Search the Community

The questioner is coming from a paradigm assuming that people have bad energies that in her attempt to heal them, she takes on. Fear, separation. Those are the illusory bad energies. I think Sadhguru is just pointing beyond this, where real impersonal healing happens? I agree, but this can be profoundly powerful, like holding or being a safe space for someone to experience the expansion that they are. People can seem to provide focus, and that expansion at the same time. But how could you possibly be a safe space for healing if you were concerned about taking on other people's energies? Or if you DO seem to experience taking "other people's energies"? That's probably the reason I've spent most of my life as a hermit. Or how you you possibly heal when you expect that a healer has some power over you that you don't have? Wouldn't the healing be the shared allowance of that power?

Having Schizoid tendencies This is from the Mayo Clinic website. Overview Schizoid personality disorder is an uncommon condition in which people avoid social activities and consistently shy away from interaction with others. They also have a limited range of emotional expression. If you have schizoid personality disorder, you may be seen as a loner or dismissive of others, and you may lack the desire or skill to form close personal relationships. Because you don't tend to show emotion, you may appear as though you don't care about others or what's going on around you. The cause of schizoid personality disorder is unknown. Talk therapy, and in some cases medications, can help. This describes me to an extent for a good part of my life. More so in the category of Schizoid splitting off as a coping mechanism. It's that- lets Pretend what just happened never happened kind of thing. That should ring a bell with a lot of you because it's pretty common. The experts don't know anything except for just a few in developmental and depth psychology and those who go into Transpersonal psychology. The rest are just knotheads who get treated to lunch fairly often by pharmaceutical representatives. If you get serious about shadow work, all that stuff has to get processed. Defending Against Personal Contact When we are confronted with impersonality in the course of letting go of ego identifications, if we neither posit it as the ultimate reality, nor reject it, but genuinely investigate the truth, we will ultimately come upon the personal element. The absence of the personal element, which is felt as impersonality, can be seen at such times either as an emptiness in the chest, or the presence of a hard impersonal shield over it. The emptiness is felt as almost physical, as an empty hole or cavity in the chest. The emptiness affects the individual by making him feel that it doesn't have what it takes for him to relate in a personal way. He is impersonal because he lacks the personal element. He feels the emptiness as a deficiency, a lack in who he is. This deficient emptiness is simply the state of the absence of the Personal Essence. The rigid shield is a defense against this deficiency, which gives the individual a sense of being a person that is not personal. In fact, it is what is usually referred to in depth psychology as a schizoid defense. It is a defense against personal contact, because of the vulnerability that it might expose. So the individual employs this impersonal defense of isolation and emotional detachment so that he does not feel either the vulnerability of personal involvement, or the sadness about the lack of it. This condition is much more common than is normally acknowledged, for it is usually hidden by the ego’s sense of being personal. Pearl Beyond Price, pg. 75 - A.H. Almaas Ive also had grandiose coping mechanisms in the past but I won't go into that for now. I think the saying goes- Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean someone is not out to get me. It almost seems that getting these security cameras put in have aggravated my condition. There's at least 3 categories of 'hallucination' that I've been experiencing. The most faint is like my iPad has been hacked into and someone is overlaying images of people doing absurd things. Another kind is where the wind is moving the branches of trees and my imagination turns them into people who act like their creeping on me. The third kind is images of people so real like that I'll sometimes run out and try to catch them. This happens most when the light is dim. I mentioned in an earlier post about nearly catching up to someone only to have them go translucent. That really messed with me,,,, Well, last night I did catch-up to someone who was appearantly creeping on me. Actually I suspect a small group who are doing this. For sport, I guess,, go figure. I don't know. It was a young lady. I really think I would have had a good chance of tackling her but, I don't know. She had a fast walk down to an art and was smart enough to keep a tree right in front of her so she couldn't be silloqueted. Also, with a bad knee I really try to avoid extreme movements that could twist it badly. But I got close enough that I'm sure of this one. Both occasions have happened in really dim light. My eyes are getting worse every year. Maybe the guy who went translucent was real in physicality and between craftiness and my worsening eyesight my imagination interpreted him going translucent. I guess it's possible that their are Warlocks like on that old sitcom -Bewitched- Slim chance, though. I actually wanted to be a Warlock in the worst way growing up watching that show. Life can be strange. I know that much.

Money (Income, Salary) Skill (Strength, Caliber, Capabilities, Ability, Experience) Aptitude (Potential, Talent, Strengths) Impact (Altruism, Contribution) Interest (Passion, "Enjoyment", Creativity, Exploration, Adventure) Meaning (Challenge, Growth, Flow, Fun) Opportunities (Entrepreneurship, Business, Invention, Innovation, Impact) Flexibility (Ability to switch into different fields, pivotability, pivot ability) Value (Scarcity, High Value, Low Availability, No/Low Abundance, Unique, Rarity) High Demand, Popularity (Popular enough that it is a valid field but not popular enough that it is mediocore, unrare, overly abundant and unscarce, low value) Exclusivity (Lack of ability to self-learn, hardness in breaking into the field with no credentials) Difficulty (ROI, Return on Investment, ROE, Return on effort) This seems to be a solid list of criteria. However there could be more not considered here. As you can see, it can be argued there are impersonal / "objective" criterias aswell as personal / "subjective" criterias What you love --> Interest, Passion What the world needs --> Impact, Meaning What you can be paid for ---> Money What you are good at ---> Aptitude, Skill Related to Japanese concept of Ikigai So you could take all the majors (the ones you are interested in or even every single major) and assess them based on this (and any other) criteria. Research and significant thinking / contemplation will be required for alot of them (like demand, money, even impact, etc.) I might edit this later as not finished and cant do shit on the phone. Why are you going to college? This may be (and probably is) the best choice for you but more information would be needed.

I've found these 4 divisions of suffering helpful in my Work on self. The first is Unnecessary Suffering. This would be the type of suffering that we incur because of our unreasonable attitudes and expectations towards others, from our ill-will, hatred and rejection of others, from doubt, possessiveness, arrogance and self pity. In other words, suffering arising from our self-importance. The second is Unavoidable Suffering. This would be the type of suffering that comes to us by accident or from events beyond our control, such as interpersonal conflicts, war, disaster, disease or death. Third, we have Voluntary Suffering. This would be the type of suffering that we take upon ourselves in order to accomplish a personal aim, such as an athlete who disciplines himself to win a race, or a student who labours to get good grades. And finally we have Intentional Suffering. According to Bennett, this would be the kind of suffering that we take upon ourselves in order to accomplish an impersonal or altruistic goal, one that is directed more towards service to others or to the Work, and not for any personal gain. Bennett assumes that this is what Gurdjieff meant by Intentional Suffering. from: https://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/philo_is_talk_ae2005.htm I take Intentional suffering to be synonymous with Conscious suffering

It seems a stage blue frame. Guilt is a psychological thing that carries the original sin thing i think. It's cultural, not impersonal.

I will answer to see what my understanding is: If a human thinks he is a human, he is right, it's a natural silent knowing. However, if a thought appears in the mind of this human that begins to pretend that it is the human, then a duality is created. Before, the human would feel connected with everything else, but after the arising of this thought the human would feel that he is only a human and everything else is other. The I-thought is like a spider web of thoughts, identity, concepts etc that keeps the human from seeing/feeling clearly. It's not that you are supposed to lose all identity and think that you are nothing, just look beyond the spider web with inner silence and you may eventually see the truth, your natural identity as a human is an impersonal thing appearing in awareness.

Thank you all for so many amazing replies! I look forward to experimenting with the techniques & methods that people have recommended. I also would like to apologise for such a late reply to my own thread. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ @Fran11 1. I plan to do a deep exploration of the world of energy work, thanks! Any advice on places to start? Books, meta-sources? 2. Do you have any practical advice for dis-identifying with the I-thought? Would it look something like a mindfulness-based 'if-then' habit, i.e.: thought arises, such as a pre-verbal judgement or something with the word 'me'/'I' in it, & as soon as I notice it, I think this thought: 'this is not me/this is just an impersonal phenomena' & try to notice that e.g. by forcing myself to feel more like a listener of it rather than the active participant in thinking it? If my interpretation is misguided, how would it look like to dis-identify from the I-thought, moment-to-moment? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ @Moksha I will investigate all of these. I loved your explanation of Karma Yoga, it's about time I included more of this than just basic morality practices. Makes sense that if I'm going to do anything, it might as well be what I would do if I was identified with the whole. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- @RedLine Not yet. I'm brainstorming methods & trying to predict which will be the most effective. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ @RendHeaven Firstly, thank you so much for this amazing reply & for taking the time to point out so much of the self-deception going on in my current thinking. I have only ever had one ego-death/enlightenment experience on psychedelics, which was terrifying, so I am still a novice in this area. I like this idea of personifying the psychedelics. In my next trip, I will take on the attitude that I am dealing with an alive teacher, as opposed to my previous/current more materialistic approach, where I only consider them as inanimate chemicals causing changes to my brain for the purpose of assisting me with MY motives, exactly like you said. No doubt, if I took such an attitude to learning with a human master, they probably wouldn't want to work with me at all. Makes me wonder if this old attitude contributed to me having such a challenging trip. I have contemplated this on many occasions since my first ego-death experience. Sometimes I like to do a thought experiment where I imagine that someone has a gun to my head & is about to pull the trigger. I try to make it as vivid as possible, to try to convince myself that it's really happening, then I try to accept my fate or imagine what I might actually do in this situation. Sometimes I think I can accept it, but usually, if I'm self-honest, I'm shit-scared & would try to do anything I could to escape physical death. I would never commit suicide (kill the body). What have you realized from contemplating this yourself? But how will I be able to make progress if I'm distracted by my thinking? Surely the rejection of certain parts of reality is necessary for any of this to work? Isn't doing this the lesser of two self-deceptions, with thinking/monkey-mind being the greater? Further, isn't the thinking that I wish to silence, ITSELF a form of self-rejection/rejection of the present-moment? When my mind is silent & I am in deep jhana, it feels like I can appreciate [everything] far more than when I am following along with some train of thought about the past or future, solving my problems, etc. I understand that I am acting hypocritical & unenlightened by choosing to silence the mind at the expense of other phenomena, but isn't this the lesser of two evils? You're 100% correct here, I am in pain & I see enlightenment as a way out, this is my main/strongest motivation in this work. Me no like suffering! P.s. Yes, the lords of the earth & sky bit was intended as comedic. Finally: What do you suggest I do instead? What has worked well for you? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ @electroBeam What happened when you tried this? Do you have any theories as to what went wrong/why it didn't work? What's your story, Mr. Beam? Also, what do you do now instead that's more effective? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ @SirVladimir Very cool reply & thanks for the headsup. It's true, I do goal-ify enlightenment probably more than I should. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ @Jonty I like this practice too, very relaxing

The spiritual search is by nature a very self centered desire and awakening ends up being a very personal and impersonal experience simultaneously. What ends up being rather surprising is that often that drive to go out and save the universe actually falls away because it's then recognized that the only mechanism that was fueling that desire was in fact the ego with its relentless(something needs to be done and I'm just the one to do it) specialness requirement. Ultimately it ends up being fair game... and whatever happens is what's happening.

Thank you for the contribution and follow-up, mr Origins~ yes it is pretty cool, after all, and you are too, but… How much did all that have in context with the OP? Free-wheeling through what you thought you read isn't cool.. However good your points may be, you completely misunderstand the context of "get rid of", so going off on tangents in terms of the aspects of conditioned perception illustrated by the conceptual aid you employed as the "lens", goes far afield. I can't believe you actually studied the poem to have come up with your long responses relative to someone else who also missed the point of the OP. Please make note: the issue is not a question of a quality of perceptive breadth, or a need for a compensatory action, it is the evidence of The StarGuitarist's failure to grasp the point of the 500 year old and famously conveyed message— or else he was too much in a hurry to actually articulate anything at all relevant to the topic, hence the graphic throw-away. It is essentially a cheap post. He's whining. WTF. TheStarGuitarist posted a cartoon that laments an ever present condition being loneliness. The Solitary Bird is a Master Class on the benefits of aloneness. Actually, it is a consice treatise which cuts through to the marrow on how to live one's life audaciously, in terms of accessing one's inherent potential. Obviously, in complaining about such an existential affliction, one can easily deduce that the author of the post didn't get the point of the poem in the first place, and that the complaint is obviously a priori, a persistent object of aversion. Therefore, it is beyond obvious that most people are of the mind to get rid of such afflictions. I did not bring up the idea of getting rid of even the object of aversion. I said to get rid of the source of the aversion— which is, the TheStarGuitarist's perspective based on habit-patterned conditioned awareness. Therefore loneliness, or even working with such affliction per se, has nothing to do with the content of the subject of this thread. This thread is about the message embedded in the poem, which is a study on enlightening activity. Please keep comments on-topic and avoid drifting off on unrelated tangents. Nothing on this thread pertains to therapeutic technique(s) nor those who need fixing. The subject is the OP. TheStarGuitarist's post is utterly off-topic in terms of the thrust of the teaching employed by San Juan de la Cruz in his The Solitary Bird because the post's content shows a complete ignorance of the obvious enlightening, uplifting, inspirational and self-empowering knowledge embedded in its few short lines. The purpose of the thread is to extoll the obvious enlightening, uplifting, inspirational and self-empowering knowledge embedded in its few short lines, and to provide a venue for relevant commentary on the specifics introduced in the poem. You did not even attempt that much, hence the expression of my displeasure in your off-topic post. The source of the off-topic lament is the cartoon's insinuation by way of the the self-importance of ego-consciousness masquerading as melancholy, or existential self-consciousness. THIS is what is to be gotten rid of. There is no need to employ a lens— one must completely forget to come up with such garbage in the first place, non? Whereas the ignorant are, for the most part, barely cognizant of the sources of such affliction in their conditioned self-conscious awareness— they only want the affliction to stay "under the radar" and are incapable of addressing the root issues involved in attaining conscious enlightening liberation. The deluded are such by virtue of their penchant for habitually responding only to the seeds of ever-recurring growths of habit-energies cloying the psychological apparatus of the being that is going to die. To be liberated, as such, would be as if stripped of one's imaginary role in life, which is attachment to appearances and following thoughts relative to ego-consciousness unawares. That's karmic bondage. Otherwise what is the point of SELF realization? To be stripped bare of such habits. Yes! Again, let's not use this thread as a point of departure relative to therapeutic fixes for the deluded. This is not a provisional teaching. Do you know? What's my point? There is such a thing as advance practice beyond the reach of most people on a grand scale. You did not address any aspect of that in your posts. There is nothing lacking in the way of life of a solitary bird. Period. That which is advocated in the lines of The Solitary Bird is for those who do not lament existential process. That would be those who have awakened to inherent enlightening being. Why? Because existential process is where reality is found. The Solitary Bird is for those who carry on without bothering about such trifles as lamenting that which is, ie: existential process. That which is worthy of minimization and refinement until it dies out completely is the conditioned human mentality that obscures the innate enlightening function of selfless spiritual adaption to WHAT IS. A lens of any manufacture or design that can render reality in terms of the viewer's perspective, regardless of its angle of view is a provisional adjunct. Why? Because ultimately, there is no inside or outside— no viewer or viewed; beyond self and other, where would there be a lens to employ? For the initiated, this is not a metaphor. What is left when one succeeds in the (never ending) process of self-refinement (in terms of sudden enlightenment when one's spiritual potential is released for the first time) is the nonoriginated mind-ground void of self. This is the absolute. Advance practice for those who have subsequently awakened to their innate enlightening potential relative to endless self-refinement, is impersonally harmonizing the all-at-once Absolute with the incremental quality of conditioned karmic evolution, ie: the Creative. Ultimately these two are not different (for buddhas). Harmonizing the light of awareness to delusional self-consciousness is a thing (not really). It's buddhahood. Actually, in terms of buddhahood's application, it is called the "middle way" or, the Supreme Vehicle of Buddhas (Buddhism did not invent this. I'm just using buddhist terminology.) So even though the "middle way" has its place in terms of provisional teaching, as does your contribution— ultimately, enlightening practice (selfless spiritual adaption) is not a personal endeavor relatively based on even conventional ideals. There is no "technique" employed, simply due to the fact that one does not do it. In other words, one does not rely on one's own power. Such potential is inherent in the situation itself. It's not the person. So there is absolutely nothing cool about it. I want you to reflect on this fact. It's NOT cool. Why? What this is, is everyday ordinary entry into inconceivability by having realized inherent enlightening being's impersonal potential as one's spiritual function in terms of adapting to endless karmic cycles of birth and death without being subject to the laws of (karmic) creation. There is no other creation. Creation, karma, eternity, endless cycles of yin and yang are all different names for the same delusional quality of existence. Those who are deluded within delusion are buddhas. Those who experience realization upon realization are the deluded. You might not understand that. If not, please feel free to PM me. We all have our part to work out in this seamless continuum. The process of clarifying the foundation of perceptive qualities may very well include aspects of your contribution to this thread, but your point of address relative to "getting rid of…" is perhaps irrelevant (to this thread) because the comment implying there is something to get rid of (the affliction — and more to the point, the implied complaint in the first place) has no basis in fact with the point of the OP. Let's raise our game, mr Origins! Presence is automatic impersonal adaption to what is, not off-topic interjections of pet theories, however relevant they may be, or actually are, to applications of general enlightening practice. Why? Because, for the initiated, the first four conditions epressed in the OP address fundamentals for practicing the Science of Essence, not the dual aspect of the Science of Life, which is only addressed in the last condition (singing softly). Both sciences of essence and life are specific to taoist spiritual alchemy, not unrelated to profound penetration of the teaching embedded in The Conditions of a Solitary Bird. All such study of works by prior illuminates are conducive to talismanic receptivity. This means that only those who can look back, as such, and see the sign-posts in reverse, as it were, are on the dusty path of authentic entry and penetration into the mystery. What's so cool about that? It's not cool, mr Origins, unless you see the reality, and you don't . You should see that reality isn't a matter of technique; it's just real, nothing more, nothing less. At any rate, the point you wished to address had more to do with a quality of perception which would be well to pursue in appropriate contexts and not much at all to do with the subject of this thread which is The Conditions of a Solitary Bird. Please try to keep comments limited to: a thorough understanding of who said what, what was said, and most importantly, please strive to employ contextual adherence with the actual topic, however well intentioned and well expressed they may otherwise be. Please feel free to address the OP as soon as you want to, but please keep your content on-topic. Please read and reflect on the poem itself. I welcome your good points and skillfully written content in the future— really!!❤︎ ed note: typo paragraph 9

