Enlightenment is not a better experience.

[Consilience]

6 minutes ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

Conceptualizations about concioussness are most devilish.

 

6 minutes ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

Nobody can ever beat the book of not knowing.

You realize how FULL of concepts The Book of Not Knowing is right? It's a gigantic book with many elaborate, detailed explanations. The trap you're outlining about Actualized.org is fully present in The Book of Not Knowing. Just playing devil's advocate here. It's an amazing resource, but let's be honest. 

I've personally found sometimes even contemplation carries with it the possibility of unconscious conceptualization about whatever it is you're contemplating, such that pure "meditative" observation, more vipassana style, would have been in "higher" alignment with whatever is true. 

 

9 minutes ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

Because it is 100% no bullshit, not 80%. Its about pure, clear and direct contemplation. 

This seems to presupposes pure, clear, direct contemplation is THE WAY. What if pure, clear, and direct contemplation was 100% bullshit? What if sitting down and shutting tf up was more pure, clear, and direct towards whatever is true?

[Inliytened1]

3 minutes ago, Consilience said:

 The trap you're outlining about Actualized.org is fully present in The Book of Not Knowing.

??

Not knowing is different from a book about it

 

[Consilience]

3 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Not knowing is different from a book about it

?

While we're on the topic - 

 

[IAmReallyImportant]

11 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Yes.  Forget all that you learned about spirituality and enlightenment..and Just perform  self inquiry with no ulterior motives.  

For me it is a hobby anyways. I know enlightenment is not the thing most people imagine. "Mystical states" seem to be common to me, too. And nothing special. The feeling of relieve after transforming a believe may be a motive, besides the pure interest on the work.

[IAmReallyImportant]

14 minutes ago, Consilience said:

This seems to presupposes pure, clear, direct contemplation is THE WAY. What if pure, clear, and direct contemplation was 100% bullshit? What if sitting down and shutting tf up was more pure, clear, and direct towards whatever is true?

You seem to have assumptions about me, whether there is no reason to have these.

Actualized.org creates a conceptulized framework about concioussness, which is completly unnecessary. Peter Ralstons work is purely about guidance and grounded in decades of work with real people.

[IAmReallyImportant]

I found it so interesting that people really get upset, whenever someone questions their Leo. This doesn't look like a good symptom imo.

[Adamq8]

@IAmReallyImportant Firstly thats an assumption that people get mad, especially in this thread.

Remember that you are projecting this unto others, What if someone has experienced it exactly as Leo laid it out, there is no such thing as non conceptualization when it comes to this when using language, perhaps it is your attitude against his teachings that might be a bias? ?

You prefer ralston over Leo, thats your preferences and I disagree on that part, see? This is not such an easy thing as 1+1=2

Also you create a bias out of that some are getting upset but still you dont seem to feel that your attitude and preferences is a bias YOU have that ralston has a better teaching then Leo 

 

[IAmReallyImportant]

3 minutes ago, Adamq8 said:

@IAmReallyImportant Firstly thats an assumption that people get mad, especially in this thread.

Remember that you are projecting this unto others, What if someone has experienced it exactly as Leo laid it out, there is no such thing as non conceptualization when it comes to this when using language, perhaps it is your attitude against his teachings that might be a bias? ?

You prefer ralston over Leo, thats your preferences and I disagree on that part, see? This is not such an easy thing as 1+1=2

Also you create a bias out of that some are getting upset but still you dont seem to feel that your attitude and preferences is a bias YOU have that ralston has a better teaching then Leo 

 

Nope I experienced that a forum member literally offended someone as he questioned Leo. You don't know when I am projecting, because I don't mention you in relation to this.

The new stuff of Leo is mostly common sense and what I think most people already know and can think of, who are not completely retarded. I think this is because it is grounded on Leo's own thoughts. That's why I found the old videos more profound, honestly.

Obivously, you don't understand what I am talking about. Unnecessary talk to fill up a video with the hope that the listener gets a minimum of understanding. Then with the premise that you should take psychedelics anyway. Then trying to put a philosophical framework on a non-philosophical topic and pretending that's not the case. For me, this is so far the failed attempt to create something new. But that may yet change.

The whole thing creates an army of people who think they are more "evolved" and are quick to judge instead of looking at things with caution and equanimity. In a subtle way, additional prejudices are formed and the whole thing also has the potential to separate rather than unite.

I won't justify my username, for example, because i find it funny how quickly people make judgments. That's also how you recognize those who are a little slower and less accurate in their thinking.

[IAmReallyImportant]

You can say it is a bias to not be a Nazi, too. That is no argument. I know what I am writing about.

[Adamq8]

24 minutes ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

Nope I experienced that a forum member literally offended someone as he questioned Leo. You don't know when I am projecting, because I don't mention you in relation to this.

The new stuff of Leo is mostly common sense and what I think most people already know and can think of, who are not completely retarded. I think this is because it is grounded on Leo's own thoughts. That's why I found the old videos more profound, honestly.

Obivously, you don't understand what I am talking about. Unnecessary talk to fill up a video with the hope that the listener gets a minimum of understanding. Then with the premise that you should take psychedelics anyway. Then trying to put a philosophical framework on a non-philosophical topic and pretending that's not the case. For me, this is so far the failed attempt to create something new. But that may yet change.

The whole thing creates an army of people who think they are more "evolved" and are quick to judge instead of looking at things with caution and equanimity. In a subtle way, additional prejudices are formed and the whole thing also has the potential to separate rather than unite.

I won't justify my username, for example, because i find it funny how quickly people make judgments. That's also how you recognize those who are a little slower and less accurate in their thinking.

You literally came in saying concepts about this is devilish and thats why Leos teaching is not that good, how is that for a personal opinion and create seperation between teachings yourself? Leo is not that good but ralston is etc, thats all fine but recognize that it is your opinion nevertheless, Leo has had more impact on me then ralston, then Leo is better for me and ralston for you, but who is right?

No one ofcourse. 

But it is still in this reference an assumption that someone gets mad about you picking on Leos teachings, how is it relevant in this thread if someone 1 time defended leo but not in this thread?

You speak of judgement and the funny thing is how you yourself is judging Leos teachings cause it does not fit your views of enlightenment or what not.

Or we can turn it around and label it constructive criticism, no matter how we turn it, we can keep going all night or just agree to disagree.

But in my interpretation there is a subtle " passive" agressiveness in your comments, but if that is not the case then im wrong about that interpretation, and if so, im sorry.

But you should still see through that every teaching is filled of concepts, some resonates with you and some dont and thats all fine brother, I just dont agree with you about who's teachings is more or less better, but who cares? If it works for you im cincerely happy for you ?

Im not trying to argue here or something so misunderstand me right, just trying to point out as well, but lets not derail the topic, have a great night

[IAmReallyImportant]

9 minutes ago, Adamq8 said:

You literally came in saying concepts about this is devilish and thats why Leos teaching is not that good, how is that for a personal opinion and create seperation between teachings yourself?

I said "nobody can beat the book of not knowing", because the is the most compact formulation of finding the Truth that may ever exist. At least in form of language-based guidance.

And you can clearly see that actualized.org is bloated of with unnecessary conceptualizations and aspects with deceptive potential.

I did not say "Peter Ralston is better than Leo Gura" lol This would be too simple. One could say it is more Truth based, even if you can get stuff out of both teachings of course.

12 minutes ago, Adamq8 said:

You speak of judgement and the funny thing is how you yourself is judging Leos teachings cause it does not fit your views of enlightenment or what not.

It is justified critique. Without critique you could not have the Internet sending this messages. You are judging my critique.

13 minutes ago, Adamq8 said:

Or we can turn it around and label it constructive criticism, no matter how we turn it, we can keep going all night or just agree to disagree.

You frame it like this was not constructive. Maybe you feel offended.

14 minutes ago, Adamq8 said:

But in my interpretation there is a subtle " passive" agressiveness in your comments, but if that is not the case then im wrong about that interpretation, and if so, im sorry.

Your interpretation. These are text messages. I am very direct and I think this is good. Won't change that. If you take a problem with it, I wish you the best.

 

14 minutes ago, Adamq8 said:

But you should still see through that every teaching is filled of concepts, some resonates with you and some dont and thats all fine brother, I just dont agree with you about who's teachings is more or less better, but who cares? If it works for you im cincerely happy for you ?

The composition makes the music.

[Consilience]

48 minutes ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

Nope I experienced that a forum member literally offended someone as he questioned Leo. You don't know when I am projecting, because I don't mention you in relation to this.

This was 100% a projection. I literally question Leo all the time. Go read some of the other threads Ive commented on. Wasn’t offended at all brother. 

Again, “Mu.” - ?

Edited June 29, 2021 by Consilience

[TimStr]

Quote

Enlightenment is not a better experience

 

[VeganAwake]

4 hours ago, Seraphim said:

The new non-duality teachings sure are convenient. By simply understanding the teachings you get to feel that you have become enlightened, just like the Buddha and other revered yogis and Buddhists from history. No need to meditate or work on clearing out your inner distortions, everything is already enlightened. And if you happen to come across a quote from someone like Ramana Maharshi that indicates that you have more work to do, then you can always find a good neo-advaita quote to counter it with!

"The degree of freedom from unwanted thoughts and the degree of concentration on a single thought are the measures to gauge spiritual progress." If you are still addicted to thinking then the ego/I-thought is still alive, you are not done yet. If you still don't feel and see that everything is the Self/the absolute, then you are not enlightened yet. The no-self thing is usually the first of many awakenings that are available.

Enlightenment has nothing to do with thinking.

It's freedom from identifying as the individual that believes it needs to meditate and work on cleaning out it's inner distortions.

And once this is recognized it starts cleaning itself out sort of speak under the weight of Truth.

And it's not an intellectual understanding.

It's clearly seeing the sense of self is an illusion and never existed in the first place.

❤

 

[VeganAwake]

There is a saying often used in the military that describes the mentality of this forum quite well.

Too many chiefs and not enough indians.

Or in other words

Too many knowers and not enough students.

It definitely seems like a generational thing in part.

❤

[Chrisd]

If enlightenment had no benefits nobody would talk about it like they are. Imagine the realizers realising their shift was into something negative, they would warn against it. 

Edited June 29, 2021 by Chrisd

[Adrian325]

8 hours ago, IAmReallyImportant said:

Enlightenment doesn't give you anything. Neither joy nor hapiness. It isn’t necessary or 'higher' either. It is a phenomena of interest in eyes of many people. 

When everything literally becomes you,you'll understand. Not that it ever wasn't lol

Edited June 29, 2021 by Adrian325

[VeganAwake]

15 minutes ago, Chrisd said:

If enlightenment had no benefits nobody would talk about it like they are. Imagine the realizers realising their shift was into something negative, they would warn against it. 

Well it's the end of the individual that believes there are positive and negative outcomes.

I guess you can call that a benefit for No One...?

[Inliytened1]

@IAmReallyImportant

You seem a bit too caught up in the teachings but just my POV of course...yes questioning is what it's about...but there wouldn't have been a need to bring up a critique of Acutalized if there wasn't some bias there or trigger..anyway ..nothing wrong with that it's relative but don't let it distract you...both Ralston and Gura are wise men but it's not about the wise men themselves or their teachings- it is about what is being pointed to - Absolute Truth.    much love 

Oh as for Gura's videos - yeah his old stuff is the best.  No one can sustain that level forever.   Plus all the early spirituality videos were on the facets of the Absolute...If you wanna wake up go listen to the very first video he made on enlightenment while meditating and watch it through the first 4

 

 

[traveler]

1 hour ago, VeganAwake said:

It's clearly seeing the sense of self is an illusion and never existed in the first place.

Sometimes it is very obvious that there is no seperate self, but other times you have to be reminded of the seperate self that isn't there to get that hit/fix of realization. The addiction is actually in wanting to know/see that there is no seperate self, or wanting to know that what is is okay. This search has everything to do with "the dream" and nothing to do with enlightenment. Nothing has anything to do with enlightenment, nothing can be said. Just "enlightenment" Full stop, no description.

Every thought that comes after this, are just thoughts. A conclusion in form of a thought might arise and say "oh, yes I see, it is this, it is silence, there is no person" and that is the addiction to knowing that fills/hides silence/emptiness/enlightenment.

Edited June 29, 2021 by traveler