What Creates Hero's

[Martin123]

On 4/7/2017 at 9:06 PM, Shin said:

"There is no coming to consciousness without pain" Carl Jung
Well, that quote also means we NEED rapists, we need murderer, we need assholes, we needed Hitler, and Hiroshima,

That's a very "dark" truth here, but it needed to be stated.

 

Careful with that. What Jung mostly meant is the necessity of waking up of the unconsciousness and integration of your shadow. The time humanity on a collective level needed darkness, is long time overdue.

Now it's just senseless left-overs, where no-one really wants it anymore, everyone sees its total BS, but we just don't wanna give up our toys like children who have outgrown their barbie-houses years ago.
So brace yourself! Humanity is about to integrate its Shadow. Be thankful for Trump, he is the man to create a platform for that! But don't wait in passive lotus pose meditating saying "all is well" mantras and other bullshit.
Integrate your own shadow. Match up the image humanity is about to jump into ahead of its time, and you will be of great service to millions every time you integrate yet another part of your unconscious. Also you will become a leader for the new world order. Don't let this sound egotistical. It will be a loving place, it will be a compassionate teaching, it will be love and beauty harmony and joy for the wellbeing of all.
And don't let for a second a doubt exist in your mind that this isn't your destiny! You would not be present at this time if it wasn't!

[Bodhi123]

6 hours ago, Martin123 said:

There is good and evil. Both are equally valid, both are beautiful, both are miraculous phenomena in existence.

 

6 hours ago, Martin123 said:

From the point of view of nonduality, the one, they are both eqauly important expressions of infinity and neither of them is prefered.

@Leo Gura Here we go… I believe there is good and evil. I believe they are both expressions of Infinity. I do NOT believe both are beautiful. I do NOT believe both are equally preferred by Source.

Here is my rationale:

I believe the essential nature of all humans is spirit. This spirit is derived from Source. Spirit and Source are identical, one and the same. Source is perfect/love. However, spirit is divine yet imperfect.

The purpose of our individual incarnation in human form is growth and expansion. We grow as spirits by embodying the characteristics of Source during our human life (i.e. love, compassion, forgiveness, etc.)

HOWEVER

When during our human life we embody characteristics opposite of Source (cruelty, deceit, narcissism, etc.) we fail to expand as spirit and move away from Source.

It is PREFERRED by Source that we grow and expand as spirits and move towards reunion with Source.

Leo to say some dumb shit like God did not disagree with Hitler is ignorant.

[Bodhi123]

@Leo Gura Respond to me bro. Make an enlightened case for defending Hitler.

[Shin]

Don't you see that you're debating your opinions and beliefs onto others here ?

All those long post and quote wars, reactions and projections, where do you think they come from ?

@Bodhi123 What makes you think I was talking about you ? What makes you think I was talking about Leo ?  

 

Edited April 11, 2017 by Shin

[Bodhi123]

@Shin I stated my opinion and then I presented the rationale for my opinion. I then invited Leo to counter my position.

Leo is an adult bro, he doesn't need you to defend him.

[Bodhi123]

@Shin I guess I made the assumption because your post wasn't specified to anyone and my post was above yours.

My bad, I never said I was perfect

[Leo Gura]

3 hours ago, Bodhi123 said:

 

@Leo Gura Here we go… I believe there is good and evil. I believe they are both expressions of Infinity. I do NOT believe both are beautiful. I do NOT believe both are equally preferred by Source.

Here is my rationale:

I believe the essential nature of all humans is spirit. This spirit is derived from Source. Spirit and Source are identical, one and the same. Source is perfect/love. However, spirit is divine yet imperfect.

The purpose of our individual incarnation in human form is growth and expansion. We grow as spirits by embodying the characteristics of Source during our human life (i.e. love, compassion, forgiveness, etc.)

HOWEVER

When during our human life we embody characteristics opposite of Source (cruelty, deceit, narcissism, etc.) we fail to expand as spirit and move away from Source.

It is PREFERRED by Source that we grow and expand as spirits and move towards reunion with Source.

Leo to say some dumb shit like God did not disagree with Hitler is ignorant.

Experience the Absolute, then let's talk.

You speak of things your mind doesn't remotely comprehend yet.

All of that above is LANGUAGE. Without language, there could not be good/evil. Like at all. You're creating concepts and distinctions of which you are not remotely conscious yet.

If you're not willing to fully embrace Hitler as good, as God, as yourself, then spirituality isn't for you. And you might as well change your avatar picture away from that Buddha tree and Enso circle, because your position goes against the core of what the Buddha realized and taught. The Enso circle is a symbol for the totality of the Absolute. Which means: no distinctions. Which means, no separation between you, Hitler, God, love, and evil. There's not a circle with Hitler somehow magically sitting outside the circle because you happen to not like him. He's part of the circle no matter what you like. Your job here is to surrender your self-agenda. As Hitler's ego tried to put the Jews outside the circle, your ego is trying to put Hitler outside the circle. Committing the very same epistemic mistake. This is the source of what you call "evil". You're currently enacting it by not being conscious of it.

The light of the Absolute will blot out all "your" beliefs and judgments, like the daytime sun blots out the stars.

[Salaam]

14 hours ago, Martin123 said:

In the Law of one there is an explanation that makes a lot of sense.
Good vs. evil = Entities oriented in service to others vs. Entities oriented in service to self.
From the point of view of nonduality, the one, they are both eqauly important expressions of infinity and neither of them is prefered.
However!
Service to others is a more efficient way of approaching existence. Why? Because when you are service to self oriented, all other entities are seen just as mere extension of yourself. This is in a sense narcissistic view of enlightenment, which isn't wrong per se, it is just a different approach, one that lacks empathy and love isn't bursting from you into space, but it is oriented towards you and only you, not hesitating to use others in order to get your desires met.
On the other hand, service to others oriented entities are having the advantage of cooperation and mirroring. They see themselves in others, not from a point of view o a narcissist, but as a mirror, and can consciously act as a mirror to others, bringing more balance, more well-being, more love and more compassion, inherently working towards creating a civilisation of very warm loving beautiful goodness.
 

Why the binary paradigm? No offense, but there is a direction beyond this binary that is much more meaningful and all-encompassing. Plus it doesn't carry the contradictions and corruption of principle via reductive simplicity present in the above view.

There are three not two facets to interaction. Not just service to self and service to others, but also shared service. And you do all 3 at the same time. Superposition over binary or oneness or nothingness.

The most satisfying, abundant, and meaningful relationships are when you keep harmony and create synergy between all 3 worlds.

My World - You have individual pursuits, desires, and standards. You nurture those and spend time on those without isolating yourself.

Her/His World - You care and are considerate of the individual pursuits, desires and standards of other people. You support and nurture those feelings of others because you genuinely want them to succeed and you have an abundance of generosity to give. However, you do so in concert with your own individual wants so they balance each other out and one is not being deprived or over shadowed by the other.

The Shared World - You have a shared sense of family or community with people where you both are coming together and contributing to the shared pursuits and desires of something greater than the individual wants and needs of everyone in this shared space. However, again you do so in concert with the collective individual desires, so none are neglected or exploited/taken advantage of.

It's a three-legged stand and when one weakens through neglect or exploitation the whole thing falters. In a very simple way this is basically the cause for strife in the entire world. People unable to come together in a harmonious manner, so that everyone's individual and shared worlds are nurtured and allowed to grow without neglect and exploitation.

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@Revolutionary Think Yes, of course! Which is why the hero must go it alone. The hero's journey always starts with him leaving behind his comfortable social existence. In real life, that's not easy to do. Most people NEVER make it that far.

Notice that in books and in movies the hero is almost always opposed by the villain who is a defender of the status quo (very often mainstream society or culture).

The status quo always demonizes the hero, because that's what ego does to Truth. Ego must pervert Truth in order to maintain itself. It's a cosmic battle between Truth and illusion (Maya). And Maya has the upper hand because it's free to use dirty tricks whereas Truth must stay true.

If all of society conspired to help you effortlessly attain Truth, a hero's journey wouldn't be necessary and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

No offense, but your missing the point of the hero's journey with this extremism you've attached to. 

It's not about leaving society, it's about leaving your comfort zone. Going beyond the edges of where and who a person currently is.

You are only focusing on the beginning of the hero's journey and not including the reintegration with others, and the expanding of the heroes edges as he or she returns with greater capability and abundance to contribute to the shared space.

It's not about the society, it's much larger than that and about the mechanisms of nature society and everyone is dealing with, that the hero goes on his journey to face both within and without as he expands beyond his edges. So when he returns from his travels he can bring with him value that moves all of society forward from it's previous zone of comfort and normality.

That's also why your very last sentence is so flawed and out of touch with nature. Even if all of society conspired to help you attain harmonious expansion the hero's journey would still be necessary, because you would still have to expand and go beyond your zones of comfort and face the mechanisms of nature that create stress and resistance as we do so. Growing pains, challenge, and resistance are a part of life and are tied into meaning and beauty. However, the flavor of challenge, growing pains, and resistance would be much more healthy and less twisted and ignorant and extreme if we had a shared world where everyone was dedicated towards such a harmonious expansion. 
 

14 hours ago, Martin123 said:

The conflict of good vs. evil is really just a game that both agree on playing, they are both part of the same consciousness, just exploring different approaches of exploring and expressing infinity.
The tricky part comes in where the service-to-others oriented ones "fight" against evil. They can never "fight" against them in the manner of hate or inferiority, or anger, because whenever they approach the interaction with anything BUT love, understanding and compassion they polarize themselves to the other side of the spectrum which is SERVICE TO SELF. So in that sense, service to self would win.

There is good and evil. Both are equally valid, both are beautiful, both are miraculous phenomena in existence. The question is... Are you strong enough not to fall prey to the temptations of the darkside Young Padawan?! <3

 

This is feels like such a naive and sheltered view from my experience. Have you ever protected anyone before? Have you ever stood up to someone trying to seriously hurt or rape or kill another? Have you been there every hard step as those people healed? You ever see someone's head get smashed in or know anyone whose been tortured or seen children blown to bits by an rpg and have to pick up the pieces afterwards? I have first hand experience of all but the torture and war and someone very close to me has had to experience those horrible things while fleeing his country overseas.

This is NOT a game. This is life, the brutal, horrible side of it that is a contrast to the beautiful, fragile side of it. Go through those things, or tell someone to their face whose experienced it, that it's a game. I bet you'll feel differently afterwards. The impact of that side of life will change you and wake you up from that disconnect. 

I don't say that in anger. I mean it sincerely and with compassion as someone who carries those scars of understanding.

Yes, you are right in that the aim is to approach every interaction with love and understanding, but that alone isn't enough for the brutality of life. It takes resistance as well as acceptance and is also why you shouldn't tunnel vision on what it means to fight and resist. Fighting is about way more than just violence and it always starts within yourself first. It's the ones who fail first within themselves, who leak that failure out onto others and the world they share with everyone else. This world relies on inter-connection and cooperation for it's health and trust is required for that cooperation to happen.

So to fight is to resist the corruption of trust both within ourselves and outside in the world. It's not self-service that is evil, evil is the corruption of trust. And again, resistance or fighting is WAY more than violence. A person learns that when they step deep into the brutal fires of the dark side of life and bring healing beauty back from it. 


 

Edited April 11, 2017 by Salaam

[Bodhi123]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

All of that above is LANGUAGE. Without language, there could not be good/evil. Like at all. You're creating concepts and distinctions of which you are not remotely conscious yet.

I am creating concepts and distinctions, but isn’t conceptualization that creates evil. Evil is still evil even without a label.

