The Illusion Of Love

[Matthew Lamot]

2 hours ago, Wormon Blatburm said:

@Matthew Lamot

"Free from the person"? How is any of this practical? Are you saying freedom is leaving the body and flying away into some other dimension?

And lol, again, you have no experience of what you are talking about. There is no sacred teaching or sacred teacher, that's to get the whole thing confused.

Your experiences actually mean very little.  An experience of true nirvikalpa Samadhi (the end of the world) and contemplation on the actual real documented scriptures that have been in print for the last 3000 years and cristalized in the 8th century and a proper understanding of self inquiry is what will bring full relaization.  /not your half baked experience of non duality that you now make relative beliefs out of. 

You seem like you want to defend your views rather than learn something, this says to me that you are that arrogant you wont even look at new information presented to you.  That is the first hurdle you must get over, if you are to ever make this real.

[Matthew Lamot]

Consciousness gives rise to matter. 

This is the most important teaching.

You are speaking of realms of physicality, which says to me and any other educated person that you have not experienced anything.

The second teaching is that you are not your thoughts and experiences.  That much is verifiable in your experience right now, always.

Freedom from the person is knowing who you are,you are not physical matter and you are not mind.  But physical matter and mind exist because you experience it. Saying things don't exist is denial. 

 

[FindingPeace]

5 hours ago, electroBeam said:

what about if one of those reasons are to develop a connection with someone to sequentially care for them? The reason why you want to enter a relationship is to learn about another individual, develop a better understanding about them, and then to help and care for them, to gain fulfillment from helping someone you share similarities with, and know deeply?

This is an ideal and a rarity, But I support this idea. However, do most people enter relationships with these motives in mind?

5 hours ago, electroBeam said:

But you make relationships sound like business deals, there aren't quite business deals,

This is more often the case though. The reality for most relationships. Although it gets disguised by the veneer of romantic 'love' (attachment and attraction) on top.

I'm only appearing cynical because the reality is cynical. If relationships were as you described above then people wouldn't be having so many of them, getting through so many partners, going through endless divorces etc. Just take a look around. Every time you see a couple arguing about something listen carefully to the argument - hear the selfish 'I'm not getting from you and you're not giving to me' talk. The 'I wants and you're not doings'. The 'my way not your way'. It's always there in one form or another.

Edit to add: just to clarify, I'm not condemming 'selfishness'. It is not a simple black-and-white thing and it is also inherent in being a living being. It is fundamentally unavoidable, a fact of life. Something to be accepted.

Edited August 11, 2016 by FindingPeace

[Matthew Lamot]

13 minutes ago, Wormon Blatburm said:

You don't have a clue of what those experiences are, you take them too literally, your knowledge of scripture doesn't make you enlightened, too much knowledge makes you dogmatic when it comes to enlightenment.

Also if you haven't noticed, we take a pragmatic approach to enlightenment, no one here is interested in your belief that a guru had supernatural powers. 

Having experiences of enlightenment myself, that makes me more entitled to talk about the subjet, then someone who has nothing, just blindly believing and misinterpreting teachings from a book. 

 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

you seem very certain. judged, tied and hung.  I guess my voice has been silenced forever by you.

Are you sure "im" the dogmatic one?

[Matthew Lamot]

Is this a cult?

[Matthew Lamot]

7 minutes ago, Wormon Blatburm said:

@Matthew Lamot This is going to my last reply to you. Your response suggests that you don't care about finding what's true or rational, or coming to a compromise with your beliefs, rather you are in a hurry to shove your own worldview down other people's throat , cling to it as "the real teaching" , and shove it down other people's throats. See how our conversation got off topic real quickly? From me sharing my views on the relationship between love and enlightenment to you arguing about who is more enlightened, I'm not here to defend whether or not I am enlightened, the truth is that there is probably more to it than my own personal experience, but I call out bullshit when I see it, and you are just not qualified to speak of enlightenment without any experience of it, sorry. The truth is that direct experience will tell you that your beliefs are meaningless, too much beliefs make you dogmatic, and farther and farther away from enlightenment.

OK.

[Matthew Lamot]

Beliefs are fine.  Advaita means I am the Self, this means I don't have to change the person or his beliefs.  His beliefs are needed in conventional relative existence.  That's enlightenment 

I'm not sure where you get your ideas from, but I have heard them before

What it looks like you are trying to do is make the Self enter the stream of time, bring an enlightened Self into this realm for you to live in this realm with.  That the only explanation I can offer for your POV.

The Self never enters into this reality, this is the most simpleist thing you can get, the rest of it about dogma and no beliefs is just a...dogmatic belief? lol

Who told you this?  Leo?  

[Matthew Lamot]

Just now, Wormon Blatburm said:

I said that there are no enlightened people, that's exactly what I'm talking about. The self is outside of time. An Enlightened person does not exist, that assumes there is an ego to be enlightened. The body and mind organism can be improved by the enlightenment, but I wouldn't say that a person can be enlightened, that implies that an ego can be improved.

I thought you were not going to reply?

Yes, there is enlightened people.  All people are the Self, there is only one Self, and its has always been enlightened.  But that's not the end of the matter, the fact is that relative existence is real, and in relative existence you have Self Realized people and you have people bound by Maya.

I'm not sure why its so difficult for you to grasp, this will probably enlighten you if you contemplated this correct teaching.  But nothing is getting through to you. Why is that? Because you made a belief about being non dogmatic and damn it you are going to stick to that belief no matter what? LOl

Im not even talking about fucking Ramana and his superpowers.  If you actually read my contributions I'm saying that there is a specific path, and that the pathless path (Adviata Vedanta) is it.

Not s fucking conglomoration of fcking Bhuddhim and fucking Mooji blitzed into one fucking mashed potato fucking soup.

Calm down and listen, because you might learn a lot from me.  Or maybe you wont.  But it doesnt matter, because these teachings are for serious students and not Sangha hoppers who need their Sunday morning Mooji every week and mistake that expererience with liberation.  Liberation is not an experience, it is knowledge.

 

[Matthew Lamot]

8 minutes ago, Wormon Blatburm said:

I'm officially done.

In Advaita they say "good riddance"

[Orange]

25 minutes ago, Matthew Lamot said:

 

Not s fucking conglomoration of fcking Bhuddhim and fucking Mooji blitzed into one fucking mashed potato fucking soup.

[Matthew Lamot]

11 minutes ago, Wormon Blatburm said:

Yes it is, your worldview has no substance, you were just parroting beliefs, someone had to point that out here so people don't get confused.

I'm sure the guru that you got all of this from would tell you to throw all your beliefs in the trash bin.

Worm...

Can you actually read?

[egoeimai]

Stop guys!!!!!!

End of fighting.

Everyone just has his opinions.

Noones ' s better or worse

[Matthew Lamot]

 

14 minutes ago, Wormon Blatburm said:

Yes it is, your worldview has no substance, you were just parroting beliefs, someone had to point that out here so people don't get confused.

How can you get confused with a 3000 year old teaching that has been producing Self-Realized people for as long as it has been around?

This is just pure hubris.

You ever hear of standing on the shoulder of giants?  This is why youre on here being controlled by your vasanas and arguing shit without even reading or contemplating the conversation.  

Is this a demonstration of the validity of your 30 second non dual experiences over a 3000 year old tradition?

 

 

[Matthew Lamot]

3 minutes ago, popi said:

Stop guys!!!!!!

End of fighting.

Everyone just has his opinions.

Noones ' s better or worse

Im not fighting, Im pointing out worms ignorance and arrogance in the hopes that he might just stop and notice with awareness that he has not actually read a word Ive said, just interpreted it all via his own vasanas and subconscious.  This is a good time to point out how ineffective the neo rubbish actually is. 

[Matthew Lamot]

41 minutes ago, Wormon Blatburm said:

@Matthew Lamot You are attached to your teaching, everyone on this forum now sees how dogmatic you are, you've spent hours defending hollow beliefs that have nothing to do with enlightenment.

"Is this a demonstration of the validity of your 30 second non dual experiences over a 3000 year old tradition?"

Sure, teachings are great but you don't realise they are only stepping stones to the real experience. The teaching is not sacred, the ones who wrote them would agree.

You are eons away from experiencing anything close to my enlightenment "experience" wanna know why? You have too much bullshit (beliefs) and because of that you cannot take proper action.

OK.  For me I' m not attched to the result.  I tried and this is my path, karma yoga which I learned from the teachings.

What else can I do except try to offer some more insight rather than band about one liner beliefs so people can cherry pick and fit into their story?

Because thats what this New Ages system is, its incomplete.

Let me ask you, how much have you researched this topic?

Youre 18?

Ive been a seeker all my life, and have gone through everything been very open minded and came to the conclusion (not belief) that there is only one way to realize the Self.  Years of trial and error.  Years of debate.  Years of study.  Years of self inquiry.  Years of loooking for something that makes sense and actually works.

I only once debated with someone over knowledge that could help me.  Because I' m a learner, I'm open to being taught, and I want to be the best.  I've seen all of Leos videos, they are good, but the best they will do is offer a taster.  Most of the spiritual teaching are tasters.  The amount of books and resources I've read (nd none of them I believed) and heard so many times that the likes of Papajis mignions are not Self Realized, and then when I find teachers who have shown me powerful ways to understand, all I can do is try to pass that onto other sincere people who dont mind just investigating a new possible bit of info just to see if they can get an edge in their practice.

I know I'm doing the right thing, because I know my experience.  I used to argue this angry "non dogma" bullshit as a red herring to avoid being truly open minded, but I soon quickly learned that it got me nowhere, it was an ego fueulliing mind game.  So I dropped it and spent my energy finding out what works.

Most people never become enlightened.  Most Sangah hoppers never become enlightened.  Some people do by chance, and by other paths, but most of them stole a bit of Adviata Vedanta because they knew the right sources of info.  Its a close club, most enlightened people cannot be bothered even teaching, so what you are exposed to now is the dregs of the egos who decided they had the authority to teach but are not even Self Realized.

Would you learn drive with an instructor who didnt know the highway code?

Depends on how serious you are.  You are not even close

[Matthew Lamot]

55 minutes ago, Wormon Blatburm said:

@Matthew Lamot You are attached to your teaching, everyone on this forum now sees how dogmatic you are, you've spent hours defending hollow beliefs that have nothing to do with enlightenment.

"Is this a demonstration of the validity of your 30 second non dual experiences over a 3000 year old tradition?"

Sure, teachings are great but you don't realise they are only stepping stones to the real experience. The teaching is not sacred, the ones who wrote them would agree.

You are eons away from experiencing anything close to my enlightenment "experience" wanna know why? You have too much bullshit (beliefs) and because of that you cannot take proper action.

Believe me, experience has nothing to do with it.  Once you know nirvikalpa samadhi you know you exist independent of the world.  There is nothing else you need to "experience".  Realization is not an experience, its is beyond that.  It is the truth that you are non dual awareness.

But the axe Im grinding is you deny relative existence.  That is not Realization, and you dnt know the vasana, karma yoga and the things that make Self Realization stick.

Again, it is a contemplation of the knowledge.  Like fire is hot and sugar is sweet.

Its not about experiences, it's about knowledge.  That is not a belief or a dogma, it is a sensible approach to making this a reality rather than a bunch of experiences.

You are already the Self.

Do you know that?  No.  If you did, you would not need to change the realaitve domain, because the person and the world is not the problem.  Dogma is not a problem, war is not a problem.  Sex is not a problem if you are not this mind and body.

Once you know that you just life like a normal person and drop the angry non dogma bullshit.  THATS Self Realization. Not this half baked nonsense that there is no people and no relationships, thats just another belief that the Neo Adviatia crew propegrate and thats why their sanghas are full every weekend, because they dont know they are the Self

[Matthew Lamot]

1 hour ago, Wormon Blatburm said:

You are eons away from experiencing anything close to my enlightenment "experience" wanna know why? You have too much bullshit (beliefs) and because of that you cannot take proper action.

Enlightenment is not an experience.  It never was.  Nirvikalpa Samadhi is not even enlightenment.  Enlightenment comes after that once you realize you exist independent of the world.  Then you can live in the world free, and not needing to argue with people about their beliefs and how much more spiritual you are than them.

Enlightenment is not about action either.  It is about Realizing the Self.  Realizing the Self is done through the contemplation of the correct non dual pointers, self inquiry, and using the right methods to destroy the vasanas.  

And who told you that beliefs hinder enlightenment?  The only belief you need to destroy is that you are not your thoughts and experience.  Then you can leave the person alone with their beliefs to function in the relative world.  In the relative world you need beliefs, otherwise you become unhappy because you are not learning the ways of the world.

Do you have a belief that you need to destroy beliefs in order to be enlightened?

Where did this belief come from?

Did Leo plant that in your head?  Now you have another bogus teaching that assumes that the ego can become enlightened and have all these experiences of "raw unfiltered seeing" or whatever other crap thats being published by the bastardised Boomeritis Buddhism crew.

 

[30secs]

maybe I can put like this, imagine that all matter in this universe is your body(cars, trees, people, galaxy, space), its silly to say that I dont love my arm or other parts of my body. woah theres no even "I" who will going to love something. I dont know what genuine love is, maybe "IT IS TO BE" or just simply "BEING"..maybe?

[Grant6]

@FindingPeace So let's say you're already in a "conditional loving" relationship, is it possible to grow the relationship into an "unconditional loving" relationship? So, if you realize that you conditionally love your partner, can you grow yourself to love her or him unconditionally while still maintaing the relationship?

[key]

@Matthew Lamot I'm sorry but what?????

You've just defended yourself, your beliefs, all that you've practiced, realised, experienced, heard, and know, like it means anything with this work  

I normally skim over your posts because I've noticed them to be completley egotistical in my short and unqualified appraisal, yet you need a little smack in the head to wake up. 

I don't know how to help you my friend except to say that, over this forum, you sound like you're looking in the wrong places for the wrong thing. 

Edit: This isn't an attack, and ultimatley I wish you the best, truly. But it can still surprise me how someone who claims so much wisdom falls short. 

Edited August 12, 2016 by Kenya