tsuki

Hey Leo, my question is: Why is it important for us, egos, to blind ourselves to absolute love through survival? What purpose, function, does this blinding serve from the "point of view" of absolute love? How does this blinding serve the egos and absolute love itself?

Equating attention with narcissism? I am very sorry for your ego, man . You are an ego. The story you live out is important, and you are important too. The meta-narrative you're providing is no more valid than living out the story of being a loving person from the point of view of the absolute. Your aunt that is dying of cancer gave you the dog you've been playing with as a child. That dog has been severely mistreated and can't function properly among humans. You don't need that dog for anything because it so happens that you are a functioning, but lonely individual. Don't talk about other people. It's your dog. You are not talking about anything. You are playing neti-neti with me. Talk, for once. Woof!

Fortunately, when it comes to absolute truth - there is an end to seeking.

Don't give me that, you know a lot about me, I've been around for a while. Why don't you give me your best shot at describing truth for a change? It's easier to hide behind smoke screens and deny the stories of others. I know from experience. Any hierarchy that is built based on difference in consciousness. For example: you teaching your dog to navigate the human world safely. While it is certainly true that it may be necessary to resort to force in extreme situations, the force is a mean of communication and not the basis of hierarchy. The dog could easily kill you, but it isn't conscious of this possibility if it has been raised in captivity. You on the other hand teach the dog out of concern for its safety despite its misbehavior. You serve, it obeys and yet - you are equals despite being different and both of you preserve your dignity. And yes, the dog teaches you how to teach it, but it is not the point of the teaching. You could do pretty damn well without this knowledge, but the dog wouldn't. If it is the main paradigm from which the ego operates, it can easily become pathological. Even if your animal instincts kick in when you are in immediate threat and won't get yourself killed, it has the potential to create a lot of psychological distress and decline the quality of your life. It is true that disidentification from negative emotions is a great skill, but it is even better if one can prevent them by solving problems for the benefit of everybody involved. That requires active effort.

Thank you. Did realizing that open up the possibility for trust instead? Vulnerability and surrender are important, but sometimes you need to do the right thing. Pretending like everybody is absolutely equal denies that possibility, or at least creates a lot of inner conflict.

Why are you afraid of me?

I was just baring my throat.

You are very preoccupied with the fact that I'm 'creating dualities'. My suspicion is that you're trying to show to me that egos do that and therefore I am an ego. Bingo. You are an ego too and it is not an insult. Nondual truth cannot be communicated by creating dualities, but dualities can show you something you don't understand. It's like dropping a stone into a well and hearing no splash. Did you hear the splash of my post? That is not a difference. The idea that one can love people only if there are no ranks or hierarchies is mistaken. The one that is above serves the one that is below, the one that is below obeys the one that is above. You only think that because you think that all hierarchies are established through power and dominance. They are not. The absolute relativism you're swimming in leads to passivity. You can do things for the benefit of others despite their protests. I will ?. This comes right back to your passivity in absolute relativism. The end of the path is not a negation. Once you've negated all worldviews and doubted everything - you are exactly the right person to notice something undoubtable.

I'm sorry. It was very irresponsible of me. I'm blaming myself because I should have foreseen the consequences even if I didn't know any better. You, as the ego, do not stop in stillness for the sake of being still. You do so because you are enchanted with what you see. The contact with the Divine is like that. Even if Ego dies, it returns revitalized. You're defending your love from an imaginary adversary. Take your love and go for God, but God ain't it despite how amazing love is. There are cutthroat egos and there are loving egos, but enlightenment isn't that.

No. By talking to someone I can tell his blind spots, so can you. If that weren't the case, development wouldn't be possible. For example, your blind spot is that you are a solipsist. Enlightenment is not random, but people/egos don't cause it. Going through it feels like the whole world was precisely engineered for this very moment when you realize it. You feel like the chosen one, but you have given up everything that is special about you already. That is why it is called grace, but it is grace that is given to you from yourself because you can't distinguish yourself from the world. No. God does not use power to control what is already present. God has used his omnipotence to create the world out of love and this very love is the law that it obeys. It took its own power away in the act of creation. God's authority is freedom. It is up to you seek it and to recognize it. Seeing it is so difficult precisely because it is so fundamental that it is unthinkable for the truth to not be. Nonduality is not a philosophy of connection between beings. It is not a moral imperative to be a good person. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love the two of you, you are some of the best people that I know of. Keep being that person, we need more of you. That isn't, however, enlightenment. Recognizing that fact lets you seek somewhere else, without losing what you already are. That is the most profound thing about God. God is more you that you are yourself. Seeking it only enhances you.

That is why there should be teachers teaching other teachers. There are people that find 'you're not conscious enough' triggering and there are those that don't. If the chasm between the teacher and a student is too great, religions get started. See: Jesus.

Say what you have to say clearly. And what does Mandy think?

s word play.

Instead of picking on my responses come out of your shell and write something of your own. I'm not going to swordplay with you. There are infinite amounts of paths, but the truth is one.

You are conflating development of the ego with enlightenment. There are power-hungry, ruthless egos that want to trample on others' dignity for the sake of feeling superior. There are also loving egos that want to share everything and spread love to the point where they are blind to themselves. There is an infinite difference between the two, but it has little to do with enlightenment. The only link is that the more loving egos have more incentive to seek it.

Egos are inferior to one another.Enlightenment has nothing to do with it.

If it doesn't then I don't understand what we are discussing. I agree with the rest of your post.

Hmmm?

That is simply not true. If that was the case, then it wouldn't be possible to guide people towards the truth. No thought-story about the truth is it, but these stories can be of lesser or higher quality simply by the fact that they lay down less obstacles. You can be so direct about the truth that you would trigger physiological effects such as nausea and panic attacks.

And so what? That fact does not invalidate it. Your response tells me that you misunderstood what I wrote. I was not against conflict! I said why is it in the best interest of everybody that we say what we consider to be true and that this is going to create conflict. By exiling people that fundamentally disagree with you, you are trying to prevent conflict from resolving in a fruitful manner. You just kicked off winterknight and alienated his, let's say - fans. If you had a sincere conversation with him instead, you would have an opportunity to educate a lot of people and possibly help him too. If your teaching is truly higher than winterknight's, then these people are part way to understanding what you're trying to convey. With this kind of behavior, you are doing disservice to yourself. That is why there are hierarchies in spiritual schools and not all hierarchies are corrupt. The above serves those that are below and those below obey those that are above. They do so because it serves them. God does not rule with power, Leo.

No. Seeing the truth is not the end of the person's life, nor does it end the person's needs. By teaching the truth you do not refine your access to it, but find new ways of sharing/expressing it. Your proclivity to seek the emotion called love is an expression your ego. It has very little to do with love in the non-dual sense. Don't treat this statement as an affront, we need more egos like that.

@Leo Gura Exiling people because they contradict your highest teaching is criminal, Leo. If your teaching was truly the highest, it would include and transcend the teachings that are inferior. Even if @winterknight's teaching were inferior (and I am deliberately not taking a stance on this matter), then they are still vastly superior to what everyday people think. If what you say is true and you have reached some of the deepest layers of reality, then isn't it to be expected that average viewer wouldn't be able to relate to what you say? By explaining how your teaching includes and transcends inferior ones, you are actually teaching the highest truth without getting this territorial about it. Of course, it would be ideal if people that use your platform didn't shit on the plate they are eating from, but the responsibility to resolve these conflicts peacefully is on you. Even if someone is "deluded" and presents an inferior view, at the very least he does so to invalidate it, if the opportunity presents itself, and grow. While this responsibility may be too burdensome when it comes to random people or trolls, I think that you should treat advanced seekers differently. Right now, by resolving conflicts through exile, you are basically saying that all teachings that are incompatible with yours are worthless. As you supposedly possess the highest vantage point of us, it is your responsibility to build this bridge. Otherwise, you are just talking to yourself.

@d0ornokey I have. I am not and have never been against psychedelics as a part of the path, on the contrary. What I am against is wounded egos deciding to resolve their conflicts this way.

Let me add to this: It is admirable that the two of you have the courage to stand by what you know to be true, but it is outrageous that once given the opportunity to discuss your differences you resolve it this way. @winterknight is sincere when he calls psychedelics a distraction and is true to himself. Given the fact that he is at the very least an advanced seeker and a teacher, wouldn't it be appropriate @Leo Gura to dedicate some effort for a proper discussion? We could all benefit from this. You have undoubtedly earned a lot of trust here Leo and asking winterknight to leave undermines a lot of it. Conversely, it is admirable @winterknight that you are speaking your heart despite the possibility of being outcasted, but to accept it just like that contradicts your sincerity. Please, talk this through.

@Leo Gura @winterknight This is outrageous. I am thoroughly disappointed with the two of you. If awakening has many degrees, then using the word 'delusion' towards a person that is halfway awake is a profanity. We need more people that are 'deluded' like Leo or winterkinght, not less. Stop being territorial for God's sake!