Blessed2 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 (edited) All people are just a dream of separation. The awakeness or unawakeness that you see in other people are both equally made up. The ignorance you see in others is just a projection of your own ignorance. See everyone already, unconditionally enlightened & liberated and so you'll see yourself too. Edited January 20 by Blessed2 There must be an effortless way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 @Robed Mystic Persistent unworthiness is often related to trauma suppressed by a misunderstanding of intelligence as finite, or, as something separate selves have amounts of. It plays out as a gravitating towards or attracting of, resenting of, and or even pedestaling ‘people who have a lot of intelligence’, via trauma bonding… via the shared suppression of unworthiness / via sharing the belief in intelligence. In extreme cases this can be doubly masked by the belief in solipsism which is isolating and tends to psychologically rule out introspection / therapy / healing (since it’s already “known”). Similar to how persistent un-deservedness is accompanied by a misunderstanding of the nature or truth of abundance & plays out as a gravitating towards ‘people which have a lot of stuff’ and efforts to be seen or thought of as someone who has a lot of stuff. This is why, so to speak, people can ‘learn it all’, completely understand quantum mechanics for example, and ‘have it all’ as in be relationship & finance wealthy… yet still experience persistant unworthiness and or un-deservedness. The deeper & relevant introspection is that of dispelling the separate self the beliefs center around. Otherwise what’s being said can be innocently reinterpreted via misidentification which might sound like ‘now I have to do this’ or ‘now I have to realize this’ (to be enough / be worthy / be deserving / be whole). In this case the guidance of guilt would be felt. If the word intelligence (wisdom as well) is popped in replacing the word consciousness in phrases like my consciousness, your consciousness, levels of consciousness & states of consciousness this stands to be more clearly seen, like a half step home from conceptualizing ‘back to’ feeling & listening to the underlying emotional discord. Another way to look at it is the truth; you are nothing. That might ‘trigger’ underlying discordant beliefs about a separate self or selves, and therein keep rumination about separate selves being awake or not, to levels, etc, going, as not to feel (which stands to dispel the discordant beliefs). Similar to how the truth, that there aren’t separate selves, only unconditional love, stands to ‘trigger’ thought attachment / ego. Trigger as in clarify, or flush out beliefs to the contrary. Another interpretation or consideration is that you indeed are perfect, perfection. Narratives based on who’s right or wrong, who’s at fault, who’s awake or more awake etc are the activity of perfection obscuring perfection (innocence, intelligence, happiness, unconditional love). At some point the who’s more infinite unconditional love (consciousness) is just seen as nonsensical, felt as discordant. YouTube Website Sessions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Long Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 16 hours ago, Proserpina said: My thoughts on Leo and Actualized are mixed. It has been my largest source of pain ( not exaggerating) and my largest source of happiness (still not exaggerating). Even though that sounds wack. The mind and heart can do some crazy things when you open up enough. I loved and still love Actualized. It took me on many adventures. Leo has his own path to take and I wish him well. Folie a duex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 @Jonas Long 😳 That’s it. What a word. YouTube Website Sessions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proserpina Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 2 hours ago, Jonas Long said: Folie a duex Too true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MetaSage Posted January 21 Share Posted January 21 Baby... I'm... dancing in the dark... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enlightened Cat Posted January 21 Share Posted January 21 9 hours ago, Jonas Long said: Folie a duex Wow, there's a term for it. Shared Psychosis Disorder is aptly named. Yeah you can literally transmit the psychosis that you bring back from your psychedelic experiences to other people, wild. Describe a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Maynor Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 I appreciate this blog post by Leo explaining how he sees spiritual enlightenment now. https://www.actualized.org/insights/simulating-liberals-vs-conservatives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 @Joseph Maynor Reminds me of a casino, pull the lever again, you'll get it next time! Oh did you think I said this time, nooo I said "next" time! Or all the dead bodies and human waste on Mount Everest, which has turned into a major money maker, yet is for the people who guide the adventurers, supposed to be sacred, and therefore left alone. Youtube Channel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Maynor Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Mandy said: @Joseph Maynor Reminds me of a casino, pull the lever again, you'll get it next time! Oh did you think I said this time, nooo I said "next" time! Or all the dead bodies and human waste on Mount Everest, which has turned into a major money maker, yet is for the people who guide the adventurers, supposed to be sacred, and therefore left alone. But I think you could give him credit for stating what he thinks in a clear way. There's always going to be a wobble between magic vs./and truth. You can presume this in almost every situation in life. And that's ok. That's to be expected. I guess I'm somewhat open to discussion on this issue. Here's the question at issue from my perspective: Is what someone says genuine or said to appease some perspective? But now you have to have evidence that someone is not being genuine. In law we call this: not communicating in "good faith". But that has to be proved. How do we know when someone is trying to appease or being forthright in their statements? I don't know how we test this in our online communications. You raise a great issue. How I trust is personal to me and I go by my own guidance. But I'm also an optimist. I give people the benefit of the doubt and allow people to change and create (and recreate) themselves. I allow people to grow. You can (or someone else) can change anything right now. Who's to say? We're both different and the same paradoxically -- and/or maybe not too! We trap ourselves by not letting different expectations and results emerge. We're against change. You have to question that premise. Edited January 25 by Joseph Maynor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Long Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 1 hour ago, Joseph Maynor said: I appreciate this blog post by Leo explaining how he sees spiritual enlightenment now. https://www.actualized.org/insights/simulating-liberals-vs-conservatives What? Looks like more of exactly the same. All the predictable