This can be a tough decision with many options to choose from. Your at a important time in your life with many crossroads. However, you are not bounded to these three options. You have infinite options. There is bound to be a near-perfect, excellent option. Now let's get into it. There seem to be two major considerations here, children and career / purpose. Let's start with children. A lot of this, would be more research and developing confidence, certainty (in whether to have children or not have children, and at what time) First, an idea to consider. I would say Learning, discovering and having a life purpose (even if it's a draft, just an idea), working toward it for a while, then after pausing (or really slowing down) for children (the early years) and coming back to life purpose afterwards Is better than Having/raising children then saying "alright now let's get started on this life purpose stuff" There are some caveats. The older someone is, practically speaking, they may want to start having children sooner, so the second option might be more optimal (considering fertility and healthy childbirth). Another thing to consider is when would you not want to have children, when would be this whatever "limit" (considering fertility, healthy childbirth, energy, etc.) For my mom she had her first child at 27 and last child (as of right now haha) at 39 years old. This can be entirely different for different people. However the hard limit, at menopause, would be around 40s - 50s. With the average age in US being 51, according to the Mayo Clinic. It might be that during times of a child's early life, that life purpose will be slowed down for a while. This might even give you a break to think and contemplate on your life purpose. So another relevant thing to consider would be how many children do you want? (If you did end up having children, would it be just one?). The amount of children you would want to have, if you did have some would be crucial in this decision. If you would want to have multiple children, however many years apart (like maybe 9 months or 1 year or 2 year or 5 years or whatever amount of years) then having children earlier rather than later would be in your favor. It also may be (or probably is) the case that as a mother (traditionally and, even naturally, the caregiver) you have it more difficult, therefore immense time management and prioritization (at different times or phases of life) would be essential. Consider how and how much the father would be in play, helping with the caregiving. It would probably be best to research people (or to be frank, mothers) who have had children and life purpose aswell. Research, learn, contemplate, ponder this option, how and if balance can be achieved. Although, likely no one is 100% certain that they want to have kids. I would say, at minimum, be around 70% certain for making this major life decision. This would mean researching, pondering, contemplating and learning to have greater certainty in what you want (just as if someone who was ending high school but uncertain to go to college should research to solidify their certainty rather than letting life just pass by). It does sound that you aren't within the certainty range (70%~, keep a mind this is a number I pulled this out of nowhere) of having kids. However, still research, ponder to increase your certainty, confidence in whatever decision you choose. Another very important factor, is one you will have children with, the father. Consider how will this family you are starting with him be, whether you want him as the father of your children, etc. Having children, seems almost certainly, most of the time, best under a longterm relationship. (Although, I haven't done research about alternatives, I think it's safe to assume this is the case) Whether you want to have a long term commitment with the father is an important point. Also whether the father wants to have children is a factor to consider to, haha. Totally forgot about that. Consider, from what I have touched, the factors of To have or not have children? When to have children? Who to have children with? Do they want to have children? How many children to have? All these factors doesn't mean "oh I'm uncertain let me not do anything" but "I'm uncertain, let me figure out, with a certain level of certainty, what I want and let me pursue that". Reseach, ponder, contemplate, learn and figure out, discover what you want in terms of children. This is arguably as essential, or possibly even more important then life purpose (If you are having children). Kids are huge commitment but, it seems, they can also provide massive value to your life. Now for career / purpose (+ finances). It's important to note finances, career and passion/purpose don't have to be the same thing. Someone can be earning money through stock dividends and a part-time job while working toward a career in school, while figuring out and developing their purpose and passion on the side. While, this may not always be the case, it seems important to note. However, I would say, ideally someone's career would be the same as their passion/purpose. For finances, this could be a different story. Someone could be financially free or developing other forms of income while working in a less profitable purpose/passion. With that in mind, I would say continue to discover. Don't compartmentalize finances as a part of your career/employment. While career/employement can be a major part of your finances (and cashflow) it doesn't have to be. Although, as someone with (a soon to be) doctorate in theoretical physics you likely have an interest (or even passion) in the field and with the skills/value you can provide - you will have no trouble with finances. I would say, ideally it doesn't so you can 100% focus on purpose/passion and to hell with anything that isn't align with it. (This may be my own preference/opinion though). This would also mean financial freedom, which is something you might want to pursue. Furthermore, note that you aren't limited to those 2 options. Unlike children, where it's fewer options, with career and employement there are atleast hundreds, if not thousands of jobs and options out there. And considering all the paths, subpaths, combinations, nuances and unconsidereds options, it's like there are "infinite" options. I would make an extensive list of all the jobs, fields, locations, passions, purposes you can go into. Consider all the places you could go. Consider all the fields you can go into. Consider all the jobs you can pursue, whether it's private, government, academia, non-profit, etc. You may not find "infinite" practical options but it's way more than 2 options. If you haven't found an atleast decent option, you haven't considered enough options. What are all the potential jobs, careers, positions, fields, domains locations, passions, purposes, options? What are the motivations, the why for each option? Why would I, what would be the benefits of each option? Do you have to do post doc abroad? Where could you go? What locations could you do postdoc (or other jobs/positions for that matter)? What other careers/fields (other than IT/Data Analyst) can you go into? What skills do you have? (Theoritcal physics is a extremely reputable major especially as a doctorate, you probably have access to an abundance of fields) Possibly feel into, intuit but also examine, consider more "logically" how you would feel, what you would experience. Use both the emotion and the logical for a wise approach (And whatever else) Ask and figure out why you would do each decision. What are the motivations Exploration/ Self-Experimentation are key to discovering what you want to do. And as you mentioned you do have an idea of what you want, from previous experience. I would say take this further and actively experiment (or continue on, if you were already consciously experimenting before). Treat the next career/job you go into as active experimentation while also using prediction and what you currently know. A process utilizing your current knowledge to predict but also seeking further experimentation to clarify what you want. While likely less revealing, experimentation on the children option is possible aswell. In addition to talking to others (and researching and contemplation), you can hang around kids, work with kids. You can also psuedo-experiment by imagining, visualizing and contemplating deeply what it would be like, what all the implications, delights and ramifications of having children. But I digress In terms of career/purpose, for the options you have given, If you have a significant relationship with your partner, it may be challenging to go abroad. Consider, that unless this is known to be temporary and shortterm, this may put you on entirely different life paths and the relationship may not survive. This really depends, like on how long the relationship has been, if you have been long distance before, your partner, etc. (I don't know shit about your relationship so to be honest I can't even say shit but consider the ideas above.) You might want to heavily consider other options (like for the postdoc option, a postdoc where you are, nearer where you are, or somewhere he can go, etc.). Or, if this resonates at all, going along different paths if you know your path forward is abroad and he cannot come. Notice you can switch paths at any time (well practically, not at anytime but you know what I mean). If you don't like postdoc, you can go into industry. If you don't like industry you can go into postdoc. (However this doesnt apply to children haha). I consider this option of career/purpose to be extremely flexible, and uncommitting as opposed to the children option. That may be something that eases the decision. As for the paths you mentioned, if those are your main options, you can go for a postdoc (either abroad or not) or industry (whichever one you lean more toward) experiment with that, and if after a month it isn't the option you like, it seems, you can just as easily turn around and do the other. It seems, that you can do this for most any career/job option. From what I understand, my very limited knowledge, the therotical physics options are primarily research, government, academia and private sector. Consider which at of all these you would want to go in most. Also discover, further what exactly you want out of your life purpose. Research, study, experiment what you want your life purpose to be. With this limited time, you must make a decision, or the decision to put the decision on hold (like take the option with most flexibility). A lot of the factors you mentioned like caring/analytical balance (both empathy, people-focused skills and analytical skills), connection, interaction with passionate people and variety are factors that can be in a plethora of domains and fields. This can be considered a good thing, as that means you have alot of freedom in what you choose. This can also mean, you should narrow down the fields/domains you would be most interested in (which it seems would be physics / therotical physics but it may not be this, and doesn't have to be). You mentioned some more specific pointers like whether you would want to go into science, whether you would want to go into people-focused / therapeutic type field. Furthermore, your biggest struggle of isolation (depression, inability to connect, loneliness, etc.), consider whether you want to work surrounding that. Also realize you don't have to do work surrounding or associated with that. You also mentioned something that interests you, pushing the limits of human knowledge, the beauty of abstract of ideas. From my very limited knowledge of you, here is some random purpose ideas to consider Expanding the collective minds and science to the next level, opening up people's perspectives to consciousness or different ideas, from within the framework of science, dismantling the flaws of science and science itself from the inside, evolving science to the next level, supercharging, super-evolving science to have centuries of evolution in the next decades, ideas, pursuits similar to Nikola Tesla, Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Max Planck, bringing the full implications of quantum mechanics and different theoretical physics to light, bringing practical applications to the ideas of theoretical physics, increasing human knowledge, advancements in theoretical physics, physics, science, knowledge to improve society, the world, everything, Those are just random ideas to consider. Your purpose doesn't have to have anything to do with that (as I likely don't have to tell you) Try to truly discover what you would want to go into (or experiment with). That life purpose, or idea/draft of your purpose, would inform your next step in terms of career/purpose. With children, you can really only predict/assess and develop confidence/certainty in whatever you want. With career/purpose, in addition to prediction/assessment, you can experiment, consistently tailor and fine tweak your purpose and path until you find what is best, excellent and optimal. Therefore, it may be best to focus on and highly consider the children option before career/purpose. However, everything I said are just ideas and speculation as I barely know anything about you. I do think it may be possible to find a sort of "objectively" best decision but this would be based on impersonal knowledge (what most humans desire, what is best for most people, what certain truths are, what happiness is, what the good life is, all in general) and personal knowledge (knowing your preferences, desires, experiences, thoughts, insights, self-understanding). It seems, most of the time people can't have enough of the personal knowledge that it would be unwise to claim a best decision. That is why everything I said is suggestions but based on what I would say, from my imperfect knowledge, are impersonal truths. Consider them as ideas, potentialities and suggestions. However, there is a path forward. It consist of research and learning, intuition and contemplation and (sometimes) exploration and experimentation into what is best.

Stage Turquoise Coping tips How to deal with the Turquoise value system? For Turquoise, complete integration is the norm, in the broadest sense of the word. All facets and aspects of life must be rated at its true value and must be included. Turquoise lives and works beyond the ego and aims to realize a dynamic balance between people, animals, nature, the earth and the universe. What are positive stimuli for Turquoise? Creating more space and openness to work with a unity consciousness, other worlds and energetic dimensions. To have the discipline and endure slowing down to anticipate this. What are negative stimuli for the Turquoise Value System? Creating an atmosphere of separateness. See the world purely from the individual or human perspective. Leaving aside the energetic dimensions of life. Qualities and Shadows What are healthy manifestations of Turquoise? To see the world and the cosmos as an integral whole. To explore, feel and pragmatically work together to solve the large complex problems to serve humanity and the earth. What are unhealthy manifestations of Turquoise? Stay in a spiritual and/or cosmic consciousness too long without taking earthly action. Prejudices Which prejudices may other value systems have about Turquoise? Purple may experience Turquoise as out of this world and not in touch with everyday reality. Red has difficulties to really see Turquoise for what it is. According to Red, Turquoise is unworldly and doesn’t take a stand. This is why Red finds it difficult to respect this value system. Blue may experience Turquoise as swimming with the tide and without structure and finds it difficult that Turquoise is continuously adapting to the ever-changing life conditions. Orange may experience Turquoise as woolly, daydreaming and Utopian. Green may experience Turquoise as putting things into perspective too much, as impersonal and very broadly orientated. This is why Turquoise is, in a way, too elusive for Green. Yellow may experience Turquoise as too calm, too acceptant and therefore lacking action.

I would say they are experiencing something that is clearly different from how the majority of people act. But I wouldn't call them ill or sick. Because most so-called mental diseases are potentially there in how the human mind works. You can observe yourself hearing voices in your head.. Talking to yourself.. Having opposing views (multiple personalities) etc. Yet it's just mild. So imo.. The symptoms of mental illness are potentially there in every human.. It's just in their case (mental people) they reach a point where they are unable to control it anymore.. Whereas for the majority of people they are able to fake that they are a "person" with a linear personality. Acting can happen. Your body mind can act in a way that is in accordance to the conditioning that it received throughout your whole life. Or it can act in a different way that is not familiar with it. In both cases.. Whatever the body-mind does.. It's not "free".. At the center of this whole thing.. There isn't an agency who is doing.. Acting.. Who is ill or normal. The true Self is pure awareness. Pure being. Pure existence. This pure being is impersonal. It's not someone or something. It's unconditional because its not this or that. It's just there as a silent witness. The body and mind are conditioned. It can't act without a program. Therefore not free. You speak English because that's the language you've been programmed with. Change the programming into French language.. The body Wil start speaking French. And if the body didn't receive any linguistic programming.. The body won't talk any language!. But in both cases.. You as the awareness are not affected. Awareness. You become aware that "this is a dream" while you are dreaming..

