Leo Gura

Experience does not actually exist. What you presently call "my experience" is actually Absolute Infinity. But the ego cannot see this because it believes that you were actually born. The ego is misinterpreting being as experience because of its selfishness. The ego is a giant ball of concepts which includes the concept "me", "my life", "my experience", etc. All of that falls away with the collapse of the ego such that only raw being remains. Life ceases to belong to you. You realize that your birth is just an idea. It never actually happened. You were not born physically, you are born conceptually. "I was born physically" << that's your conceptual birth! Wakey wakey

@Revolutionary Think Like a circle jerk

The hard scientific statistical data for paranormal phenomena is beyond doubt. The problem is, no materialist wants to take it seriously, so the data falls on deaf ears. The bottleneck isn't lack of evidence, it's lack of openmindedness. The truth is too uncomfortable for materialist to stomach, as it would spell doom for materialism. So they just stick their head in the sand. Just like religious folks do about evolution. Same old game replayed in new ways. Nothing original or surprising about it. This is paradigm lock.

Being is prior to knowledge. Turns out that knowledge is actually impossible. You cannot know anything because the thing you are using to accomplish the knowing is itself unknowable. It's like you're trying to use a knife to cut itself.

What would happen if you placed a time machine inside another time machine?

@electroBeam That "book" is called psychedelics

Nothing your mind says can be trusted. You're still not getting it. You are spinning this nonsense and then swallowing it hook, line, and sinker. "I", "I", "I", "I".... Every time you write the word "I", it's a lie. "But I need..." << LIE! "But I just think..." << LIE! "But I want..." << LIE! "But I will have to sacrifice..." << LIE! "I might as well shoot myself..." << LIE! "Meaninglessness is making me feel bad..." << LIE! "Now I'm confused..." << LIE! You are an imaginary character.

@pluto No. If you don't bother to study, you will not understand the difference. Awakening isn't Turquoise, and Turquoise isn't awakening.

I accused the HR lady of tricking me into a position with no benefits.

@Stretch It's like you're the fox guarding the hen house musing about why it would be a bad idea if you stopped guarding the hens. Lol You are an illegitimate tyrant who is completely full of shit. Nothing your mind says can be trusted.

Don't get ahead of your skis.

@brugluiz Nothing in reality is useless. If it exists, it serves some part in the whole. Just don't get carried away with your activism.

@kieranperez Well, someone like Sam Harris demonstrates how one can pursue spirituality, have some minor awakenings, but still be lost in materialism, rationalism, and moralism. The question is: how deep was your awakening really? The early awakenings tend to not be deep. At the deepest levels, not only the self, but reality itself will collapse.

@George Fil He talks about how busy he was running various businesses before enlightenment. Yes, he went through Orange.

@Revolutionary Think Keep at it. There are many solutions available. Yes, mastering financial independence is challenging. But it's also highly worthwhile and an exciting opportunity for growth. I was in your shoes 10 years ago. I got fired from my first job in 1 day. Then a month later I found a much better job. And a year later I quit even that job and started my own biz and worked for myself for 10 years. Those first 5 years of doing biz were really exciting and scary times. Without that, Actualized.org would never have been possible. So keep the hope and really work the problem.

Get a job and move out. Until then, you're in a coping holding pattern. It's important to break free of your family and forge your own life. Then you can set all the rules and values. In your early 20's the #1 priority should be to master making a living for yourself so you are not anyone's slave, including not your boss's slave.

Here's a simple thought experiment for you moralists: If we program a robot with a rule which says: "Do not kill robots" does that make this rule have any objective validity? If we program the robot to feel guilty for killing a robot, does that make it any more objective? What if we program another robot with the opposite rule? Which one of them is right? Based on who's criteria?