beats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Long Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 20 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said: But I think you could give him credit for stating what he thinks in a clear way. There's always going to be a wobble between magic vs./and truth. You can presume this in almost every situation in life. And that's ok. That's to be expected. I guess I'm somewhat open to discussion on this issue. Here's the question at issue from my perspective: Is what someone says genuine or said to appease some perspective? But now you have to have evidence that someone is not being genuine. In law we call this: not communicating in "good faith". But that has to be proved. How do we know when someone is trying to appease or being forthright in their statements? I don't know how we test this in our online communications. You raise a great issue. How I trust is personal to me and I go by my own guidance. But I'm also an optimist. I give people the benefit of the doubt and allow people to change and create (and recreate) themselves. I allow people to grow. You can (or someone else) can change anything right now. Who's to say? We're both different and the same paradoxically -- and/or maybe not too! We trap ourselves but not letting different expectations and results emerge. We're against change. You have to question that premise. It doesn't seem like you are giving yourself room to change significantly by constantly going back to that well. It's the same exact thing being served there, but maybe you're too accustomed to it to notice. Side note, didn't they teach you about the logical fallacies in philosophy class? You might want to review those, and see if his post, any of them, passes muster with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blessed2 Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 I swear, Truth is like that overwhelmingly and overblowingly, teasingly tempting, sexy and attractive rockstar whom all those conservative, fundamental and religious folk say is bad, evil and devilish and whom you should resist and not even look at, yet whom they all really want deep in their hearts and can't stop thinking about. Jeez, just give up the nonsense and get down with the star already. Anyone here seen Rock of Ages? There must be an effortless way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 3 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said: There's always going to be a wobble between magic vs./and truth. Not in direct experience. It's pretty real and fantastical and also just this, nothing special. Not sure what it is. 3 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said: Here's the question at issue from my perspective: Is what someone says genuine or said to appease some perspective? People can occasionally be appeased, perspectives can't be appeased. Usually appeasing is done when there is peer pressure being assumed or imposed. 3 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said: How do we know when someone is trying to appease or being forthright in their statements? I don't know how we test this in our online communications. Ask questions? When we're upset we can't find the car keys, or the remote, or get the joke, but when we're relaxed and don't claim to know or need to know we, see clearly. Actually looking and asking, with okayness with not knowing are the same here. 3 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said: We're against change. You have to question that premise. Lost me. Youtube Channel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Long Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 4 hours ago, Blessed2 said: Anyone here seen Rock of Ages? Is that the documentary about Tom cruise and Russell brand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteOwl Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 On 1/20/2024 at 2:51 PM, Phil said: Persistent unworthiness is often related to trauma suppressed by a misunderstanding of intelligence as finite, or, as something separate selves have amounts of. It plays out as a gravitating towards or attracting of, resenting of, and or even pedestaling ‘people who have a lot of intelligence’, via trauma bonding… via the shared suppression of unworthiness / via sharing the belief in intelligence This is so huge.. How do you contemplate something like intelligence? What angle do you go at it from. Maybe there is a way to gradually dispell beliefs about intelligence without fully realizing that there is no self. "Worth" also. Seems so obvious that it doesn't exist yet still seems to dominate stuff in experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James123 Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 10 minutes ago, WhiteOwl said: This is so huge.. How do you contemplate something like intelligence? What angle do you go at it from. Maybe there is a way to gradually dispell beliefs about intelligence without fully realizing that there is no self. "Worth" also. Seems so obvious that it doesn't exist yet still seems to dominate stuff in experience. What if whatever we have learned is an just illusion itself? Like being in the earth "It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enlightened Cat Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) 22 minutes ago, WhiteOwl said: How do you contemplate something like intelligence? What angle do you go at it from. Maybe there is a way to gradually dispell beliefs about intelligence without fully realizing that there is no self. The object of contemplation would probably be about the "I" that knows things, not directly intelligence itself, but the one who claims ownership over intelligence. The ownership and the inherent separation that comes with that ownership is the only thing that can create beliefs about your intelligence. "I know things, therefore I am intelligent because of that." These kinds of identity structures. Edited January 26 by Enlightened Cat Describe a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 1 hour ago, WhiteOwl said: This is so huge.. How do you contemplate something like intelligence? What angle do you go at it from. Maybe there is a way to gradually dispell beliefs about intelligence without fully realizing that there is no self. "Worth" also. Seems so obvious that it doesn't exist yet still seems to dominate stuff in experience. What is intelligence? What is worth? YouTube Website Sessions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Maynor Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) @Mandy When we make something an enemy we don't want it to change. We have a stake in it not changing because if it does, then we have to change, and we don't want to do that. I always give the benefit of the doubt that anyone can change anything at any time. People can turn on a dime. I've seen it. I don't want to be Pollyannish but I am an optimist. Someone can get it and boom, they can change right there. Everybody wants to improve. If they realize something they're doing is stupid and they can change that, they will. I always allow and root for people to change for the better, even people I put into my shadow for various reasons. Edited January 26 by Joseph Maynor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts