nuwu
-
Posts
11 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by nuwu
-
-
As an intuitive introvert with social anxiety, I have difficulties managing networked structural entanglements, incentives, manipulations, and their respective dynamics. I operate effectively in a minimally maximizing field of potentialities. Due to severe chronic health problems, I have absolutely no spare energy for superfluous worries. In accordance with:
- Vertical Integrity: Hierarchical positions are entitled to basic decencies and non-discriminatory external or internal integration, especially in allegedly help-centric communities considering the potentially profound trauma-induced vulnerability of entities, contrasting subsequent failure to uphold the forum own’s guidelines ‘Expression of all emotions is encouraged.’ and ‘What Is Not Allowed On This Forum […] racism’
- Privacy Regulations: I live in a jurisdiction with strong data protection laws (EU’s GDPR laws and their extraterritorial effects). They enforce my right to privacy, respect, and support in services of practices deemed unfair and deceptive, which may also include American consumer protection laws.
- Self-Help Completeness: If the well-being of users is not prioritized (e.g. by processing suppression of account), then objectives and actions are mutually contradictory. Legitimate consideration of user requests is tautological.
- Clarity: To enhance the effectiveness and sincerity of communal classifications, and to respect the boundaries of their users.
Under such circumstances, cynical superstitious gaslighting is unfortunate and unwarranted. I hereby request the regrettable suppression of the account of mine.
-
@Blessed2 Game theory wise pragmatically measured defense mechanisms are possibly necessary in survival. https://youtu.be/mScpHTIi-kM
This interpretation is not inspired by pseudo-spiritual dogmas. I personally wish for infinitely loving ontology, rather than a regrettably abstract absolute with no relative practicality.
-
@Blessed2 If you are kind and forgiving to narcissists, they will exploit and abuse you until death. I understand ego death depends on a perspective, but if you are willing to sustain a presence within duality, or at least this realm, then survival bias may be unavoidable.
-
Sorry for gloom and doom. I am disturbed by the prevalence of hate speech and narcissism on the actualized.org forum, ostensibly accentuating. I am dumbfounded that individuals boast or denigrate based on placeholder monkey avatars devoid of abstract significance. But more importantly, I feel overwhelmed by the systemic lack of empathy in this realm, and this is troubling my experiences with dreams, psychedelics and meditation. I wanna see evidence that consciousness is love.
-
2 hours ago, Phil said:
Because ‘it’s’ never actual.
what's the difference between perception and abstraction? aren't they both the same substance (imagination)? why would more or less direct forms of understanding even require a sense of self? i don't share the opinion of @Devin that the ego isn't problematic, but buddhism and advaita may or may not provide the full picture of what we should do with our consciousness, conveniently omitted by the "it's impossible to know" rhetoric. we actually don't know if it really is impossible to know either. the sense of self only limits the expansion and freedom of awareness, but it doesn't change its substrate. we are it. if leo has been aware of states potentially beyond ego games, it's intriguing. i don't think we should be scared of exploring the realm of possibilities.
-
1 hour ago, Phil said:
Awareness can veil itself with the activity of thought
w-why is ego considered identical to thoughts? it doesn’t matter how many layers of concrete or abstract understandings consciousness gives shape to, isn’t it all part of truth? conceptualisation does not imply attachments.
i still meditate and seek selflessness, but as far as i can see, there are blind spots in advaita/buddhism that deserve to be explored. such as having a clear understanding of the end goal (even if we say the end is an illusion, in practice our experiences will be radically different). if we are going back to where we came from, what’s the point? using concepts to prevent the exploration of other concepts is not a solution to this. eventually, this would also be useful in mainstreaming spirituality.
-
to be clear, i'm not arguing against buddhism or leo. both are supported by strong arguments and both make lots of sense. i only scrutinize what i find confusing. personally, i will still explore all spiritual practices. a more loving existence is all we need.
in summary, one side says "everything is a state" and another says "everything has a sense of self". i think leo believes states without ego he has been aware of invalidates the latter view, or something, which is why he would lately distance himself from advaita. it doesn't mean he necessarily believes advaita is false, but he might find it incomplete. i have not been aware of such states, nor i have any idea how he actually views spirituality or experiences it. it's mostly intellectual contemplation.