The 9 Stages Of Ego Development - Part 1, 2 and 3 6 stages of Ego Development by Cook-Greuter: - Based on the sentence completion test. - It models how self-identity/ego evolves over time - Find out what kind of ego do you have? - This is focused on cognitive and mental development - Modelling how the mind is relating to reality - "The whole previous meaning system is transformed and restructured into a new, more expansive and inclusive self-theory and theory of the world" - The function of the ego is meaning-making - The ego is constantly engaged in the battle of sense-making - Here we look at the structure of the mind (watch content vs structure) - "A person's understanding of power, feedback, time, love, integrity, and truth, for instance, changes with increasing development." - 9 stages 1) Symbiotic 2) Impulsive 2/3) Opportunist - 4.3% 3) Conformist 3/4) Expert 4) Achiever 4/5) Pluralist 5) Autonomous/Strategist 5/6) Construct-Aware/ Magician 6) Unitive PRECONVENTIONAL STAGE - Symbiotic - a baby - dependant on parents - struggling to make sense to the world - Impulsive - toddler - stage in which you have your earliest memories - thinks in crude dichotomy - easy for the mind to feel overwhelmed and feel abandoned - People are seen as objects to gratify one's needs - Opportunist - the mind is very impulsive, animal-like, self-centred - Doesn't consider the needs and suffering of others - mind is not capable of insight into itself or others in any psychological sense. - life is seen as a zero-sum game. If I win, you lose. If you lose I win - There is a sense of self having two sides, inner self and an outer self to shield it from others - A problem would arise due to the mask one wears and how one really feels - Social rules are recognized but are only followed for the immediate benefit or to avoid punishment - One is socially invested in the concrete visible world of things that they can own - Self-respect = my ability to control others - Other's are always to blame not one's self - One is prone to anger when frustrated and the anger tends to be loud and projected outwards - Actions are only bad if one is caught or punished. - Show little remorse when they are caught - If it is caught, they tend to blame others - Success can be archived in business if its about opportunism and unilateral power. - business as exploitation - showing weakness in this stage is considered dangerous - The more others know about me, the more one is gonna take advantage of me. So I have to hide my true self from others so that it doesn't get taken advantage of. - Morality doesn't compute in the mind - not much empathy - Defence mechanism: + Blame + Distortions to minimize one's own anxiety, fantasy, acting out. Twisting the truth around to suit one's own self + Self-protective, bull-headed, tunnel vision and are constantly blowing up + Don't find common grounds + Exploit other's weakness + Negative emotions are expressed loudly unabashedly CONVENTIONAL STAGES Conformist/ Diplomate - Ego evolved beyond the opportunist stage and is discovering a new "We space" - I am part of a community - The groups here are only of 2 types: the in-group and the out-group (us and them) - There is a confused boundary between self and the in-group - This stage is very sheep-like - People are perceived as your allies or your enemies - These people feel honoured to be in a part of a group with high status - At this stage of cognitive development, the mind is unable to take perspectives of other groups - At this stage, the mind cannot comprehend that other groups hold absolute beliefs as well. - The mind at this stage cannot distinguish between belief and reality - Belief is taken as reality - No distinction between belief and experience either - No sense of recognition that beliefs can be wrong - Mind tries to uphold tradition and avoid rocking the boat - Feedback is experienced as an attack and critique as wrongdoing - doesn't evaluate things independently - they need roles to be rigid and absolute - Black and white, either good or bad - The action here carried out with absolute conviction - Strong sense of guilt and shame - confused and threatened by different perspectives, diversity, complexity, paradox, and multi-culturalism (Note: with every stage, you are taking more and more responsibility) - Sexuality is treated like an animalistic instinct that needs to be controlled - People tend to be very judgemental - Anger is suppressed - Sense of self is denied by others - Great value is put on material 3rd-dimensional stuff - main anxiety is not to belong and be rejected by the group - Asking the superior what to do is the natural way to deal with difficulties - Avoid conflict within the group - Suppressing their emotions, needs and wants Expert Stage - Able to step back and look at oneself as an object from a distance - Rudimentary self-reflection - Want to be unique - get away from family and want to express newly found personhood - Feels good to be noticed as unique - Want to be respected for one's want and abilities - focus on finding one's own voice - capable of dealing with abstract objects and concepts and want to assert itself - vision to be more successful - the compulsive perfectionistic tendency here to outdo one's self - want to be the best - negative feedback as a personal rebuke - enjoys criticizing others as a way to establish one's own superiority and power - one's own way of doing things is considered the right way or the superior way - focused on doing the task right rather than doing the right task - Science becomes the religion - superiority complex - feels disappointed in oneself for not doing better - strong sense of shoulds and wants - Doesn't easily collaborate with others - argumentative and opinionated. The intellect becomes weaponized and becomes aggressive - The ego lives in a world where things are sure and clear - Doesn't realize that one's perspectives is one of many valid perspectives - person is overworked - hard time delegating tasks - loves to have the last word - hostile sense of humour - defence mechanism: Hyper rational logic - highly educated specialist - superego is strong at this stage but not available for introspection - If I can do it, you can do it too attitude - 1% openness - Early interest in causality Achiever - 5 to 10 years forwards and backwards vision - you can continue to grow from mind and heart as an adult - excited for self-knowledge and self-improvement - beginning to appreciate conceptual complexity - Recognizes that the way that the problem is framed is the problem itself - planful and capable of reorienting towards new goals - still convinced in the scientific method doesn't question it very much - looking for rational laws and ways in which the universe works - much of science is done from this achiever stage - better at working in a collaborative environment - recognizing that making new distinctions is important for growing one's mind - create complex theories and models - actively asks to find out what makes other's tick - trusts in the potential to improve oneself using effort, learning and feedback - could take misguided criticism and see it as useful - the concern with reasons, causes, and effective use of one's time - interested in knowing the reasons and causes for unwanted behaviour - starts to realize self-deception is a thing - importance of distinguishing appearance from reality - starting to connect with your feelings - becoming familiar with their own biases and projections - One can consciously use negative energy in productive ways - sense of responsibility actualizing one's potential - there is guilt for not being more successful and more developed - questions the shoulds of the society and one's profession - guilt for having made wrong choices and regret for missed opportunities - more appreciative of diversities of people and perspectives - interpersonal relationships now become more intense and more important for the achiever - other's are valued for who they are rather than how they serve oneself - chooses to proceed based on one's own critical examination of what works and what is important - driven to improve the world - feeling of urgency - preoccupied with getting things done - issue of legacy and self-image becomes important - may create complex theory psychology and philosophy but they are still in the level of theories - drive to achieve that might lead to over exhaustion and burnout - not trying to figure things out is no longer an option - have a sense of responsibility for others even when pursuing their own agenda - fear of loss and control in autonomy - fear that they get sucked back into conformity - fear of loss of progress - material stuff and world is real - believes that most problems can be solved with technology GENERAL REMARKS - people's responses don't all fit into one category, there is a blend in categories - this model is about vertical development (changing your sense of reality and structure of your mind) - the levels alternate in a snakey sort of motion between differentiation and integration of the ego-self - see the significance of each stage and each stage is its own reality - Shows you what healthy human development and maturity looks like - HELPS YOU TO UNDERSTAND OTHERS WITHOUT DEMONIZING AND JUDGING THEM Note: this is meant to complement the video. Please watch the video, I love it. I have been following Leo for 5.5 years and it literally changed my life in soo many ways <3 so this stuff is real. Also, the book list is FIRE. ------------------------------------------------------------------- The 9 Stages Of Ego Development - Part 2 --PART 1/2--- General Remark - This is a scientific model and thus has it's own limits - Each stage has the capabilities of the earlier stages underneath it. - NONE of these stages are good or bad - each stage is its own reality but the higher stages are its own reality incorporating the lower reality. Therefore, the higher stages can understand the lower stages as it went through them. - You have to be humble enough to admit that there is something above your level of understanding - Just because you are in a higher stage, it doesn't mean that you are a saint. There are still dysfunctions in the higher stages. (but it tends to improve as it goes higher) - Humans do tend to regress stages when they are threatened or stressed - awakening or mystical experiences can happen in any stage but the interpretation is different based on their level POST-CONVENTIONAL - Previous stages, the ego was busy constructing itself, but in this stage, the ego starts deconstructing itself - deconstruction means turning your focus inwards, starting to really question yourself, starting to reflect on your beliefs & ideas. - Starting to realize the socially constructed nature of reality - Aspects of reality that could be deconstructed (Asking "is this really true for all people everywhere or is it just a local phenomenon" ) + Objective + Material + Real + Scientific + Absolute word + Rationality + Logic + Science + Government + Politics + Capitalist economic system - Relativity is a huge theme of the post-conventional stage. This is a huge leap. - There are many degrees of relativistic thinking - Awareness of one's own unexamined beliefs becomes... almost painfully brought into one's consciousness - the mind opens up to something beyond rationality, new ways of knowing the world than just logic. - noticing evolution and self-deception. All problems become a matter of perspective and mind (not a problem with the world but how you think and relate to the world) - There is a decrease in defensiveness and less blaming of others as you move up these stages - language starts to be questioned and it becomes complex - materialist assumptions are starting to be questioned (not completely but they are starting to be) - although objects are seen are permanent, the meaning is seen to be context-dependent - The boundaries of concepts seem to be much more flexible/movable/impersonal - The mind can compare the whole system of thought and organization with increasing distance - They can now look back to previous belief systems as systems - There is an appreciation of existential, metaphysical, psychological and epistemic issues and questions Pluralist (11% of the adult US population) - Relativity (check out Leo's episode of relativity part 1) - realizes there are multiple perspectives and exploring the perspective becomes fascinating. - Objective judgments become impossible - Life still pressures you into survival. While you want to explore all the perspectives, you still want to manage life. This can be difficult as it becomes hard to make decisions in life. Not all views are equally practical So you sort these views based on practicality - We cannot help filter our observations through our personal and subjective lenses. This humbles the mind - becomes aware of the culturalistic conditioning and you are not in control or values - Exercise: Travel to unconventional exotic places - They start to see all world views as equally valid and worthy of consideration - Truth becomes really difficult to find in this stage because everything starts to become relative and they might even deny there is such a thing as truth - The mind can stand outside itself it grew up in and observe itself/culture from above - Good at questioning hidden assumptions values and beliefs - there is a realization of self-deception as a defence mechanism [just beginning] (check out leo's video on self-deception. I personally highly recommend it) - If other people are so easily fooled, what are the chances that you are fooling yourself thinking that you are an exception to self-deception? - The greatest danger is your own mind and the beliefs and software that was programmed into your mind that was taken for granted with all the assumptions that you never questioned - They start questioning how do we know what we know? - Realizes that I am not immune to all the brainwashing - There is an awareness of how much society or awareness has shaped one's point of view, worldview, beliefs and values - The mind is seen as completely contingent on +historical context +geographic place +economic circumstance +education +the structure of society +culture +media +advertising +language - The inner world becomes more interesting than materialistic pleasure - trying to make sense of oneself - They realize the limitation of rationality - One of the chief ways the mind can deceive you is logic - exploration is more important than reaching a goal - Tends to be a distrust at the pluralist stage of conventional wisdom and hyper-rational wisdom - The scientific frame and the judgemental frame breaks down - They like to scrutinize their own assumptions and relish novel mental freedom - All values are now relative but survival still demands making choices and judgements that the pluralist struggles with - Rather than solving a problem, one must figure out what to define a problem - problems is an interplay between polarities neither one of which can simply be eliminated - enjoys paradox and contradiction without the need to eliminate them - linear logic gives way to a more holistic understanding - Not everything needs to be proven in order to be embraced - Value is placed upon insight and breakthrough - playful exploration and the imagination is set free - looks for connections and subtle clues rather than analyzing independent parts - useful information can now come from beyond science - sources that were viewed with ridicule such as intuition, feeling, dream, meditation, self-reflection, insight, these now become highly valued - there is a shift from doing to being and feeling - they like to live more unconventionally - good at finding novel ways at looking at the problem - they like to inspire others to pursue their own interest Traps: - they can appear amoral because they appear so relativistic - there is a dread that one's work-life won't allow self-expression and creativity - can feel isolated from others who don't understand the post-conventional mindset - there can be relationship problems if your partner is post-conventional and the other person is conventional - Diversity and equalities itself become an oppressive position. - They might judge others who do not hold their values - They still don't fully appreciate the others are not as developed as they are - They generally very tolerant of other's diverse ideas, behaviours, and cultures but they can come off as dreamers and non-doers - Tend to have an attitude of "It all depends" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The 9 Stages Of Ego Development - Part 3 [Note: yes, I have written notes for the past 2 videos] *General* - It can be counter-productive to skip stages - Don't rush trying to get towards enlightenment or awakening. If you do, you won't be able to sustain it - Use this model to analyze what kind of people you are dealing with in your life - Use this model to determine what kind of teachings you need! - Focus on all the stages, if you don't do so, you will stagnate and will feel frustrated *Construct-Aware/ Magician* - mind and the material reality is tangled together is constructed - Realize that life is not an objective but rather a subjective and deeply personal thing - at this stage, you are concerned about what it means to be alive and the significance of your existence - everything that is held true is called into question once again - When you realize how much of reality is constructed by the mind, reality starts to feel intangible and groundless - Keen awareness of how the ego-mind distorts reality and comes up with models and understandings of reality to suit itself for the purpose of survival (Check out the 2 part series of understanding survival. Very Imp) - The realization that all objects are human-made constructions - keep appreciation between the idea of map and the territory - Realize how much language shapes your reality and understanding of the world - Cognizant of the pitfalls of language and it's a tremendous gift to mankind - Getting skillful at playing with the language and not getting stuck - Realize that concepts only make sense with what it surrounds and polar opposite - Awareness of how abstractions and concepts get made by the mind and responsible - hitting up with the limits of the human mind - conventional belief in the permanent, objective, external world starts to be questioned - The distinction between mind and body, self and others starts to break down - Objective and clear self-identification starts to be questioned at this stage - this stage has a flexible, continuously, deconstructing, non-reified notion of self - an acute awareness of the endless interplay of polar opposites - good at cross paradigmatic thinking - They have a global historical perspective - stepping back and awareness of meaning-making 41:27 - 42:16 (Very profound) - realization of the human need for map making and trying to organize experience and knowledge in ever more complex matrixes and meta-theory - Deconstructing personal stories and letting it go - Deception stages: Level 1: We have no idea that we are deceiving ourself Level 2: Start to get a little bit of idea that we are deceiving ourself Level 3: HOLY SHIT, I am deceiving myself and I am aware that I am deceiving myself, I CAN"T STOP deceiving myself because I am attached to it. Can't figure out how to let go yet. Level 4: You will be aware of self-deception that you will stop it before it starts. - Constantly questioning your own questioning process - there is lastish effort by the ego to create comprehensive maps and reality possible - theories incorporate other theories and become ever more complex - sense of isolation that comes in this stage as nobody is able to understand you and your complexity - start seeing the absurdity of map-making and stuff like this - glimpses of consciousness beyond language - a different relationship to knowing is necessary - An acute awareness of ego tricks and mechanisms - Ego functions as the CPU for all the stimuli and central reference point for all identity formation - realize how deeply you get stuck in the ego and how helpless and powerless it is to break out of it - The ego desires ego transcendence but it feels stuck even in it's own desires - The more one tries to break free, the more one gets stuck - Awareness of thoughts and how limited it is - all cognition is realized as constructed and split off from underlying non-dual territory - The concept of ego now becomes questionable - the mind wants to get free of linguistic filters but is stuck in its illusion - Duality is recognized which mutually necessitate each other - deep awareness of how one's unhappiness and judgements create unhappiness and so there is a lot of shedding and letting go of judging - seeks deeper compassion of self and others - has a dynamic and multidimensional understanding of human nature and human interaction - living in the edge of meaning and meaninglessness - awareness of one's own emotions and rational processing patterns but you have to use both - awareness of pseudo-reality created by words - rational explanations seem to be futile and impossible - the language itself is a tool of ego constructing and defending itself - capacity to draw from and appreciate insight from non-rational sources - momentary experiences where the knower and known merge and the personal self disappears - temporary freedom of the ego's constants effort to control - Ego can use this information to tute its own horn - As leaders, people tend to build their own novel organizations and work alone to make the best contribution to humanity that they can - take the role of catalyst and transformers inside organizations - tend to be consultant, mentors, therapist and coaches - open to not knowing - need to look good goes away - need for defensiveness starts to melt away - less need to impress others - depression at this stage is the man's existential aloneness and inability to create lasting meaning through a rational process - capable of perceiving the structure of its own thinking and feeling habits - language is much more authentic, vivid, complex and playful. It's more direct and raw - there is an attempt to let go of conscious structuring of what one says or does - catches himself in self-deception and catches himself and auto-corrects - Recognizing self-deception is an opportunity to grow and change your belief system - Ken Wilber uses two terms when referring to this stage: Vision logical and centaur(half animal half human and both learn to coexist) - questions the need of making order out of chaos - think of reality as an undifferentiated whole and realization of the interconnectedness of all things

