Leo Gura

Men are attracted to all sorts of types. Which is why porn of every stripe exists. There are entire websites that cater to guys who like fat girls, skinny girls, tall girls, short girls, black girls, old girls, young girls, hairy girls, shaved girls, Asian girls, Muslim girls, Christian girls, even girls with dicks and a thousand other things. The less people judge such things, the better.

To be fair, wanting to grow financially is still a form of growth (just a relatively low one). But hey, many people need to start low. Moving from Blue to Orange will often involve growing financially. Remember, financial growth is not simply about earning more cash. To really grow in this area usually requires some significant and serious mindset shifts. For example, for a person to go from working a 9-5 job to being a successful entrepreneur usually takes a lot of inner growth. It's not simply a matter of money. You have to start to think about the world and yourself differently. Starting a business is one of the best and most practical ways to grow yourself as a person, especially within Tier 1 of the Spiral. The problem is that many people who want more money do not even understand that money is a function of one's being. So when you ask them, "Do you want to grow as a person?" they don't make the connection between that and earning more money. They think they can just have lots of money while staying the same inside. Which would be disastrous even if it ever came to be. A powerful way to help people grow is to show them how things like money, sex, success, fame, a good relationship, a good family, good physical appearance, and happiness are best achieved through deep inner growth, not by chasing externals directly.

Sounds to me like you just need much more experience socializing. Socialization is just like tennis. To get good at it you must have many opportunities to practice. So very practically you need to change your life around so that you have more socialization opportunities on a regular basis. The rest will mostly auto-correct. You can't get good at socializing if you're alone most of the time. There is no specific way that you must be when you socialize. You can basically be totally natural unless you're some kind of psycho, in which case you'll have to reign that in. Be chill, friendly, pleasant, playful, honest, expressive, and relaxed. That usually works best. You'll be amazed at how often people just accept you exactly for how you are. Perhaps the biggest mistake of learning to socialize is to try to act a certain way to please people or meet their expectations. Just be you. Not everyone will jive with you, but that doesn't matter. Be comfortable in your own skin. Act with strangers the same way you'd act with close family. Assume everyone already knows each other. Don't try to act cool or impressive. As simple as all these things are, it can take years to learn. Especially if you've developed bad habits.

That's a big if. And presence has many degrees. You can be 1000x more present than you are right now. And it's also a matter of consistency. Can you stay present for 1hr straight? If you could, you'd already be enlightened.

Presence

Love isn't just something you value, Love is what you are. Be careful not to lose Love while you're so wrapped up in chasing sex. The thing you most want is the very thing you push away in your desperation to get it. But do whatever you gotta do to learn that lesson. Be careful to distinguish Love and sex/girls.

EVERYTHING is special about her! That light, is love. You are looking at the glass half-empty.

@Aquarius Keep in mind that it usually takes 5 years for a person to move up one stage. And that's assuming they are doing some kind of active self-improvement work. Your time might be better spent helping other people who are eager to grow, rather than dragging a stubborn old mule up hill. A person cannot be forced to grow unless they are interested in growth. Before teaching someone, you might first want to ask them, "On a scale of 1 to 10, how interested are you in growing yourself as a human?"

I don't see either of these as being a problem for Yang. Yang would beat Trump. Yang's problem is that he will simply not get the Dem nomination due to lack of visibility.

Void = Truth = Love No, it's not about belief. Intention is a separate matter. The intention is simply to experience what is most true. Not about having your beliefs validated. There aren't infinite facets, only a handful of key ones.

No, the Absolute is Absolute. It's not relative as you assume. Once you see all the facets you will understand why people disagree about them. Because few have seen them all. Love is not a belief and it is not influenced by anything. Of course what you contemplate and set your intention for drives which facet will be revealed to you. So in this sense, yeah, if you go into a trip desiring to know about love, you will be shown love rather than something else.