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

If you're not willing to fully embrace Hitler as good, as God, as yourself, then spirituality isn't for you. And you might as well change your avatar picture away from that Buddha tree and Enso circle, because your position goes against the core of what the Buddha realized and taught. The Enso circle is a symbol for the totality of the Absolute. Which means: no distinctions. Which means, no separation between you, Hitler, God, love, and evil. There's not a circle with Hitler somehow magically sitting outside the circle because you happen to not like him. He's part of the circle no matter what you like. Your job here is to surrender your self-agenda.

I am fully aware of what my avatar represents. I agree that Hitler is part of the totality of the Absolute. I also believe that morality (principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong behavior) is divinely inspired.

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

As Hitler's ego tried to put the Jews outside the circle, your ego is trying to put Hitler outside the circle. Committing the very same epistemic mistake. This is the source of what you call "evil". You're currently enacting it by not being conscious of it.

I am fully conscious of my beliefs regarding good and evil.

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Experience the Absolute, then let's talk.

You have taken 5-meo DMT. I have not. I don't give a fuck.

Thank you for your response.

[Martin123]

@Salaam sorry I cannot take your point as valid. You are extremely biased.

 

However let me expand on one point. 

Self-love doesn't equal service to self. Self love is the beginning process of developing love for all there is.

You don't appreciate the possibility of how emptied of one's personal bias one can be, so they can act accordingly on every situation for the wellbeing of all.

I understand that it is difficult especially when having gone through a challenge such as you described. However the most loving thing you could do is to get over yourself. It will happen eventually.

 

This isn't naive this is very real. The problem is we don't have many people who had been emptied of personal bias enough. I can right now think of Gandhi or Jesus.

Study those individuals to truly understand what absolute service to others endulges, if you wish to do so.

[Salaam]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Experience the Absolute, then let's talk.

You speak of things your mind doesn't remotely comprehend yet.

All of that above is LANGUAGE. Without language, there could not be good/evil. Like at all. You're creating concepts and distinctions of which you are not remotely conscious yet.

If you're not willing to fully embrace Hitler as good, as God, as yourself, then spirituality isn't for you. And you might as well change your avatar picture away from that Buddha tree and Enso circle, because your position goes against the core of what the Buddha realized and taught. The Enso circle is a symbol for the totality of the Absolute. Which means: no distinctions. Which means, no separation between you, Hitler, God, love, and evil. There's not a circle with Hitler somehow magically sitting outside the circle because you happen to not like him. He's part of the circle no matter what you like. Your job here is to surrender your self-agenda. As Hitler's ego tried to put the Jews outside the circle, your ego is trying to put Hitler outside the circle. Committing the very same epistemic mistake. This is the source of what you call "evil". You're currently enacting it by not being conscious of it.

The light of the Absolute will blot out all "your" beliefs and judgments, like the daytime sun blots out the stars.

You do realize you can still have distance within a circle right? There are nuances and degrees of distance within inclusion to be found if one expands their mind and emotions beyond rigid absolutism.

And you do realize that all these actions and energies and distinctions exist independent of language right?

A dog speaks no language, but it understands and can differentiate between what to trust and what not to trust. I personally interact with the very same energies without words, I read their directions and sensations of presence like a wordless braille. Beauty, brutality, trust, compassion are labels for distinct energies with distinct feelings. Even without the words they still exist, actually without the limitation or containment of words, they become more vibrant with potential.

This attachment to extremism and absolutism is quite a limited and primitive direction in my experience. Maybe one day you'll expand beyond your comfort zone with it and continue your own heroic journey. I'm not trying to be snide by saying that, I'm speaking with compassion from my own experience, even if it maybe doesn't come across that way to you.

 

[Salaam]

38 minutes ago, Martin123 said:

@Salaam sorry I cannot take your point as valid. You are extremely biased.

 

However let me expand on one point. 

Self-love doesn't equal service to self. Self love is the beginning process of developing love for all there is.

You don't appreciate the possibility of how emptied of one's personal bias one can be, so they can act accordingly on every situation for the wellbeing of all.

I understand that it is difficult especially when having gone through a challenge such as you described. However the most loving thing you could do is to get over yourself. It will happen eventually.