@Moksha totally feel ya and love that humble reply... yes the personal impersonal....the wild and exciting unknowable ❤ Thanks for sharing ?

I’ve been perspective jumping. Not everyone is into this type of thing right now. Lots of different contexts of what “death” here represents. 1. There is the context of cheering on the death of a good person. 2. There is the context of personally hating a terrible person that has caused human suffering and cheering on their death as a form of justice. “Good for them. They got what they deserved”. 3. There is the context of cheering on the death of the suffering caused by an abuser. If someone abuses children and dies, there is the cheering for the death of the abuse. The abuse to the children has died. 4. There is also an impersonal form of death. If scientists figure out how to kill the coronavirus, the death of the coronavirus would relieve the suffering of billions of humans in the world. Yet the death of the virus could harm global biodiversity. Humans are cheering scientists on to develop a vaccine to kill the virus. Yet from the perspective of biodiversity in nature, nature may be highly uncomfortable cheering the death of a virus humans call terrible. From a trans-human view, the coronavirus and the death of millions of humans and subsequent re-structuring of human society may be good for biodiversity and nature. We could also draw a distinction between “rooting for” and “cheering for”. . . For example, let’s suppose If Trump survives, he will cause the the death of 2,000 plant/animal species and 200,000 human deaths in the next four years. From this perspective, who to root for seems like a no-brainer. Yet of course this is a simplistic hypothetical and it can get much more nuanced.

These comments are meant to be impersonal and not directed at any one person. This is a rational, logical perspective. This has value and is a partial truth. Yet one cannot see and understand the bigger picture of locked into this perspective. It is like the analogy of the blind men and the elephant. The man feeling the tail thinks the elephant is a rope and the man feeling the leg thinks the elephant is a pillar. Both have a partially true perspective, yet if they stay contracted within that perspective and debate whose part is actually the elephant, they will not be able to expand and gain broader understanding of the elephant. In SD theory, this would be a Tier 1 mindset. A Tier 2 mindset would realize that they are missing something and get curious. The man feeling the tail might think “What a minute, maybe I’m missing something”. Then the mind would get curious and want to explore other parts of the elephant. Yet this would involve letting go of the tail and exploring other parts (yet this does not mean the tail is “wrong” - it is still a part of the elephant). An orange level mind would want to either dissect the tail into smaller parts to understand the elephant or debate that the tail is the elephant. A yellow mind goes off into exploratory mode. Examples of such Tier 2 minds would be Gregory Bateson and Richard Feynman. In this metaphor, we could say that the tail of the elephant is rational reasoning of the situation and the leg of the tail is empathic / experiential understanding. Both are parts of the holistic elephant and both the tail and leg and inter-connected as rational thinking and empathic knowing are inter-connected. Yet a mind immersed in one part will not even be aware of other parts. The first step is to become aware that there are many parts that make up the elephant. Then the mind will create separate categories of parts. The next step is to see that all the categories are inter-connected. Bateson describes this beautifully in the Ecology of Mind documentary.

This is all your own projection onto being. If we substitute the word Love with Being would it make any difference in terms of the actuality of what is being pointed at?. Actually it would because everyone can recognize this being situation that's happening here. From the perspective of the ego.. There must be good and bad.. If you stop seeing bad you will die.. Imagine if you stop seeing death as bad.. Why should you live then?. From the POV of the universe itself its not that ITS ALL GOOD. The universe doesn't know good or bad. There is no such thing as good or bad except inside your skull (thoughts). The universe doesn't reject or accept itself. Again these are your human qualities being projected into impersonal beingness. From the view point of being.. Everything is just what it is. It's not love it's not good its not bad it's not anything . But that's only available when you recognize yourself as being itself. If you recognize yourself as a person which you do.. As a poor little Me that needs to survive in the world.. Then you know love and hate.. Good and bad. From your pov it will never be the case.. As in your living perspective...that all is love(because if all is love then you love death then why should life be preferred from death)? .. And if you do recognize yourself as beingness itself there is no longer anything to say about yourself (love or not love) because you just are the ultimate reality as you are and that's it.

I will follow up quickly to confirm that just this type of psychologically relational aspect is exhibited appropriately in ordinary enlightening BDSM scenes as well, simply because one's adaption to conditioned circumstances is the natural course regardless of situational characteristics. Quoting the last sentence of the commentary: "Preordained" is a relative term alluding to prior illumination of the psychological apparatus of the being that is going to die. Where the the rational function of conscious knowledge is subject to gradual refinement by concentration and insight, one's "prior illumination" is inversely effective to the degree one has dispensed with pattern-consciousness in meeting the demands of everyday ordinary situations. In other words, as one's gradual self-refinement results in less pattern-consciousness arising as psychological impacts (in the face of karmic stimulus), to that degree, conscious knowledge is subsumed as real illumination (objective, impersonal knowledge of accord in reality), which must naturally be "prior" to be an actualized functionality in terms of spiritually adaptive enlightening activity. The preceding paragraph is a long-winded description of psychological (rational) activity and nonpsychological (spiritual) efficacy transforming in seamless accord due to gradual practice entering reality. The reason accord is seamless is because mind is one. Delusion and enlightenment are the same mind. Delusion is all there is to work with in terms of Creation. There is no other mind. There is no other enlightenment. Enlightenment is seeing reality without habitual psychological reference to the person. Self-reifying consciousness sees the same reality, but its perspective is delusional, and therefore karmically bound to the being that sees the person as "having" absolute identity, in terms of individual conscious projections. It's not that individual conscious projection doesn't exist, if that's what the person is habituated to. If a person doesn't know that there is no such person in reality (in terms of absolute nature), karma is the result and delusion is the norm. Enlightening being's function perceiving essence (potential) void of personal identity, obviously isn't the person, whereas the psychological apparatus is the person's conditioned function. Both functions are accessible and naturally balanced without habitual pattern-consciousness in those who have recognized the basic sanity all beings are born with. Self-refinement is the endless gradual path recognizing and actualizing inherent enlightening qualities by virtue of the sane energy people are born with. As such, entry into inconceivable reality is fathomless; mystery upon mystery. ed note: typo; add quote and following three paragraphs

The OP concluded with: The whole premise for this thread is in these lines. The following is a line by line commentary of the seminal text: Presence of independent means and natural urgency guide one’s healthy and effective gratification of intent in the course of situational evolution. The first line seems to me to be clearly self-evident. This is the very picture of sane activity in the course of everyday ordinary intercourse. Serving the integrity of one’s subtle potential underlies the timing and rate of advance and withdrawal in mutual exchanges of personality dynamics. The second line gets a bit deeper in that one's rational function must naturally be preordained in terms of its adherence to the integrity of one's subtle potential. It is, actually, but due to conditioning, this means the individual must become subtly aware of potential, a priori, in order to respond appropriately in terms of seeing situational timing objectively, without bias or inclination, in advancing and withdrawing attention according to relationship dynamics. Serving the integrity of (one's) potential has nothing to do with personal gratification. One doesn't own potential. Potential is not relative to the person. It is one's very situational milieu of being. Yet potential is not beholden to either the creative nor the absolute, as potential is the working essence of their non-differentiation. Gratification of mutual exchanges in terms of personality dynamics, per se, is relative to the situational potential based on reality, not the person. "The person" is relative to self and other, which is properly a variable expression of potential (karmic, if you will), and is therefore not beyond the created aspect. Potential is not created. Potential is the essence of the primal organization before the dichotomy of the two things (duality) before they fall into the creative sphere, yet comprising the the sphere of reality, which is neither creation nor absolute. This introduces the buddhist and taoist terms, Suchness and Complete Reality. The consensual repose of dominance toward the submissive is the device employed by independent means and natural urgency to effect the balance of one’s intent in meeting the measure of power inherent in creative cycles. This line illustrates one's enlightening function inherent in one's created dual nature in terms of relative situational rank. In terms of the person, this is called Sameness within Differentiation. Relative difference is not absolute. In terms of potential, relative difference simply is— it has no intrinsic value outside of conventional modes of karmic activity. Enlightening response operates transcendentally beyond convention (not that anyone might notice). The balance of one's intent is what drives enlightening activity, which is the sane energy you were born with. Just this is impersonal accord with reality. Again, this is not a reference to personal gratification. Consensual repose of dominance toward the submissive is simply the representation of undifferentiated flux, ever-adjusting and spontaneously balancing in pure equipoise. Consensual repose being the device employed by independent means and natural urgency is selflessly adaptive response in mutual accord. The measure of power inherent in creative cycles refers to being able to see reality, that is, potential, which is the essence of creation transcendently inherent in endless karmic cycles of birth and death. So in harmonizing integral mutual situational potential, dominance is expressed in accord with submissive intent by adaptivity to the creative. This line recaps the aspect of one's inherent enlightening function in terms of impersonal subtle spiritual adaption to karmic evolution. This is "meeting creation with potential" without relying on one's personal power. "One's personal power" refers to psychologically reified pattern-consciousness projecting desire, craving, aggression, and in general, a tendency to assume ascendancy over others as a matter of course. Situational dynamics of advance and withdrawal influencing the timing and rates of exchange defining the situation decide the balance of potency and decline throughout the natural cycle of its transformative exigencies. This is "finding out what happened in the end." As per one's selfless adaptivity meeting the creative in terms of its karmic momentum by virtue of advancing illumination in the beginning of yang and withdrawing its potential in the yin convergence, whereby the full expression of each created cycle is allowed to flourish and decline naturally without compulsive behavior (on one's part) influencing outcomes. Otherwise, how would one find out what happened in terms of potential? It is possible by mutual accord in reality that the submissive exacts its release if virtuously exerted dominance absorbs their factors of potential. In transcending endless cycles of yin and yang, unrefined potential is absorbed as a matter of course without effort or coercion. How would one even begin to do so? Doing so is the norm for karmically bound psychological momentum (action in thought, deed and unconscious adherence to creation) by ordinary people's pattern-consciousness. It is by not conceiving self-referencing (relative) adherence to creation that one accords with the real while in the midst of conditioned karmic momentum. The submissive, in this context, is created situationally karmic (conditioned) energy in its naturally responsive accord with real knowledge (knowledge of potential), in which dominance (nonpsychological awareness), is advanced, in terms of gradual practice. As I have said often enough, seeing is itself the transformative agency. Seeing is itself "advancing" the fire in terms of the alchemic operation. Spiritual alchemy is not accomplished in any strict sense of doing. When adepts see potential, they see it as essence. Essence is the nature of karmic energy; not difference. Ordinary people see karma as differentiated energy, which is why ordinary people are subject to birth and death. In seeing karma as essence, one does not go along with creation and transcends its rounds of birth and death. Ordinary people see energy, whereas alchemists see potential. Seeing potential "frees" it from its situational karmic matrix, in that enlightening beings don't do anything with potential— much less karmic energy. This goes back to the beginning of this section, where "one's (refined) rational function (conscious knowledge) must naturally be preordained in terms of its adherence to the integrity of one's subtle potential" (real knowledge). ed note: add line below quoted text; typo 3rd paragraph; radically change last paragraph