Bernie taking Yang for his spanking

I don't think Dems are interested in a centrist billionaire. Bloomberg has no base of support. The people who might support him already got Biden and Buttigeg, and the Warren and Sanders and Yang supporters will never accept Bloomberg. Bloomberg will not make any of the debates. He just wants to buy the election, which I think voters are too smart to tolerate. Bloomberg offers nothing new. The real problem here is that Bloomberg might simply use the Dems as a launching point for a 3rd party run, which could be a big problem in the general election. Seems like Bloomberg is not truly running to win the Dem primary but to set himself up as a 3rd party after the Dem is selected. There's just no way Bloomberg will overtake Bernie, Warren, or Biden. Biden may be a centrist but at least he's someone people can relate to. Bloomberg is gonna look like an elitist asshole. The Rust Belt is not going to vote for him.

I think there's depth to any state of consciousness, and there is nothing but states of consciousness. There are states of consciousness so nondual you would not be able to walk straight. Seems hard to make such things permanent. Usually one's baseline state will be much lower than a possible peak. But ultimately I don't know. It's a tricky topic since you need reference points of what's possible, and those are hard to come by and even harder to communicate and share.

Sahaja Samadhi is the end goal: a permanent state of nondual awareness 24/7 regardless of what you're doing. You don't access it, you are in nonduality at all times. That's the ideal. And ideally you don't get lured out of it by cravings and attachments. Accessing special states would be icing on that nondual cake.

Sadhguru is not in a no man's land of no perception in his regular life. That might be a state he enters when he sits in deep meditation, not while he's driving his motorbike. You have to be nuanced here. There are many possible states of consciousness with psychedelics, not just some one state called "enlightenment". There are various kinds of samadhi states which have been catalogued by mystics and gurus throughout the ages.

Probably because you care about how your friends will judge you. Which is of course just you judging yourself via them.

It is what it is. Arguing with people is largely a waste of time. If you care about truth you will sit down and do the work. Question what reason is. Study what post-rationality is. Don't take my word for it. I just don't have 10 years to explain to you all the limits of reason. It is your job to figure that out. I just give quick pointers. Under each pointer might lie 5 or 10 years of study and contemplation. So of course without doing that the pointer will mean very little to you. Don't confuse this work with any kind of proof. We're not in the business of proof or argumentation, we're in the business of self-reflection and exploration of how our minds work. The only way you can learn how your mind works is by studying how your mind works. Not by listening to arguments. Everything worth knowing can be found directly in your experience, so there is no need to argue about it. Observation work is necessary.

@Serotoninluv Hehehe...

This is really a discussion about feminism, and a lack of understanding of it's historical development and function in society. If you want to start a thread about understanding feminism, go for it. But let's get not derail this thread any further with debates about the validity of feminism. This threat for posting more Stage Green examples, positive and negative ones. Remember, to understand Stage Green is not the same as saying it is the end-all-be-all and that it doesn't have its problems and limits. There are much higher worldviews than Green. But to not understand Green is an obstacle to reaching those. Green's validity needs to be acknowledged to go higher.

There are truths so much more advanced and more important than science that they make science look like a joke. If you could access such truth you would stop wasting your time reading science or trying to convince scientists of their blindness. It is mistake to ask spirituality to lower itself to the gross material domain of science. There is an endless list of technical problems to solve and solving them does not really improve the human condition.

Go ahead, if you dare.

The cheif function of reason is to realize its own limitations and go beyond itself to vision-logic and then even further to pure consciousness. Reason eats its own tail if you question it deeply enough. At post-rational even the notion of argument falls apart. There is nothing to argue and no one to argue with but yourself.

It's far more complex than that. America has pockets of Blue. Lots of it in the South, which is of course a geographical factor. Rural America is much less developed than urban America. Amd rural parts of the Middle East are far lower than Blue. They are mostly Purple and Red. No problem here at all. The rational is being criticized from post-rational. Post-rational still uses reason but recognizes its limits, whereas the rational does not recognize the limits of reason. Which is Sam Harris' biggest problem.

Love is the not result of structure, but structure is the result of love. Life has a very specific structure which has a logic to it. I am not saying one part of reality is better than another. I am saying the entire thing as a whole works to maximize love. You are overlooking the intelligence that went into the design. This intelligence wasn't just dicking around, telling itself that nothing matters and spawning monstrosities. It had a goal in mind: to maximize the sharing of love / God.