 

This isn't naive this is very real. The problem is we don't have many people who had been emptied of personal bias enough. I can right now think of Gandhi or Jesus.

Study those individuals to truly understand what absolute service to others endulges, if you wish to do so.

You mistake deep experience and wisdom for extreme bias. Why are you closing your spirit off to the realities of the world that come from involvement and being present with it at different intensities? Why stay untested and un-examined in your comfort zone and delude yourself with fantasies and keyboard jockey proclamations when the brutality of the world is clearly evident? I've touched both sides of life, the extreme beauty and brutality. The deep meaning of life and the hollowness. And my spirit is vibrant and alive and joyous because of it. I'm thankful for the meaning I carry in my scars. For standing up over and over again for a better world. 

There is nothing wrong with being immature from not having touched both sides of life in these ways, but you do yourself a disservice by turning a blind eye to the potential for greater maturity. By not considering the value and truth that comes from maturing because of those experiences.

You believe you're empty of bias, but really you're unaware of how sheltered and protected you are because of other people's efforts who have faced and resisted brutality.

And neither Ghandi or Jesus were empty of personal bias. Ghandi was a racist and a sexist, who still needed to work on his cognitive and behavioral errors of prejudice which are an intense form of bias. Jesus would knock over the tables of bankers and apparently he cursed a date tree once because it pissed him off. Have you ever read the gospels of Thomas? He was constantly irritated by the people around him. He definitely took things personally and there is nothing wrong with that. I like him more for it, whether or not I attribute any real historical validity to his written accounts.

Again, we don't have to be binary or even worse mired in limited absolutism. Superposition is available and very real. You can superimpose personal preference on top of the shared preference of this section of the universe we're in. There can be harmony between the individual and shared worlds without the elimination of one or the other.

Why are you so against superimposed harmony?

Edited April 11, 2017 by Salaam

[Martin123]

@Salaam yo homie im not free of personal bias who told you that? Lol

There is a misunderstanding and I dont feel like continuing this debate will beat any fruits.

[Salaam]

1 minute ago, Martin123 said:

@Salaam yo homie im not free of personal bias who told you that? Lol

There is a misunderstanding and I dont feel like continuing this debate will beat any fruits.

Ah, sorry it came across to me like you were ascribing to that standard and writing from the belief or view of one who feels they embody it.

I feel like there is a lot of fruit to harvest with this discussion, but I understand and respect your feelings toward continuing

[alyra]

16 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Without language, there could not be good/evil

I challenge this. for three reasons.

 

the first is that I grew up without any language in my thoughts at all. I just thought in pure concept. that was enough to hold understanding of the world, and bias my opinion thereof. The second is that animals have fight or flight responses. not only that but they learn, learn helplessness for example, or to bite and claw. this may not be a clean example of good from evil, but it certainly is some kind of differentiation of good from bad. what is evil except for a monster? and third because language is what defines, language is nothing more than symbols. it is in the end without any meaning except the meaning we hold to it.

 

all that is needed really is action to create the "form" of good and evil. by action it is revealed what the actor seeks and what they actor avoids.... and that is the basic of good and evil.

of course it's possible I'm being more precise about language than you meant, and more abstract about good/evil than you meant.

in the end I find that good and evil are transcended, but not removed from conception, to cease awareness thereof is either to find blissful ignorance of it or foolish ignoring of it. when really good and evil are not... err, good and evil. they are just: pursued and avoided. preferred and disliked.

Edited April 12, 2017 by aryberry
spelling error

[TeamBills]

@Leo Gura

@Salaam

Quote

 rather than taking the harder road that demands self-responsibility and building rather than hollow distractions that make things worse and hurt others.

Aren't they causing more pain and more problems for themselves by killing others by risking the chance of wasting their life in jail, karma, future guilt, being paranoid and worried that there might actually be an afterlife that punishes the bad? It doesn't seem to me like it is the easy way out at all.

 

 

Quote

 

The reason hero's are admired, is because they give us a glimpse of how great 
we ourselves could be if we would only muster the courage to choose Truth over ego. The reason we like to celebrate hero's is because it gives us a false hope that they can do it for us.

If all of society conspired to help you effortlessly attain Truth, a hero's 
journey wouldn't be necessary and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

I really like these quotes, they really made me think. I'm a logician and I'm nerdy for thought provoking content like this. How did you become so smart and so well versed in all of this stuff? I always think this when you are able to provide so much content in a video each week. Like how are able to learn this much every week? 

I thought the hero's journey video was pretty inspirational from the life purpose course, but I find it hard to believe that everyone who truly does the hero's journey comes out with the medallion from the forest. I feel like the hero's journey guarantees you the medallion as long as you go through all of the steps. I can't imagine that everyone is able to succeed if they do the proper steps, some must fail. 

 

Quote

Notice that in books and in movies the hero is almost always opposed by the 
villain who is a defender of the status quo (very often mainstream society or 
culture).

I disagree. The hero in books and in movies is always the straight line. They are trying to protect what they currently have while the villain is fighting for change and fighting for something that they want and believe in. The hero to me seems to be fighting for the status quo.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 12, 2017 by TeamBills

[Salaam]

13 hours ago, TeamBills said:

 

@Salaam

Aren't they causing more pain and more problems for themselves by killing others by risking the chance of wasting their life in jail, karma, future guilt, being paranoid and worried that there might actually be an afterlife that punishes the bad? It doesn't seem to me like it is the easy way out at all.

 

Well, there are a couple things you might want to consider. The first is their difference in beliefs and awareness from your own and how that plays into their considerations when making choices. They may feel like they have no future, no potential other than jail, they may not believe or care about karma or guilt. They may not pay any attention to the afterlife or they may also be very good at lying to themselves and justifying their actions or blaming someone else. Self-responsibility is often in short supply for people who chronically bring about destruction in other people's lives.

The second thing is that there is a difference between easy and satisfying. Staying mired in suffering is actually pretty easy, in that you don't have to apply effort to stay in suffering, it's more the case that we have to apply effort to get OUT of suffering. It's takes less effort to destroy than build, you know?

And finally, there is a difference between how we feel in the short term versus the long term when making choices. Long term focus by their nature can often come across with less emotional intensity compared to things that are much more immediate. This reality often fools people, especially when the influence of the short term is high or very intense. This is how people get caught up so often in unhealthy cycles of behavior, like the person who drinks and then wakes up the next day with a hangover and says they'll never drink again, but once night comes around the pain is a distant memory, and their right back to drinking again.

Their choices in these situations keep getting influenced by the immediate feeling, while ignoring the long term consequences because the long-term feelings lack the intensity to move them. They don't apply that long term perspective and exercise will or volition to the resistance of that short-term influence for the greater long-term gain. 

Edited April 12, 2017 by Salaam

[Revolutionary Think]

@Salaam this is a poetry piece I did talking about the things I wanted to do with my life to become a hero. 

 

[Leo Gura]

On 4/11/2017 at 7:55 AM, Bodhi123 said:

I am creating concepts and distinctions, but isn’t conceptualization that creates evil. Evil is still evil even without a label.

No, evil is not still evil without a label.

You're not appreciating how much you create reality with your concepts. Concepts and distinctions are not "just labels", they are the building blocks reality.

For example, you were not born out of a vagina. "You" were created when the concept of self/other arose. Which makes you a concept.

Not only is evil a concept. You are a concept. Your body is a concept. Reality is a concept.

None of these things are a given. They had to be created. They are the paradigms which you created to exist in the reality you presently inhabit. Until you become aware of this, you will be a slave to them.

[Bodhi123]

@Leo Gura

Perhaps we can come to an understanding.

Correct me if I am wrong. Your position is that all form, thought, and actions are appearances in consciousness. These appearances have no moral value. They simply appear in consciousness.

The concept of “me” is creating the concepts of “good” and “evil” and placing them on appearances in consciousness (i.e. murder, hate, Hitler) which are neutral.

Is this correct?