-
cross-posting from the other forum
Quoteseems actualized.org's videos are slowly moving away from buddhism, or at least find themselves in a somewhat confusing status. i wish @Leo Gura could share some clarifications about these, since the views are growingly incompatible with traditional spiritual models. both philosophies are interesting in their own way, such that silencing or discrediting opposite narratives is superfluous. summary of discord (from what i can tell):
- in buddhism, all dualities necessarily cancel out into nothingness/oneness. our perspectives are conceived from subconscious vibrations who melt into nonduality with meditation/stillness. in leo's recent videos, the understandings of awareness are unclear, other than absolute infinity implies all impossible and absurd states of awareness, potentially even blends of seemingly incompatible experiences (non-duality + duality?), or subinfinities merging together, or something i dont even know
- arguments pointing at biases are useless, since both buddhism and leo are sustained by powerful egos. former being more cultural and artistic, while latter being a classical body-mind perspective
- oneness is in our heart. nothing should be required in order to (un)reach the absolute, like gravity. countless perspectives are unable to obtain sufficiently powerful psychedelics to "awaken". in contrast, meditation is universal. god can not prevent itself from being itself. but then, what does it mean to "do nothing"? if one is meditating, isnt she already imagining herself not taking psychedelics? its mitigated
- death is imaginary, which may contradict the assumption one must be entitled to attain parinirvana after physical death, even with a glimpse of nonduality. why is such delay required, if bodily functions are illusions? buddhism traditionally shut down all discussions about the "experience" of parinirvana, yet it could be very well be dreams within sub-infinities.
- meditation with calcified pineal glands is, or seem to be less effective due to lower andogenous dmt. so what is the difference between meditation and some ever lasting trips? buddha claims ego's attachments are the source of suffering, but why would such attachments matter when they are themselves imaginary? counter-argument is that if it meditation works for (you), doesnt it mean it works for everyone since (your perspective) is the only one that is provably actual? were you ever aware of a state where meditation doesn't work?
- maybe leo is susceptible to impressive state of awareness and experiences of large infinities, which can be confused with the absolute if you trip hard enough. shouldnt the absolute be transcendental to states and degree of awareness? no sized infinities may ever compare to the absolute. such as it doesnt matter how large numbers can grow, they will never reach infinity unless going back to nil. one could dream being the "god" of infinite civilizations, yet it still woudnt be the absolute. then at the same time, how do we know what it takes to reach the absolute? all awakenings could be the delusion of self-impressionable entities, as far as we know.
- there are anecdotal evidences from that one taiwanese youtuber who experienced both awawakening with meditation and 5-meo-dmt, and reportedly shared an abyssal difference in favor of former. status of leo's meditation practices are unknown. unclear why he doesnt try serious attempts, since it would make communications between the two schools of thoughts easier.
- if everything is a single self-loving entity, why would rejection of anything be ever necessary to obtain truth? this is assuming there is such thing as an "ego" out there who has any level of sovereignty on the matter, but there is no such thing. there would be only one ego, that is yours.n-not sure how much of a foolish rant this is. i find the situation somewhat confusing. what are your thoughts on the matter? i have no idea or attachment about what consciousness truly is, i just want to be comfy and happy
content in question:
- leo's posting style which seems less inclusive to traditional buddhism, reinforcing the observation his views are incompatible
-
beyond material goods, i feel money is a powerful to raise collective understandings above what would be a bunch of selfish perspectives otherwise. this is specially apparent in web3, but also happens in legacy contracts structures, where game theory shapes systems that are stronger with interests alignment at all levels. stock markets is, despite all the flaws, humanity first attempt to algorithmic governance. all systems are incomplete so i feel like happiness might only come from money when upsides and drawbacks are understood
Why people ask for account to be deleted?
in The Path
Posted
I am not sure what the drama of yours is about. However, apathy, pseudo-nondualism, blatant dismissiveness, over-emphasis on superficial harmony over the legitimate well-being of extraneous perspectives, passive-aggressive entitlement, belittlement, perpetuate nonchalant maceration of victims, sophistry (particularly strawman, status quoism, appeal to naturalism, short-sighted disregard on fundamental principles | needs, oxymoronic exclusion of perfect actuality based on symbolic misinterpretations, …), all of such contentions are inappropriate rebuttals to the stoic distressful states of vulnerable entities. Refusal to provide simple concrete solutions to traumatized agents optimizing their slim chances of self-imposed perspectival survival, is iniquitous. I will not reiterate my request. Please delete my account.