Preety_India

Then I'm God.

So when I'm boiling water, am I boiling myself?

If going by your thinking, consciousness and reality become one and there is no reality. There's only one thing and that is consciousness. This consciousness is ever changing and evolving like a continuous stream. I'll call it superconsciousness. In this reality merges with consciousness. This is called Brahman in hinduism

Don't take your eyes for granted.

Don't be deceived by deception.

Then how do you explain cause and effect? Because for that you definitely need 2 separate entities.

This question actually confirms to me the duality of the universe.

Sometimes the simplest answer is the best one like the Occam's razor. The simplest answer can be that nature of reality is uncertain.. So we are uncertain if it's real or not.

I believe in the duality, in 2 fundamental symbiotic energies, similar to the school of thought of Empedocles of the law of opposites, similar to yin and yang, the self and the reflection, and Newton's third law of motion, every action has an equal and opposite reaction, cause and effect, this to me establishes the duality of the universe.

Two things can be in a symbiotic relationship with each other without being interchangeable and same. They can still be two separate entities that are mutually exclusive. A lot of people believe in duality. There is no such consensus that only non duality is the absolute truth.

Even if there is a symbiotic relationship between consciousness and reality, let's see who impacts more. Let's say that you are a general who is contemplating war and If everyone agreed, then war will happen. This is consciousness impacting reality. However as you can see, your decision to start a war was voluntary. Now take the same example and reverse it. You have been transported to a country while you slept, against your will and there is a war happening there. You're finding yourself dealing with the reality of war. This is reality impacting your consciousness. However this was involuntary. So in this symbiotic relationship, reality impacts consciousness in a involuntary manner whereas consciousness impacts reality in a voluntary manner. Thus by changing consciousness voluntarily and carefully its possible to change the nature of reality This is pretty much the basis of the law of attraction and the book secret.. Changing reality by changing thinking.

@IJB063 ok trying to remove the entities of mind, spirit, God etc and simplifying and breaking it down further. Now I only use consciousness. Within consciousness, reality exists. But independent of consciousness, there is nothing to prove whether it exists or not. An analogy of the relationship between consciousness and reality can be a mirror. You look into the mirror. You see yourself. Now turn a bit to the side of the mirror, hide from it. Can you be certain if the mirror shows your image now? Now to know that you will need to once again peep into this mirror. Which means the only way to know if the mirror reflects you is to look at the mirror. But when you are not in front of it you can't tell. Similarly reality can be a reflection of consciousness. It could be only be visible when the consciousness perceives or reflects it. But when it doesn't, nobody can tell. This means consciousness and reality are objects in one frame related to each other and inseparable. One cannot exist without the other and so the existence can't be proven or unproven since they are quantum bound.

@IJB063 Once again...... Cogito Ergo Sum. (to me I exist, because I think so, to you whether I exist or not doesn't matter and since you cannot prove my non existence or existence with solid proof, you cannot make an assumption on my existence, just like I cannot prove to you my existence, you cannot prove to me my non existence, that's why I exist if I think (only to me) , you exist if you think(only to you) , a summary of that quote) To me reality is in the eyes of the observer. Would you know if reality exists if you didn't exist? The answer is no. So reality exists as long as your mind exists. But when your mind stops thinking or dead, reality ceases to exist. This again bears the question, if reality is real. Notice that this is turning into a strange loop just like the question, who came first, egg or chicken? So one thing is established here that reality is an object relative to the perceived. One can't be sure of this object, once the perceiver is gone. In practical terms, reality does exist even if you are dead, because it exists to others. This is collective reality.again the same dilemma. What if everyone dies. Will this collective reality exist? The answer is uncertain. My take is. Since reality is context dependent, it's independent nature is a principle of uncertainty.

Cogito Ergo Sum

You're conflating object with tool. You're just strawmanning.

The fact that she is not respecting her friend by having a relationship with her friends son is very telling And the other fact being that she already had sex with him and he is still not sure about what is going on. That's a very bad part. Because when sexual intimacy is reached, most people are emotionally comfortable with each other. That's why it's called intimacy. Her signs are that of a person who is very reckless of boundaries or very manipulative and just using a younger person for fun and games, not having any regard for his emotional state or how this experience will affect him. I personally feel she is enjoying this, probably it makes her ego feel better that she is screwing a young guy, or else if she was really emotionally committed, wouldn't she already have confessed her feelings before or after sex. The fact that the guy is confused tells me that she is unbothered about emotional things and probably just toying around and might have done this with many young men in the pursuit of pleasure and ego satisfaction. This is a big drama she is creating. If the friend finds out I don't know how it's going to be. Maybe she doesn't care if she loses a friend and ends up emotionally damaging her son. I'm presuming that the mother doesn't know this and probably would not approve of this. A highly manipulative person would want to have a close friendship with a family member and an intimate relationship with another family member. This is usually seen in abusive relationships where the main purpose is control. Controlling an entire family is some sort of a fun for abusers. This is not active abuse. But it's a passive form of covert abuse that is not visible at first. This woman has to be extremely power hungry if she is not genuine about this relationship. The whole aspect of friendship with the mother and screwing the son at the same time gives a vibe of a very controlling power hungry person who derives pleasure out of knowing that they have everything at their fingertips. She is the likely one to call the shots. I mean just reverse this scenario. Let's say two older men. One has an extremely young daughter. The friend wants to screw this man's daughter when he is not around. Just think how creepy it sounds.

