Leo's Teachings Sometimes Gets Me In Trouble

[Princess Arabia]

7 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

Were they all good, or bad in that tribe? What does it mean to be good? and bad? Where is the difference?

This topic is being misconstrued. No one is speaking about what's good or bad, and if the actions of people are good or bad. What you described is obviously atrocious, but that's not what the message is about. Watch the video in question and you will see what the post is pointing to.

This is why I think Leo is very brave and courageous in putting himself out there with radical topics like these where his is vulnerable to being misunderstood and people misunderstanding the messages he tries to convey.

What you've written here, and every thing else under the sun that humans commit unto each other still doesn't stray away from the message that their intentions were still coming from a place where they thought they were doing good but it's not the type of good that we're used to in the description of the word. Don't for

 once think I'm condoning any of these heinous actions but delving into the psychology of why. 

 

Edited October 14 by Princess Arabia

[Princess Arabia]

1 hour ago, Rigel said:

I have completely stopped mentioning Leo to anyone over time

This is not about mentioning Leo. It's about having a conversation that led to a topic on a video he made and was trying to use it as a reference. If I knew of another video to reference, i would have done the same with that video. How many videos are there on this topic on yt that one can just reference to off the top of your head.

[Princess Arabia]

The heading of the post is a bit misleading as this is not about me spreading Leo's teachings and then having people disagreeing. It's about a conversation that led to a topic that Leo did a video about and could have been used as an explanation, if understood correctly, as to the point i was making in the discussion. Leo is the only person I've been exposed to that has spoken about this topic in such detail and was only using his teaching/video/explanation as a reference point. A POINT THAT I ALSO AGREE WITH because I also can see the depth of what the message was about.

This thread is also an example how one can get misunderstood and the details get misconstrued. If you read the post and understood it properly for what it was saying and not what you thought was the case, you would have realized that this isn't about the teachings of Leo but about a conversation I had and used a teaching from Leo's perspective to get my point across. Like using an example of what you're trying to say.

This wasn't about you are God and it's all an illusion and you're imagining everything and you will never die. It was a deep conversation but about normal affairs of the world that turned to dictators and how they were bad people and I was trying to show how everyone is actually acting from good intentions; and i found myself having to explain that away  but it wasn't well received. Wasn't about spreading Leo's teachings and saying I've stopped spreading Leo's teachings a long time ago isn't what this is about. Sometimes why I write such lengthy posts is so I can make myself clear by sticking in the details i find necessary to accomplish that, but people still read and interpret however they feel and misses the whole point anyway.

[Princess Arabia]

https://chatgpt.com/share/670d6194-db74-8012-a4f7-de8129510d47

This is what Leo AI bot had to say in summary about everyone acts from good intentions.

Edited October 14 by Princess Arabia

[Breakingthewall]

51 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

What you described is obviously atrocious

From their perspective was good, because for the gene is good . For them it strengthens the energy of the tribe, always in danger of death, and weakens the energy of the adversaries. For the gene, all others are enemies, the strong live, the weak die, that is the only law. Now the gene does not have that priority since its path is not tribal struggle, so what seemed good before is now horrible.

[Dabidoe]

Certain kinds of conversations just aren't very effective. Talking about "the underlying nature of human psyche" generally falls on deaf ears.

[Princess Arabia]

4 minutes ago, Dabidoe said:

Certain kinds of conversations just aren't very effective. Talking about "the underlying nature of human psyche" generally falls on deaf ears.

Yes, I touched on it briefly and they even asked me to explain my stance, but they just couldn't see it. I found myself having to keep saying I'm not condoning atrocious behavior and just turned the topic around. Money, power and greed is a surface level understanding on the reasons why dictators act the way they do. Most people are influenced by these things on different levels but we have to go deeper to understand why. 

[LoseYourvelf]

I be staring at my brother deep in his soul saying "It's only you" .... "Mate..." (when his attention drifts) "It's only you", "you're all that exists" wide eyed staring him out

[Emerald]

The way I tend to express this insight is more like "Everyone has positive intentions towards what they consider as part of themselves."

