Ralston Gives A Clear Answer To Metaphysical Love Question

[Yimpa]

@Bazooka Jesus I think that edible had a  delayed reaction on @Osaid.

[UnbornTao]

[Yimpa]

I think we all need to take a bus to Peter Ralston’s house and explain all this to him personally 

 

[Princess Arabia]

1 hour ago, Tech36363 said:

@Inliytened1 @Leo GuraGura After watching hundreds of hours of leos content i can confidently say he thinks about all possible angles. All possible scenarios and situations. If you don't consider him to be smart enough to have already figured this stuff out then you shouldn't be here. He has actually pioneered this stuff. And when he says what he says it's not ego boasting it's just stating stuff as it is for him. He has done years of work in here and it gets frustrating making people understand. You gotta trust him. 

You're talking like a cult member. This is not a cult where we just follow the leader. Leo also says to put in the work to discover things for ourselves, and to not trust his word blindly. Saying we shouldn't be here if we don't trust that he has figured stuff out is so......idk what word to even use here, lame. This work is not about figuring stuff out but to have deeper understandings that will never arive at a finish line because of its nature.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2023 by Princess Arabia

[Francis777]

@Tech36363 never ever in your life are you going to be able to verify truth for yourself simply by putting your trust in someone else. It doesn’t matter how much faith you have in them, if you don’t verify it for yourself, there is simply no point.

[Loveeee]

6 hours ago, Water by the River said:

You wrote:

1: Am I something like the "people that have no POV just like in your dreams, see above?" Yes or no? question (1)

2: I can assure you there is pain arising in my perspective if you pinch me.

Do others on the forum feel pain if you pinch them? Yes or no? question (2)

And if yes, why do only they feel pain and I dont't? question (3)

The questions are pretty clear. Please don't avoid or misinterpret them in any way. Just yes or no.

 

1 : yes

2 : no 

[Yimpa]

6 hours ago, Water by the River said:

The questions are pretty clear. Please don't avoid or misinterpret them in any way. Just yes or no.

You would seriously make a top-notch politician.

[Loveeee]

7 hours ago, Water by the River said:

2: I can assure you there is pain arising in my perspective if you pinch me.

Are you trolling me 

I'm talking from my POV, from your POV (which doesn't exist from mine), yeah you feel pain

Here at 1:26:26

 

[Yimpa]

@Loveeee Leo should re-upload that video as his final Actualized video (at least on the main channel).

[Loveeee]

Just now, Yimpa said:

@Loveeee Leo should re-upload that video as his final Actualized video (at least on the main channel).

There's nothing final about it this is consciousness 101, I want alien consciousness !

[Yimpa]

@Loveeee That would require going beyond the confines of the internet and physical reality, then.

[Loveeee]

1 minute ago, Yimpa said:

@Loveeee That would require going beyond the confines of the internet and physical reality, then.

Ultimately yes 

[Arthogaan]

5 hours ago, Osaid said:

Your POV is inside of everyone else's POV. You are viewing everyone's POV right now. You ARE everyone's POV. Otherwise you wouldn't be talking about "other POVs" in the first place.

Hypothetically, if you DID experience everyone's "POV", their POVs would literally stop existing, because it would just become your POV.

The POV of other people exists EXACTLY BECAUSE you cannot directly view them. It is a relative dualistic dance.

Sometimes "other people" is visual perception. Sometimes it is a physical presence. Sometimes it is sound. Sometimes it is imagination. It changes. It is ephemeral. It's not some fixed idea of "Everyone is imaginary!" 

Is the flower in front of you "other"? It happens in your own experience, yes. But it absolutely has its own unique qualities, despite being in your POV. It has its own intelligence. Its own flair. Which cannot be imagined by any kind of ego "you", only experienced.

There is an input from you, where you imagine things about people. You imagine things about yourself as well. This is being mistaken as "you" being "alone." No.

Is realizing that the tree outside your house is being imagined making you lonely too? Do you want the physical tree to exist in your experience forever? Do you want a physical human to exist in your experience forever? No! It's a beautifully intelligent dualistic dance. Love it. The tree becomes concept. The tree becomes physical. The tree becomes an idea for a drawing. The tree becomes a creating of oxygen. You are putting a big limit on the tree when you say "It only exists when it is physical!" Same goes for other people. It is an anthropomorphic and materialistic interpretation of reality when you think otherwise.

Really, any notions of "you" and "other" are equally real, because they are dualities which depend on eachother. Yin and yang.

To me it sounds exactly like what Leo is describing with Absolute Solipsism but with a bias against word "You"/"I". It points to the same way of seeing. You just misunderstand what Leo means by "I" and assume any ego left there imho. @Water by the River @Bazooka Jesus @Breakingthewall

[Yimpa]

@Moksha what’s your take on this? 

[Osaid]

5 minutes ago, Arthogaan said:

To me it sounds exactly like what Leo is describing with Absolute Solipsism but with a bias against word "You"/"I". It points to the same way of seeing. You just misunderstand what Leo means by "I" and assume any ego left there imho. 

What I'm talking about is not "Absolute Solipsism", it's just a small aspect of the only Truth which is enlightenment. It's a small part of a big singular thing. To view "Absolute Solipsism" you have to partition truth to focus on that particular aspect of reality. Awakenings are just narrow experiences of the small parts of that big singular thing, which is Truth/enlightenment.

I know Leo knows what I am pointing to, but he is probably not conscious of it right now, and if he is, that is still just a small aspect of Truth/enlightenment. Not the full thing.

There is no existential subset of truth in reality that is like "Absolute Solipsism." Truth cannot FOCUS IN on a small aspect of itself. That is not Truth/enlightenment. That is an awakening which hints at Truth/enlightenment. It's like the elephant and the blind men.

[Water by the River]

8 hours ago, Loveeee said:

15 hours ago, Water by the River said:

You wrote:

1: Am I something like the "people that have no POV just like in your dreams, see above?" Yes or no? question (1)

2: I can assure you there is pain arising in my perspective if you pinch me.

Do others on the forum feel pain if you pinch them? Yes or no? question (2)

And if yes, why do only they feel pain and I dont't? question (3)

The questions are pretty clear. Please don't avoid or misinterpret them in any way. Just yes or no.

 

1 : yes

2 : no

15 hours ago, Loveeee said:

16 hours ago, Water by the River said:

Ok, these were two separate questions. To which question refers your no?

Am I a nonplayer character in your perspective? Yes or no to question 1.

Do I feel pain if you pinch me? Yes or no to question 2.

Thank you.

1 : What do you mean ?

2 : No 

 

8 hours ago, Loveeee said:

15 hours ago, Water by the River said:

2: I can assure you there is pain arising in my perspective if you pinch me.

Are you trolling me 

I'm talking from my POV, from your POV (which doesn't exist from mine), yeah you feel pain

Here at 1:26:26

I am not trolling you. I could ask you the same.

I have clearly asked "Do I feel pain if you pinch me", and you have clearly stated no. And I wrote yes I do.

And then you wrote "I'm talking from my POV, from your POV (which doesn't exist from mine), yeah you feel pain", while my question was Do I feel pain if you pinch me, not from your perspective but if I feel pain if you pinch me.

That seems to me like Solipsistic mental gymnastic. When Solipsism is done from the level of the separate self/ego, it normally turns out like that.

Rupert Spira once said Solipsism (from the ego-level)  is madness. Hard to contradict.

[Loveeee]

6 minutes ago, Water by the River said:

 

I am not trolling you. I could ask you the same.

I have clearly asked "Do I feel pain if you pinch me", and you have clearly stated no. And I wrote yes I do.

And then you wrote "I'm talking from my POV, from your POV (which doesn't exist from mine), yeah you feel pain", while my question was Do I feel pain if you pinch me, not from your perspective but if I feel pain if you pinch me.

That seems to me like Solipsistic mental gymnastic. When Solipsism is done from the level of the separate self/ego, it normally turns out like that.

Rupert Spira once said Solipsism (from the ego-level)  is madness. Hard to contradict.

 

[Yimpa]

If solipsism and enlightenment had a baby…

[Breakingthewall]

8 hours ago, Arthogaan said:

To me it sounds exactly like what Leo is describing with Absolute Solipsism but with a bias against word "You"/"I". It points to the same way of seeing. You just misunderstand what Leo means by "I" and assume any ego left there imho. @Water by the River @Bazooka Jesus @Breakingthewall

13 hours ago, Osaid said:

 

the solipsism issue is completely obvious imo, and completely unnecessary. Saying that others don't have POV is a conceptual creation. to say that if they have pov, it is another conceptual creation. If we need to make a conceptual creation, it is better to make one that points to reality than one that is delusional. Conceptually we can clearly see that reality is cyclical. It is divided into cycles of death and birth. Now I am breakingthewall, but obviously in the eternity of existence there will have existed other experiential patterns, in fact, infinite. where are they? in the past? Time is a creation, reality is unlimited, everything is now. Now everything is, and the guys you see on the street are you in another time, in another dimension. It's obvious, you can perceive it directly. Solipsism is true in the sense that you will always be in your now, but that cyclical now will change its structure. When it does, the continuity will disappear, there will be a reset. so, really, there is no you, there is unlimited existence manifested . What you perceive is not a show to make you believe things, and because you're bored, that's stupid. It is the living infinity that reflects itself. Everything is within you and you are within everything. inside and outside are the same, infinity is not linear and solipsism is a toxic , psychotic and silly idea, and over all, it's not necessary to define it in spirituality. Spirituality is to let go the barriers, and realize your true nature. Solipsism is just another conceptual history, same that I said about ciclical existence. Just thoughts.  

Edited September 18, 2023 by Breakingthewall

[Arthogaan]

11 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

the solipsism issue is completely obvious imo, and completely unnecessary. Saying that others don't have POV is a conceptual creation. to say that if they have pov, it is another conceptual creation. If we need to make a conceptual creation, it is better to make one that points to reality than one that is delusional. Conceptually we can clearly see that reality is cyclical. It is divided into cycles of death and birth. Now I am breakingthewall, but obviously in the eternity of existence there will have existed other experiential patterns, in fact, infinite. where are they? in the past? Time is a creation, reality is unlimited, everything is now. Now everything is, and the guys you see on the street are you in another time, in another dimension. It's obvious, you can perceive it directly. Solipsism is true in the sense that you will always be in your now, but that cyclical now will change its structure. When it does, the continuity will disappear, there will be a reset. so, really, there is no you, there is unlimited existence manifested . What you perceive is not a show to make you believe things, and because you're bored, that's stupid. It is the living infinity that reflects itself. Everything is within you and you are within everything. inside and outside are the same, infinity is not linear and solipsism is a toxic , psychotic and silly idea, and over all, it's not necessary to define it in spirituality. Spirituality is to let go the barriers, and realize your true nature. Solipsism is just another conceptual history, same that I said about ciclical existence. Just thoughts.  

All that you have written I agree with and again this is exactly what I get from Leo's Solipsism video. I think we are too little charitable to Leo.