avoid taking responsibility for your behavior, and I suggest to stop doing that.

It is yours, it is your problem, and focusing on it is not a big mistake (you're focusing on it right now by trying to justify your past actions). My advice: when you're talking about egoic matters, talk like you are an ego. It's unfortunate to use non-dual language in that situation, because it's providing unnecessary information, it confuses rather than clarifies, it creates an aura of denying responsibility, and you're really just invoking a spiritual ego. When you're being a bit of a dick, then you're being a bit of a dick — simple as that.

There is a difference between enlightenment and the normal state. You're here trying to guide people to enlightenment, because there is something we're not getting and which is keeping us away from it. That would be resistance, or ignorance, or suffering. That is what distinguishes enlightenment from the normal state.