What is LOVE?, or: Why we have to go to war

[Princess Arabia]

2 minutes ago, cetus said:

@Princess Arabia @Sir Oberon The two of you are hijacking this thread. 

I really don't think that was necessary as I tried to stop it as was stated in my last post. Prior to that as you can see his English was a bit off and i couldn't understand what he was trying to say. I was trying to avoid this by telling him to stay on topic.

[vibv]

9 hours ago, Osaid said:

Language tends to be inherently divisive in that way, but where are my dualisms pointing to and where are Leo's dualisms pointing to? One is pointing to more dualisms, and one is pointing to a lack thereof. The distinction is made because I have to point to your experience of yourself somehow. 

Leo says that you can realize what you are twice, and many more times, at much deeper levels. I am saying you can only realize what you are once, because to realize yourself twice means that you previously didn't realize something beyond yourself.

You are saying that there's a before and after enlightenment.

Leo is saying it's all degress of consciousness and that's what it was the whole time.

Your idea of enlightenment looks like this picture to me:

While Leo's looks like this picture:

Edited October 5, 2023 by vibv

[Breakingthewall]

11 hours ago, Osaid said:

His entire model and understanding of reality is just dualistic.

14 hours ago, Osaid said:

 

that's how it is. What leo does is the scientific approach. On the one hand there is him, on the other the absolute reality, God, and on the medium the research instruments, the psychedelics. With them he looks into infinity, perhaps very deeply, and returns to take notes. It's interesting. Another thing is to try to maintain a permanent openness to infinity, to become one with it, so with yourself and leave the ego. then you must put aside the need to understand, since this need creates duality between you and reality. If you want openness, you must understand that you already understand everything, whoever does not understand is the ego and the ego is nothing. Feeding the ego with new understanding can be fun, but it's pretty useless for him ,but on the other hand, Leo's approach is extremely useful for people to open themselves to spirituality, because it speaks to the ego from the ego about God. Nobody had done this, and it is revolutionary.

Edited October 5, 2023 by Breakingthewall

[Breakingthewall]

2 hours ago, vibv said:

Leo is saying it's all degress of consciousness and that's what it was the whole time.

Who has degrees of consciousness? You? What you, god or the ego? What is the level of consciousness of a dog? very low? Sure, his ego has a low degree of consciousness, but the dog, as a being, is the entire existence creating an unimaginably complex pattern of experience out of nothing. The dog's level of consciousness is infinite, like everything else. It is your ego that has levels of consciousness, and all its levels are zero, since they are not infinite. There is only one way to increase your level of consciousness, by removing the ego, not by increasing its understanding.

[vibv]

49 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Who has degrees of consciousness? You? What you, god or the ego? What is the level of consciousness of a dog? very low? Sure, his ego has a low degree of consciousness, but the dog, as a being, is the entire existence creating an unimaginably complex pattern of experience out of nothing. The dog's level of consciousness is infinite, like everything else. It is your ego that has levels of consciousness, and all its levels are zero, since they are not infinite. There is only one way to increase your level of consciousness, by removing the ego, not by increasing its understanding.

So you're telling me if you're a dog or a human it's all the same? I'll happily evolve further then while you're contentedly stagnating.

Edited October 5, 2023 by vibv

[Breakingthewall]

11 minutes ago, vibv said:

So you're telling me if you're a dog or a human it's all the same? I'll happily evolve further then while you're happily stagnating.

They are not the same, there is a difference: the ego, that important thing that wants to understand things, when a rat corpse has an infinite level of consciousness, or a hydrogen molecule, everything has it, you just have to leave the linear language of the ego, which is limited, therefore it is zero. The ego is an illusion, and its level of consciousness is an illusion, that is, it does not exist. the level of consciousness of reality is total, there are no intermediate levels, only ego levels, and level 1 is the same as the billion level compared to the infinite level, they are nothing, they are illusory levels

[vibv]

5 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

They are not the same, there is a difference: the ego, that important thing that wants to understand things, when a rat corpse has an infinite level of consciousness, or a hydrogen molecule, everything has it, you just have to leave the linear language of the ego, which is limited, therefore it is zero. The ego is an illusion, and its level of consciousness is an illusion, that is, it does not exist. the level of consciousness of reality is total, there are no intermediate levels, only ego levels, and level 1 is the same as the billion level compared to the infinite level, they are nothing, they are illusory levels

Both exist at the same time. The Absolute never moves anyway because there's nowhere to go. But in the relative everything moves all the time. Not only that but it evolves, too, into the direction of Love, Beauty and Consciousness.

You can't achieve the Absolute because you already are it. Everything else is relative. We are in the relative. You are in the relative. All self-appointed enlightened people are in the relative. It's not a bug, it's a feature. Because the relative is not different from the Absolute.

Riddle me that...

[vibv]

The Absolute has a DESIRE to experientally know and understand itself. It's the Divine Desire. It's also a Divine Tragedy because it can never be fulfilled. But it's also unfathomably beautiful because it pursuits it anway for all eternity.

[Breakingthewall]

11 minutes ago, vibv said:

The Absolute never moves anyway because there's nowhere to go

That statement is meaningless in infinity. It is a relative statement. It implies time and place, in infinity there is no such thing, saying: there is no place to go, implies limitation. the same as saying: you are alone, or I am god. there are no limits therefore there is no place to go is equivalent to there are many places to go, and the pronoun "i" is completely meaningless 

14 minutes ago, vibv said:

You are in the relative. All self-appointed enlightened people are in the relative. It's not a bug, it's a feature. Because the relative is not different from the Absolute

The only relative thing there is is your illusion of being something that understands things and that increases its level of consciousness, and that is more conscious than dogs and rats, but as I said, it is an illusion, it is nothing, and its level of Consciousness is an illusion too. Now the reality is in its total level of consciousness, 

[vibv]

10 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

That statement is meaningless in infinity. It is a relative statement. It implies time and place, in infinity there is no such thing, saying: there is no place to go, implies limitation. the same as saying: you are alone, or I am god. there are no limits therefore there is no place to go is equivalent to there are many places to go, and the pronoun "i" is completely meaningless 

The only relative thing there is is your illusion of being something that understands things and that increases its level of consciousness, and that is more conscious than dogs and rats, but as I said, it is an illusion, it is nothing, and its level of Consciousness is an illusion too. Now the reality is in its total level of consciousness, 

Well, I'll continue playing then and evolving to higher states of consciousness. Because there's nothing else to do anyway.

Luckily it is also the greatest, most beautiful and most fulfilling activity that could ever exist.

[vibv]

@Breakingthewall Imagine you sitting in an empty room with white walls that are so white you can't even see them. Nothing exists outside of that room and you're also immortal.

In front of you is a computer with WoW installed, the hardcore version – when you die your character's dead.

You don't have to play. But you will do it anyway, fully knowing that it's just a game. And when you die you just instantly start a new character. That's all there's to do anyway.

You're so immersed in the game that you literally become your character, but sometimes in between you remember that you're just this immortal being playing a game. But that doesn't stop you from continuing to play. To play is all there is to do for all of eternity, fully knowing that it's not real. But who cares anyway?

Of course this is just a metaphor and in reality it's all much much more complex and intertwined, but you get the idea.

[Breakingthewall]

29 minutes ago, vibv said:

@Breakingthewall Imagine you sitting in an empty room with white walls that are so white you can't even see them. Nothing exists outside of that room and you're also immortal.

In front of you is a computer with WoW installed, the hardcore version – when you die your character's dead.

You don't have to play. But you will do it anyway, fully knowing that it's just a game. And when you die you just instantly start a new character. That's all there's to do anyway.

You're so immersed in the game that you literally become your character, but sometimes in between you remember that you're just this immortal being playing a game. But that doesn't stop you from continuing to play. To play is all there is to do for all of eternity, fully knowing that it's not real. But who cares anyway?

Of course this is just a metaphor and in reality it's all much much more complex and intertwined, but you get the idea.

Well, for me that's wrong for an important reason. Who is sitting in the white room? you? and who is that you? God? This is the essential confusion, the: I am God imagining reality. There is no specific character who does things and plays things for love, that god who does things is the ego, it is a confusion. Reality is infinite breadth where everything is, completely impersonal. This is what you are but it is not you, it means letting the self fall. Reality is not a game, it is an infinite cycle and if we want to glimpse what this is, we must abandon all those limiting ideas. We don't know what this is, we can intuit it. but first, in my opinion, completely forget anything that has been transmitted by word

[An young being]

Describing God or reality as Love is acceptable in the sense that it helps us to accept what is happening around us, love or hatred,good or bad,life or death with equal acceptance, knowing that there is nothing to hate about God making life this way, and even be compassionate with him for being so. As long as the nature of life is impermanent, there is always hope for joy even in the extremes of suffering. If reality is like there is no end to suffering, without hope, without death, without a limit for suffering, as hell is described, then we can argue reality is not about Love. But I don't think it's the case in earth.

At the same time, describing reality as love leads to confusions, with the nature of human love mostly being conditional and egoistic. So, it's better to discover or create another word, similar to the way words are framed in Sanskrit, where there are so many words for the same experience with different meanings.

[vibv]

4 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Well, for me that's wrong for an important reason. Who is sitting in the white room? you? and who is that you? God? This is the essential confusion, the: I am God imagining reality. There is no specific character who does things and plays things for love, that god who does things is the ego, it is a confusion. Reality is infinite breadth where everything is, completely impersonal. This is what you are but it is not you, it means letting the self fall. Reality is not a game, it is an infinite cycle and if we want to glimpse what this is, we must abandon all those limiting ideas. We don't know what this is, we can intuit it. but first, in my opinion, completely forget anything that has been transmitted by word

It’s a metaphor. But you could argue that in reality the guy on the computer is also a creation of the impersonal room and that’s in reality all that exists. 

But that doesn’t change the outcome.

Reality is deeply personal and completely impersonal at the same time.

[Yimpa]

I have a strange feeling that Osaid and Leo are at war with each other.

Which is basically to say, they both love each other a lot, heh.

[Yimpa]

5 hours ago, vibv said:

You are saying that there's a before and after enlightenment.

Leo is saying it's all degress of consciousness and that's what it was the whole time.

Your idea of enlightenment looks like this picture to me:

While Leo's looks like this picture:

I’ve had a therapist teach me this way back when I was 15, before I even knew about nonduality and spirituality. I wasn’t able to make the recontextualization until now, a decade later.

Back then, I was creating a separation/duality between Osaid and Leo’s points of view. But now, I see that even those merge into ONENESS!

[Yimpa]

3 hours ago, vibv said:

So you're telling me if you're a dog or a human it's all the same? I'll happily evolve further then while you're contentedly stagnating.

Be mindful that how you communicate with others is precisely a reflection of yourself.

I understand your frustration and how it’s like to constantly berate someone. But there’s a difference between putting someone down to get your way vs. expressing your views from a place of authenticity and holism.

Someone who is wise does not correct someone to prove a point and to get their way over another. They guide them towards higher truths by first understanding where they’re at and speaking from their level.

[Sir Oberon]

37 minutes ago, Yimpa said:

Be mindful that how you communicate with others is precisely a reflection of yourself.

I understand your frustration and how it’s like to constantly berate someone. But there’s a difference between putting someone down to get your way vs. expressing your views from a place of authenticity and holism.

Someone who is wise does not correct someone to prove a point and to get their way over another. They guide them towards higher truths by first understanding where they’re at and speaking from their level.

A wise man/woman it was once said can not be disturbed but only disturbs.  I see the ego like an onion that we peel away layer by layer, as we get to deeper layers more is revealed about the nature of the onion.    I am the seer and the seeker all at once, the ground of consciousness.  The onion has its place and one day is left behind.  Just my 2 cents.

Edited October 5, 2023 by Sir Oberon

[An young being]

12 minutes ago, Sir Oberon said:

A wise man/woman it was once said can not be disturbed but only disturbs.  I see the ego like an onion that we peel away layer by layer, as we get to deeper layers more is revealed about the nature of the onion.    I am the seer and the seeker all at once, the ground of consciousness.  The onion has its place and one day is left behind.  Just my 2 cents.

But, if we reach the end by removing all layers without doing the peeling, aren't we left with nothing to do?

[gettoefl]

4 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

that's how it is. What leo does is the scientific approach. On the one hand there is him, on the other the absolute reality, God, and on the medium the research instruments, the psychedelics. With them he looks into infinity, perhaps very deeply, and returns to take notes. It's interesting. Another thing is to try to maintain a permanent openness to infinity, to become one with it, so with yourself and leave the ego. then you must put aside the need to understand, since this need creates duality between you and reality. If you want openness, you must understand that you already understand everything, whoever does not understand is the ego and the ego is nothing. Feeding the ego with new understanding can be fun, but it's pretty useless for him ,but on the other hand, Leo's approach is extremely useful for people to open themselves to spirituality, because it speaks to the ego from the ego about God. Nobody had done this, and it is revolutionary.

if i awaken i help me and in this there is nothing i can do for you, my words and or my methods will be nothing to you

if i understand i can help you, i don't need to help me since i understand

the twist is if i help you to awaken in this way, i bring myself to greater awakening

to bring the other to awakening is the only love

in particular only the awakened are capable of love

love is to resurrect your parts

the part is what is awakened

the whole is what is enlightened