I'm of the same opinion. I don't mean to say abandon rationality.

Understanding the limits of rationality is transcending rationality. Once you do this, you don't rely on rationality anymore and look beyond. Most people who are rationalist are content with how rationality defines things or fails to define things. That's called living in a box

That's a normal relationship. Not a toxic relationship. Fighting and breaking up is fine. But feeling that you were hurt in a toxic relationship has more dangerous effects and its best to avoid them. Also this is not to say to someone to not explore the world of relationships. It's only a way of telling them to be safe. Because you know many people are vulnerable.

It does not mean being irrational. You're taking it the wrong way. It means having already understood the limits of rationality and going further and beyond. Like @Jacobsrw explains, there is only a point to which you can use rationalism to explain things. Beyond that point, rationality loses the power to understand or explain things. Compassion is just a quality. You don't need religion to be compassionate. But people who are religious have mystical and paranormal experiences example stigmata, these can't be explained by any rational science. Materialism and rationality cannot explain the Esoteric.

You are not getting the point. It's not about living with her for 40 years or 4 months. It's about not getting hurt in a relationship. Nobody enters a relationship with the idea that they are going to break it at some point unless the guy has a player mentality. It's about protecting emotions. He is young, just 20. Nobody wants their earliest experience of a relationship to be a memory of being taken advantage of by an older person. Relationship trauma takes time to heal further delaying the process of getting a reasonable and decent relationship. The advice you're giving can work for fuck and dump mentality but if a person is emotionally attached, a bad relationship has consequences on the psyche especially in younger age and the effects are long term, examples like hating women, unable to experience intimacy, developing a vengeance against women for the hurt caused. So the guy already needs to be aware of what he is getting into. Toxic relationships at early ages are the number one cause of relationship fatigue, intimacy and trust issues. That's why Leo said "don't kid yourself."

I'm a deeply emotional person and I don't want to be fucked up.

America has a ton of stage orange. A person like Sam Harris can easily cast a wide net and become popular with the crowd. But Sam Harris will fail terribly in a stage Green and Turquoise society. People like Sam Harris can become extremely popular in countries like America and India because most people in these countries are blue and orange, they focus on dogmatic thinking about race and religion and are very status and success oriented. America is a definition of Orange Success. These countries are far from green. And a man like Sam Harris that sells rationality is bound to impress the public. Because he says things that the general public in America are waiting to hear.. That's why Sam Harris is not very popular with the Leftists in America because a lot of the people on the side of the left are stage Green and they can see the holes in Harris's philosophies and thoughts. Sam Harris would have also become extremely popular in India if he was born here. He would have suited the stage blue and stage orange in Indians. Because people in these stages love the language of rationality since for them everything has to have a theory or explanation and some things need to be included and some things need to be excluded like a Mathematically accurate formula. But the universe has highly intelligent forces at work that work beyond the realm of physics and Mathematics or chemistry. Sam Harris is simply an intellectual like so many others. But he is not a profound wise awakened being.

@Amit I'm not projecting anything. I'm saying that you have a long way to go if you are still embedded in rationality. True Spiritualists have transcended that long ago. Sam Harris cannot understand the depth of irrationality and metaphysics. I don't follow Leo blindly. I have every book of Sam Harris. I learned nothing new from it that a young university student cannot write. Sam Harris regurgitates the same rational answers of logical reasoning and arguments that people did in the 1970s. He is not offering something new. Like Leo said just now, if you want to grow, you won't find that depth in Sam Harris's work. Because the universe cannot be explained by logic alone. Sam Harris is skeptical about a lot of things. He is not open to it. He talks about supporting mystical experiences but at the same time demonizes religions which are full of orthodox mystical experiences. A person like that doesn't grasp the complexity of things. Leo is very open minded, the most open minded so far, plus Leo is a careful balance of open mindedness and common sense. Therefore he doesn't take the garbage of conspiracy theories in the name of open mindedness. Leo's intuition is on point And nobody including me is a blind follower of Leo. Most have come to Leo after following a lot of other teachers. And Leo is high caliber.

@Amit For you to grasp whatever I'm saying, you'll need to step outside the box of rationality and you're not at that stage yet. You have a long way to go. When you go through phases and stages, nobody will matter to you other than Infinity and pure consciousness, the Brahman. At that point, Sam Harris will appear to you as an insignificant speck in the politics of humanity using rationality to shield the shadows of his ego You'll undergo ego transcendence. Then suddenly whatever Leo says here will immediately become understandable to you. Till then everything will look like simplistic criticism to you..