No "one" exists. Ultimate reality is indescribable impersonal ever-unknown ever-known. Ever-changing ever-present . all dualities must collapse. You me. Alone together. It isn't anything you think it is.. It just is. . The best word to describe it is nothing . Because it confuses the fuck out of your mind. You don't know what to do with nothing. You don't know what it means. And that's precisely what Is needed. Complete not knowing. Absolutely not knowing. And when you can't not know more because you are absolutely not knowing.. Then you can't go further.. All the sudden the circle is complete. You end up with actual knowledge. Of your being. Knowledge dissolving into being. Into nothing . The mind is trying to grasp.. The mind is always missing the whole fucking "point".

Can we make desire harmonious by being considerate and empathetic towards others and ourselves? No, not at the personal stage which has a too low level of complexity to achieve that. To put it more simply, at the personal stage we lack the capability to function in harmony with the whole of society and nature. What we can do at the personal stage is to recognize the limitation of personal desire and be open to the possibility that impersonal development will result in harmonious desire. And even if we don't yet know how that works, by questioning desire at the personal stage, as done in Buddhism, there is an opening up of being receptive to allowing conflict-ridden desire to be replaced by harmonious desire.

? Getting there means getting here. But i get you. Wink wink, we're going to get there some day! I trust the Universe. Everything will happen as it must. All I can do is be here. I'm not enlightened. The real part of reality is formless. Forms are illusory, the one writing t you is a form which acknowledges publicly it's illusory nature. Only God, the impersonal self, is real. I cannot say anything more true.

It helps to be a well adjusted person in order to advance up the spiral dynamics stages. If you are wired to be an introvert that doesn't want to socialize and even has an aversion towards people or negative feelings towards them, that comes from childhood, so "faking" it in this manner will wire your own brain to crave socializing more, and thus over time can make you a happier, more well adjusted person. Learning to socialize is like learning any new skill... it takes time and repetition to wire it into your subconscious mind and make it come natural to you. I always think of that line from the movie "Avatar" when I want to learn a new skill, where he talks about "it's like field stripping a weapon, repetition." A person must get over their negativity towards people if they want to grow, period. There's no quick fix around that. That phrase "fake it until you make it" has some merit. You don't necessarily have to be an extrovert, but if you have any hangup towards people whatsoever it must be addressed in some manner. The concept of "being yourself" ... well personality is actually a very impersonal aspect of one's being... I prefer to think of it as something I can hack and change to suit my goals....

It's just a story. The documentary brilliantly tells it for the purpose of entertainment. It was a reaction of personalities and circumstances with that conservative town in Oregon, but ultimately as impersonal and random as the formation of the universe itself. Both the town, the US government officials, Osho and Sheela and the people the community attracted were all trying to heal themselves, mutually attracting and reacting into the characters they played at the time of it, among all those crazy circumstances. The problem with spiritual communities is that they often start with the assumption that there are spiritual people and not spiritual people.

This thread, or this single post, as most of my topics remain, is a little different than others in that it has an inordinate number of cultural and technical references relying heavily and almost exclusively on the readers' familiarity with the Chinese buddhist lexicon throughout a prolonged period of various cultural shifts taking place in its long history between A.D. 500 and the 1800s. Of course, there are ancient taoist references to contend with as well. My apologies. I wrote this on four petite serviettes the other day at my café in town… there was one left. Five Serviettes Simply awakening is the selfless awakening to buddha-mind beyond the grasping mentality. It is knowledge of non-being’s open awareness constituting impersonal nonoriginated unification and clarification of the singular intent before the first thought. There are people who just fall into this without any intention of doing so as a result of a long-nurtured countenance of open sincerity. "Falling into this" is harmony with the Constant, after which It is then possible to return and share oneself fully. In the mean-time, they see their own unified mind as the fulfillment of its own desire. Since it is not oneself, not other~ unified mind being the fulfillment of its own desire is the meaning of taking the forward step with open hands meeting situations as arrow-points meet, with no remainder. Unity of primally open “intellect” is the properly incipient nature of one’s perpetually fulfilled desire. “Intellect” is the capacity for fulfillment where there is nothing to fill~ just openness. The attainment is one’s penetrating reversion as the Source. The application of the term “intellect” is the substance of Mind’s open serene clear light. Mind’s function is its intent: ever sensitive and effective. Sincere intent is Mind’s expression of oneself’s impersonal unity functioning through selfless desire passing through situations without lingering, without initiating. The expression of the function is in terms of harmony— selfless harmony~ adapting impersonally and effectively to situations without sticking to appearances; neither seeking praise nor avoiding censure. Affinity is the impersonal knowledge of harmony in terms of the Constant. It is not that there is anything to know… one's affinity is just the nature of the Constant, which is the application of an angelic harmony that can kill a buddha when it sees a buddha. It cuts right through in an instant with a precision that is equal to its appropriateness in terms of one’s inconceivable matching of potential to conditions which has never admitted one’s own strength. Not admitting one’s own strength that can kill a buddha is the Celestial in action. Its power is due to the clarity of the Constant being the nature of Mind. In one’s own gradual refinement, clarity being the nature of mind, it follows that its clarification is the effective harmony of the heaven and earth of the immaterial body of awareness whose heart is the Center. The Constant is the nature of this Center of open awareness being Mind mastering energy. This is not a matter of energy-work. It is not even energy being other than Mind. It is a description of the mystical source of the impulse of one’s own life, immaterial beyond location. Mind mastering energy being the Center having no location is the real totality of unity. Though it has no location, it is not apart from your pointed nose. There it is! Yet how could it be or have a place? Just this primordial Space with no inside or outside is not beyond this instant occasion. Ignorance of the Constant is energy mastering mind; when conditioned yang peaks, it wanes, and evolution inexorably goes along with a cycle of creation, which is bound to birth and death. The 55th chapter of the Tao te Ching concludes: