What is Actuality ? (Leo new vid)

[Sockrattes]

"Don't get the wrong idea. I don't mean that you're gonna looking at this hand and all of the sudden it will turn into a tentacle. That's not what i mean."

 

Serious question: Why can't you do this?

[Nahm]

@Mikael89 If I am not you, you’re lost in the falsity of identification with the body / brain. You have no direct experience that anyone else exists, or that anyone else is thinking. These are all assumptions, and they are false. 

This attachment to thinking / falsity explains your experience or lack of, with chakras. Do you see the connection? The, two sides of the same coin?

[Shin]

52 minutes ago, Sockrattes said:

"Don't get the wrong idea. I don't mean that you're gonna looking at this hand and all of the sudden it will turn into a tentacle. That's not what i mean."

 

Serious question: Why can't you do this?

It would increase my "How to make a girl squirt skill " by SOOOOOOO much.

Please Leo let me do that ?

[Sockrattes]

@Shin

I'm not here to judge, but i have to tell you, that this forum is becoming a egoistic circlejerk. Every day a bit more. It is just sad to witness.

Have you considered, that your enlightenment experience might be just a psychological phenomena, which resulted from those various concepts, you've already had in you mind? Ask yourself. Is it possible that all of these various concepts you had, just connected reasonably together, when you had your "enlightenment"? It is proven that meditation and contemplation have this effect. Quote: "Neuronal plasticity refers to the ability of synapses, nerve cells or entire brain areas to change in their anatomy and function depending on use in order to optimise ongoing processes."

The more i think about it, the more it makes sense to me: The pantheistic worldview, Leo is talking about in his new video, isn't something new. It always was a concept, in epistemology (e.g. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel) and mysticism (e.g. Giordano Bruno). But non-dual teachings in Hinduism or at least those written in the Upanishads were fighting about wether reality is monotheistic, pantheistic or even panentheistic. They aren't sure about that. Do you claim to know what is real? Buddha said, there is no god. Or at least no personal god. Various Advaita Vedanta teachers (e.g.Frithjof Schuon) are saying, there is a personal god. Do you have the definite answer to that question?

Is it possible, that enlightenment does have different stages and lines to it?

Just keep in mind: When you were really fully enlightened, you were basically the one true god, who is immanent and transcendent at the same time. You could transform your hand into a tentacle whenever you want.

So i would like to ask you: Why don't you do that?

Having an insight to something and actually making use of that knowledge are two entirely different thinks. And if those enlightened people around here would stay humble from time to time, we could sort that out.

[Mirror of Confusion]

What about how there are nuances between existence and non-existence (or thoughts that navigate the perception from non existence to existence)?

For example:

1. My hand on the one side is 100% real and existent

2. Some kind of middleman exists in my head (pool of concepts and believes) that moves the perception to the back of the hand (thought/concept navigates me to 100% existence)

3. And then there are thoughts that don't lead the perception to real things (like: I think there is a ghost in my closet - I have a look and there is no ghost in it -> navigating to 0% existence)

So the different nuances would be:  Front hand > back hand > ghost in the closet

 

[Shin]

26 minutes ago, Sockrattes said:

@Shin

I'm not here to judge, but i have to tell you, that this forum is becoming a egoistic circlejerk. Every day a bit more. It is just sad to witness.

Have you considered, that your enlightenment experience might be just a psychological phenomena, which resulted from those various concepts, you've already had in you mind? Ask yourself. Is it possible that all of these various concepts you had, just connected reasonably together, when you had your "enlightenment"? It is proven that meditation and contemplation have this effect. Quote: "Neuronal plasticity refers to the ability of synapses, nerve cells or entire brain areas to change in their anatomy and function depending on use in order to optimise ongoing processes."

The more i think about it, the more it makes sense to me: The pantheistic worldview, Leo is talking about in his new video, isn't something new. It always was a concept, in epistemology (e.g. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel) and mysticism (e.g. Giordano Bruno). But non-dual teachings in Hinduism or at least those written in the Upanishads were fighting about wether reality is monotheistic, pantheistic or even panentheistic. They aren't sure about that. Do you claim to know what is real? Buddha said, there is no god. Or at least no personal god. Various Advaita Vedanta teachers (e.g.Frithjof Schuon) are saying, there is a personal god. Do you have the definite answer to that question?

Is it possible, that enlightenment does have different stages and lines to it?

Just keep in mind: When you were really fully enlightened, you were basically the one true god, who is immanent and transcendent at the same time. You could transform your hand into a tentacle whenever you want.

So i would like to ask you: Why don't you do that?

Having an insight to something and actually making use of that knowledge are two entirely different thinks. And if those enlightened people around here would stay humble from time to time, we could sort that out.

What is your point ?

I genuinely don't get it.

[Sockrattes]

@Shin You are judging others, even if you don't know them:

"I hope the mental masturbators in here understood this episode ?

Otherwise you're so fucked ?"

 

You claim to have figured everything out. And you are looking down on other people.

So why should i take seriously what you are saying? Why should i take something seriously, what you are obviously supporting (Leos Video)?

 

I'm not saying you are wrong. I don't know that. I'm just trying to check, if there is truth in anything you are saying. So if you could answer those questions i have asked in my last post, you could raise you credibility.

[Shin]

22 minutes ago, Sockrattes said:

@Shin You are judging others, even if you don't know them:

"I hope the mental masturbators in here understood this episode ?

Otherwise you're so fucked ?"

 

You claim to have figured everything out. And you are looking down on other people.

So why should i take seriously what you are saying? Why should i take something seriously, what you are obviously supporting (Leos Video)?

 

I'm not saying you are wrong. I don't know that. I'm just trying to check, if there is truth in anything you are saying. So if you could answer those questions i have asked in my last post, you could raise you credibility.

 

I didn't figure everything out, I never claimed to be enlightened.

 

I'm not looking down on everyone, It's quite the opposite

The reason I sound like an asshole, is actually because I know that it's working for some people (better than being all nice and proper imo), and also because it feels genuine.

I can see the potential in those people, and that is why I act like a douche, because I love them.

 

It's your choice to be skeptical, and if you aren't and just don't like me, that is fine too, I don't post here to be liked, otherwise I would speak differently don't you think ? 

I can't tell you if there is any truth in what I'm saying, because I can only talk about my experience and the one off the people I know off, 

But since I still want to do something, I'm not gonna say something else that what I see and experience as a valid and effective way to progress in this.

 

[Sockrattes]

@Shin Fair enough. Thank you. I've obviously misinterpreted your comments a bit. Sorry for that. 

 

@all:

My question is still unanswered: Why no tentacle-hands at will?

It would be cool, if someone tried to answer this.^^

[Shin]

7 minutes ago, Sockrattes said:

@Shin Fair enough. Thank you. I've obviously misinterpreted your comments a bit. Sorry for that. 

 

@all:

My question is still unanswered: Why no tentacle-hands at will?

It would be cool, if someone tried to answer this.^^

No biggi.

I'm used to being seen as an heartless arrogant asshole by now, but for what I care ... ?

[Mirror of Confusion]

@Sockrattes I recently read an article about a guy who shared his insights after 4300 hours of meditation and one paragraph stuck with me:

"The only thing we can control is our attention

We can’t control the external circumstances of the world. We can’t control our bodies. We can’t control our thoughts. We can’t control our emotions. Everything that happens to us, and that we do, is the result of our unconscious mind reacting, and to circumstances arising in order to invoke reactions from our unconscious mind. The only thing we have control over is where we place our attention. This is because the only thing that really exists is our attention, and it’s what we are. By directing our attention to the core of our delusion, we can use it to untie the knots of delusion which bind us, and free ourselves from this self-imposed prison of suffering."

https://medium.com/gethealthy/what-4-300-hours-of-meditation-has-taught-me-51ad3440149e

[Nahm]

1 hour ago, Mikael89 said:

I do have direct experience that other people exists.

I have strong indirect experience of that other people are thinking, it seems like they are. But yes there is a small possibility that other people are philosophical zombies, but I think it's more likely that they are not philosophical zombies.

I should be more specific, I am not suggesting you are the real person and other people are zombies. I am saying the interpretation of what you’re seeing, as separate objects, people, etc, is in actuality, you. There is only Being, the role of the brain is delusion, or, thinking & attaching, which leads to a concept of “I am this person” “that is that person”. With self inquiry, investigation, thought is revealed to be false in it’s entirety (useful in ways), and everything - persona, personality, memories, “separate entities”, etc - is revealed to be groundless, nondual, love, intelligence, these are facets of The Infinite Being.

So, if I was to hold a belief that I will be happy when I have someone else, to love and be loved, I would be mistaking love & happiness for a product of a causation and or relationship , and missing the love & happiness are my true nature.

Or more simply, if I say, I’ll be happy when I meet someone - then I just added a contingency, a condition, and because I believe it, I won’t be happy until I meet someone. But without the condition, and with self inquiry, I could discover that love is real, and I am that. 

[Nahm]

1 hour ago, Sockrattes said:

Just keep in mind: When you were really fully enlightened, you were basically the one true god, who is immanent and transcendent at the same time. You could transform your hand into a tentacle whenever you want.

So i would like to ask you: Why don't you do that?

You don’t remember, and you haven’t remembered yet, and so you think there is a hand in infinite consciousness. 

Write a story, in which there is a character, a person, in a world, which is governed by physics, and is so convincing, the person assumes it’s reality, and then imagine the story happening from the view of the person. Then imagine one of the things the person does, because the person believes it is the person (not knowing it is the author and the story which is being imagined) is say that if The person realized it is not the person, the person could turn his hand into a tentacle. The falsity is that the person still believes it is the person, and that it is real, and that the hand is real, and that God is other than the person.

[Sockrattes]

@Shin Not all heroes wear capes.^^

 

@Nahm Thanks.

I recently came up with this author-character-analogy myself. But after a few days, i've realised, how i've constructed this concept without even knowing it. So at this point i'm not sure anymore if it's was an insight or a concept.

And there is this whole question about determinism and free will, which puts some extra weight onto that topic. Sometime it feels like, i have free will, and at other times, i can literally watch myself, walking and talking, without doing anything myself. Like i am sitting in a theatre or something. But i only get to that point, when i meditate or smoke weed. So... the fundamental question here is: Am i even free to decide, if i want to meditate to get this theatre-experience, or is this determined as well?

Is there something in between determinism and free will? Is reality a mixture of both?

[Nahm]

@Sockrattes

If you do anything “unconsciously” that is still you doing it. If you do something “consciously”, that is still you doing it. There is no second being or thing which you could impose free will upon, it is literally all you, so free will is a thought, which is rooted in not knowing there is only you. Determinism is the same. A poetic way to express this is, you are beating your heart, dividing cells, etc, so there can be this dream, this story, this experience. Imagine how lame and taxing it would be, to have this life experience, while voluntarily beating your heart, breathing, dividing cells, etc. That these things are being done, and “you are not doing them”, is precisely the evidence that you are. Try to find the line which separates you which types words, and you which beats the heart. There is no such line. This is the nature of “illusion”.  99.99999% of what is taking place in the body, “you” are not conscious of, “you” are not “doing”. We ignore that, and instead look at the .000001% (choosing) and believe we are a separate, choosing, entity. This is the nature of a probabilistic dream. 

But when we stop ignoring, when we start inquiry - we start “connecting” (there was never a disconnection) with the Infinite Love, and Infinite Intelligence we truly are. That “other” 99.99999% of you is always there, unfathomably patient. 

Look at your finger. There it is. Right there. All the proof you could need. 

Evolution, your birth, your parents, the sun, the earth, the moon, outer space, cells, atoms, etc - the greatest illusion. 

All just so you could be “you”. 

If that’s not love, nothing is. 

[Shin]

 

It's time !!!

 

 

Edited October 7, 2018 by Shin

[Shin]

15 minutes ago, TylerJ said:

Something that comes up for me is. 

When Leo says to think of my parents when they aren’t in the room, and then says to realize that it is a concept and imagination. What is that “concept and imagination” ? Wouldn’t that just be more actuality? Aren’t those thoughts just as much truth as anything else since they aren’t coming from anywhere?

or am I just doing mental masterbation? But then what is that..

What actually exist for you is what you can perceive right now, what your mind is imagining is pure fiction.

Your thoughts are very real, they just don't represent what they try to symbolize.

It is only a concept of the real thing, but as long as the real thing isn't experienced RIGHT NOW, it doesn't exist in reality.

 

It's really easy, are your mom and dad there ?

No.

Where do they exist then ?

In your mind.

Does the thoughts of your parents are your parents ?

No.

 

They exist when they appear in your life, otherwise they don't, and this is quite litteral, I'm not saying they are just far away.

Edited October 7, 2018 by Shin

[RichardY]

June 17, 1800 (on observing prisoners of war who recognized him)
Many began to shout, with apparent enthusiasm: "Vive Bonaparte!"

What a thing is imagination! Here are men who don't know me, who have never seen me, but who only knew of me, and they are moved by my presence, they would do anything for me! And this same incident arises in all centuries and in all countries! Such is fanaticism! Yes, imagination rules the world. The defect of our modern institutions is that they do not speak to the imagination. By that alone can man be governed; without it he is but a brute. 

[Flammable]

@TylerJ There is a distinction between the content and the actuality of the thought - the content might be your parents, but the actuality might just be a tingling sensation in your stomach and a mental image of them. Thus, the content is not really there [your parents are not in the room], however, that tingling sensation and mental image are what is actually there [as you can directly experience them] - the actuality of the thought. 

Edited October 7, 2018 by Flammable

[Sockrattes]

@Nahm

Well Dude... that was beautiful. Thank you.

 

But what does "inquiry" even mean. Due to the lack of my english skills, i can't fully grasp, what you guys are specifically talking about when you use that term. My translators aren't very helpful.