
RendHeaven
Member-
Content count
2,976 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by RendHeaven
-
I would personally never give touching as advice until it's established that this is a person who is comfortable in their own skin. A genuine smile, combined with a genuine laugh combined with genuine touching is killer. A forced smile, a half-laugh, and a rigid, rehearsed touch is disgusting.
-
@Richard Alpert I mentioned the moon as an analogy. But, since you ask, the answer is "I don't know." And if you were really honest, that would be your answer also. Notice, RIGHT NOW, that in your direct experience, you do not perceive anything "behind" you. Now, if you were to turn around, you might say that what was "behind" you is now visible. And once again if you turned back to your original orientation, "behind" is once again invisible. Where did all the forms go? "Well, they're behind me!" Nope. That's a mental map you constructed. Do you understand that? For all you know, what's "behind" you might physically cease to exist while you are not aware of it. When you turn back around, it spontaneously materializes. Now, I'm not saying that's what actually happens. What I am saying, though, is that there are gaps in your certainty of reality and you fill them with thought stories. What happens to the forms behind you when you do not see them? Well, you imagine that they continue to exist while not being observed. Key word, imagine. You have no way of verifying this. In order to imagine this, you literally invent "you," "perceptual field/vision," "objects," "space/location," and "time." I am telling you that these things literally do not exist. So what does exist?? Imagine this (lol): Let's pretend "direct experience" is like a a big canvas. The forms you see are paint on that canvas. So as you turn around, the paint changes. In fact, as you live life, the paint is constantly changing. The whole process is so mysterious that you, that being the curious little cat you are, you MUST explain it to yourself. So what do you do? You start calling the paint "objects." When the paint changes, you tell yourself that these are different objects that are being perceived by you. In doing this, however, you lose sight of the canvas. You only see the paint. Try to get in touch with the canvas. The experience as it happens prior to your mind projecting all sorts of conceptions. So once again, Notice, RIGHT NOW, that in your direct experience, you do not perceive anything "behind" you. Your direct experience is your direct experience. The canvas regardless of the paint. Now, if you were to turn around, you might say that what was "behind" you is now visible. Your direct experience is your direct experience. The canvas regardless of the paint. Turning around does not change this. And once again if you turned back to your original orientation, "behind" is once again invisible. Where did all the forms go? No, they are NOT "behind you." And if you are adamantly going to insist that they are, at least admit that you are imagining it and that you are taking a blind leap of faith. The "external world" is NOT obvious. It is NOT common sense. If you were really really really honest, when I ask, "where did all the forms go?" You would say "I don't know." And not knowing, my friend, is both the starting point as well as the whole journey.
-
Finger pointing to the moon, my man Ofc the finger ain't the moon. Shiva's analogy here is clearly tailored toward someone locked in materialism, thus it is a partial truth. You can't bust out anekantavada on a materialist, they will reject it immediately (not that anekantavada is any more "truthful" than any other partial truth, necessarily. Very twisted, tricky stuff.)
-
Wow, this is a gem! Sadly, I get this feeling that materialists will still insist on "hallucination!" to maintain their worldview of "brainz>everything else!!"
-
1) That's because you're assuming consciousness is fractured and trapped within individual people. 2) Thanks! I suggest you (and anyone else who is curious) take a look at this review of that book. These reviewers clearly know what they are talking about, as shown by their ability to take multiple paradigms into account. The important takeaway is, Nelson was evidently biased and paradigm locked. This is questioned thoroughly in this review. This does not discount his findings, but it does discount his conclusions. Notice, what a scientist finds and what a scientist concludes can be two very different things. https://www.academia.edu/9480789/The_Spiritual_Doorway_in_the_Brain_A_Neurologists_Search_for_the_God_Experience_by_Kevin_Nelson_review_
-
@Richard Alpert First of all, cite your sources. You may be bastardizing this finding, and none of us will know that unless you are transparent about your claims. Secondly, just because there are correlations between the brain and what you may call mystical experiences, that is NOT "proof" that the brain causes states of consciousness. Correlation is not causation. Basic statistics. You learn this in high school.
-
@Anirban657 Academic philosophy will not get you to Truth. Just come to terms with that first if you decide to pursue
-
RendHeaven replied to Bryanbrax's topic in Spirituality, Consciousness, Awakening, Mysticism, Meditation, God
@Keyhole Lol that's quite a non sequitur. -
RendHeaven replied to Bryanbrax's topic in Spirituality, Consciousness, Awakening, Mysticism, Meditation, God
"Image looks like enlightenment?" -
I wonder what makes you say this? I've seen this video 5 times over with notes as well, thank you very much. "Haphazard sharing?" This video addresses your exact concerns regarding Leo's use of the term "devil." Just because the video does not fit your preconceived notions of "devilry," it does not become invalid to the discussion. You won't be finding Truth with your current attitude.
-
RendHeaven replied to Truth Addict's topic in Spirituality, Consciousness, Awakening, Mysticism, Meditation, God
@Nic Terpstra Therefore God and the devil are one. From God's perspective, of course. From the devil's perspective, God does not even register. -
P.S. Let's not not derail this thread any more. If you would like to respond, please consider starting a new thread and tag me. I'll be glad to discuss!
-
Sounds impractical...
-
1) "But that's all they are - states of consciousness" - define that. I don't think you know the full meaning of "states of consciousness." 2) No, not "obviously an escape from reality." Why do you get to call your experience of reality True? Why is your experience more Truthful while his is somehow a fantasy? Citing "drugs!" is insufficient. People have profound enlightenment experiences sober. How do you explain this? More hallucinations? What, so all profound experiences that other people have are fake, but your experiences are what's actually real? Why do you get to make that exception? 3) Consciousness isn't "going on locally" anywhere. Location is a model you use to describe phenomena. A mental projection. By relegating consciousness as something within a relative model, you further show that you have no clue as to what "consciousness" is. 4) Why does the "natural world" get priority over Leo's hypothetical "hallucination?" Your "natural world" itself is your own hallucination. No difference. You just don't see that because of your impatience. Notice how in every single critique you mount, you are prioritizing your own experiences as somehow more True? You have this notion of what "real reality" is. What we are all telling you here is that you have investigated this not nearly enough. 5) Leo is not going to use any "counter-arguments," lol. He is not in the business of arguing. Fancy this: he has been in your shoes and beyond, and he is sharing what he has learned. You have only been in your own shoes and not his, and you are the one pointing fingers. And you really have the audacity to call Leo the arrogant one?
-
@dude Damn, your editing is fantastic. What program do you use? Would you say there was/is a mastery curve to learning editing?
-
@Surfingthewave @possibilities Holy SHIT how long did that take you to write?? This video should answer your questions: In the future, try to keep your points precise and short; that makes it easier for the reader.
-
@Surfingthewave Me being male and you being female is irrelevant. I would have said the same thing to Leo if he wrote the things you did. It's good that you're expressing your views. My intention was to simply point out your potential blind spots. I hope it's clear that I'm not attacking your personhood. It would be unwise to dismiss these insights. If my tonality was unnecessarily harsh, or you felt like I mischaracterized you, I sincerely apologize. That happens to be some of my blind spots
-
Going through this myself. Learn to love it, haha (literally). It's absolutely central to life. There's no getting rid of it, though you can try to ignore it. Key word: try Be curious. Wonder, "why empty?" It's not an accident that we feel this way.
-
RendHeaven replied to Dimi's topic in Spirituality, Consciousness, Awakening, Mysticism, Meditation, God
Not sure what your question is... -
@Surfingthewave The thread started with the question of why sexuality is so moralized. The answer to that was survival, and cultural norms were cited as examples of survival. You seem to really be against these cultural norms, as you keep bringing up that alternatives exist. Yes, of course alternatives exist. And nobody said the current cultural norm is the right way to structure things. Nobody here is encouraging unconscious norms. We are merely stating that they exist. This has nothing to do with acceptance. Do you recognize that these norms exist? Well, if you do, there's not much to do beyond that. You seem to want to do something about it. Norm is defined as: "something that is usual, typical, or standard." A synonym for it is "average." Who are you to demand that the minority be the norm? Do you see how you are injecting your own needs and wants into your questions? Maybe look into that. If your question, then, is "why survival?" then make that explicit. Survival goes deep. Very, very, very, very deep. It's not merely a matter of having food, shelter, sex, and comfort. It's about who you think you are and maintaining that. You are clearly underestimating survival.
-
How is this ignorance? What makes you think he's criticizing from below? You realize it's fair game to criticize from above.
-
RendHeaven replied to Bryanbrax's topic in Spirituality, Consciousness, Awakening, Mysticism, Meditation, God
I recall this, yes. In my opinion, it's a gross bastardization of spirituality though. Even though they stepped out of the rationalist stage orange paradigm for 1 minute, they undermined the whole thing by having Rick shoot the guy and learn nothing from the experience. They essentially dismissed it as hallucination and used the "union of souls" as a means to make rick's killing funnier. Not that any of it matters. Like Leo says, don't get seduced -
Try this free home workout app: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=homeworkout.homeworkouts.noequipment&hl=en_US
-
Oh boy. Ok yeah that's a problem First of all, can you see why that's a problem? We can't have a conversation unless we agree on that haha.
-
I love this. Yes, yes, and yes. It's worth studying the unconsciousness of most "love" simply to not personally fall into this trap. Nothing's wrong! I was merely saying that "raising consciousness" indeed mends almost everything there is that you could call "problematic." Is that not fascinating? A universal band-aid with a 100% success rate! Don't take it for granted, this is worth pondering.