So, if a person has a very contracted sense of self where they see themselves as different from others, they can do all sorts of negative things to the "other" out of a positive intention to serve themselves, their loved ones, the "good" people, or whatever group they identify with.

But upon the awakening to the senes of oneness that undergirds all things, there is a genuine good will towards all because there is no longer an illusion of the other. There is just a recognition of a singularity that has pure positive intention and unconditional love for itself.

And it is this same unitive unconditional love that is at play underneath every vile act that's done to serve self by sacrificing the other. It is only when we're caught in the illusion that there is anything other than self, that we can cause this kind of harm.

So, we could say that a serial killer has positive intentions because it makes them temporarily feel good/better when they kill and murder the "other".

But it is only with the illusion of fragmentation of self and other that someone can feel better by harming the other. And if there was a greater awareness of that sense of oneness, no one could harm another without the sense of harming self.

The same thing holds true for when we repress away parts of ourselves. We resist and fragment off parts of ourselves that we can't accept, and even these parts of ourselves become the "other" despite being internal to our mind-body complex.

And in similar ways, both the conscious personality can do harmful things to this repressed part to serve itself AND the repressed part can do harmful things to the conscious personality to serve itself.

And similarly to how it is in external situations, it is only in the illusion of separation and "otherness" that we can cause harm to ourselves.

 

[FlyingLotus]

@Princess Arabia Leo actually made a follow up video that addresses a lot of this stuff.  I think his follow up video is better than the original.  

https://www.actualized.org/insights/extra-insights-about-good-intentions

 

I also made a summary of it years ago that might interest you:

 

Edited October 14 by FlyingLotus

[bambi]

2 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

https://chatgpt.com/share/670d6194-db74-8012-a4f7-de8129510d47

This is what Leo AI bot had to say in summary about everyone acts from good intentions.

I dont mean to be rude, but you aren't comprehending things properly. That chatbot is basically confused

I outlined it conclusively in my previous posts.

What I think you and leo are simply trying to say is 'Everyone acts out of selfish intentions' or 'selfishlessly rationaionalised intentions'

I finished your conversation with gpt-4 for you. Let me know if something still isnt clear

https://chatgpt.com/share/670d85e6-2908-800a-871f-439e6ce2a072

Edited October 14 by bambi

[Princess Arabia]

21 minutes ago, FlyingLotus said:

@Princess Arabia Leo actually made a follow up video that addresses a lot of this stuff.  I think his follow up video is better than the original.  

https://www.actualized.org/insights/extra-insights-about-good-intentions

 

I also made a summary of it years ago that might interest you:

 

Ok thank you, I'll check it out.

[Princess Arabia]

28 minutes ago, Emerald said:

The way I tend to express this insight is more like "Everyone has positive intentions towards what they consider as part of themselves."

So, if a person has a very contracted sense of self where they see themselves as different from others, they can do all sorts of negative things to the "other" out of a positive intention to serve themselves, their loved ones, the "good" people, or whatever group they identify with.

But upon the awakening to the senes of oneness that undergirds all things, there is a genuine good will towards all because there is no longer an illusion of the other. There is just a recognition of a singularity that has pure positive intention and unconditional love for itself.

And it is this same unitive unconditional love that is at play underneath every vile act that's done to serve self by sacrificing the other. It is only when we're caught in the illusion that there is anything other than self, that we can cause this kind of harm.

So, we could say that a serial killer has positive intentions because it makes them temporarily feel good/better when they kill and murder the "other".

But it is only with the illusion of fragmentation of self and other that someone can feel better by harming the other. And if there was a greater awareness of that sense of oneness, no one could harm another without the sense of harming self.

The same thing holds true for when we repress away parts of ourselves. We resist and fragment off parts of ourselves that we can't accept, and even these parts of ourselves become the "other" despite being internal to our mind-body complex.

And in similar ways, both the conscious personality can do harmful things to this repressed part to serve itself AND the repressed part can do harmful things to the conscious personality to serve itself.

And similarly to how it is in external situations, it is only in the illusion of separation and "otherness" that we can cause harm to ourselves.

 

Beautifully said, thank you.

[Princess Arabia]

44 minutes ago, bambi said:

I dont mean to be rude, but you aren't comprehending things properly. That chatbot is basically confused

I outlined it conclusively in my previous posts.

What I think you and leo are simply trying to say is 'Everyone acts out of selfish intentions' or 'selfishlessly rationaionalised intentions'

I finished your conversation with gpt-4 for you. Let me know if something still isnt clear

https://chatgpt.com/share/670d85e6-2908-800a-871f-439e6ce2a072

Forget about the AI Leo bot I shared. I read your conversation with gpt-4. It's still missing the point. People are acting from selfish intentions is still on the surface level and trying to explain away why people do what they do. The bigger message here is that God or whatever you call it, is inherently good (not selfish) and is acting through EVERYONE. It just it manifests in different ways and appears to the limited relative mind as bad but nothing bad can come from something that's inherently good without it being "filtered" in some way and can only be perceived by a limited perception as bad. 

[Breakingthewall]

56 minutes ago, Emerald said:

The way I tend to express this insight is more like "Everyone has positive intentions towards what they consider as part of themselves

There is people self destructive who hates themselves. You could say that they are "sick", that they shouldn't be like that, but the fact is that they exist. 

[Breakingthewall]

2 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

The bigger message here is that God or whatever you call it, is inherently good (not selfish)

Why no selfish is good? Is a stone good? Is not selfish, but good? In what sense?

[Princess Arabia]

7 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

There is people self destructive who hates themselves

This is obvious, but surface level thinking. Hate can only come from loving something else and people have different sides to themselves. Ever stop to think a part of someone is hating another part and is using the part they love to destroy the part they hate.

What part of a person is it that hates themselves. If that person sees themselves as whole, there would be nothing outside of that whole to hate. So saying someone hates themselves you have automatically divided that person into 'here I am, but there's a part of me that hate the other part". This is what she was trying to point to.

Edited October 14 by Princess Arabia

[Breakingthewall]

1 minute ago, Princess Arabia said:

here I am, but there's a part of me that hate the other part". This is what she was trying to point to.

Also could be said that this person is just hate. Absence of love, a hole of negativity. Then, commit suicide because that. There are millions. It's a dark reality. 

[bambi]

5 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

Forget about the AI Leo bot I shared. I read your conversation with gpt-4. It's still missing the point. People are acting from selfish intentions is still on the surface level and trying to explain away why people do what they do. The bigger message here is that God or whatever you call it, is inherently good (not selfish) and is acting through EVERYONE. It just it manifests in different ways and appears to the limited relative mind as bad but nothing bad can come from something that's inherently good without it being "filtered" in some way and can only be perceived by a limited perception as bad. 

I am missing no point, I can assure you that. Send me your gpt-4 chat and Ill clear it up quickly for you.

In regards to your message, that everything is God, or conciousness, or that everything is an act of God, act of Conciousness or an act of Love, doesnt address remotely the proclamation 'everyone always acts out of good intentions'.

What you are doing is trying to make a basic tautological proposiion: A=A, which is obvious and self-evident, but says absolutely nothing meaninful or insightful about anything.

Its akin to saying rape is an act of the universe, sure, everythign is an act of the universe, so whether thats rape, pooping or eating ice cream is meaningless statement

[Princess Arabia]

5 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Why no selfish is good? Is a stone good? Is not selfish, but good? In what sense?

How can God be selfish when it's formless. We are playing word semantics here. Good in this sense just means it cannot be bad if it's unlimited and infinite. Selfish can only be where there is form. Please don't ask me if a stone is good. A stone is not sentient, it doesn't have feelings.