fortifyacacia3

Pretty crazy how identical they are, or interdependent. qualitative love is just goodness. Infinite love is what makes goodness absolute. To become directly conscious of Absolute Good one must become directly conscious of infinite love. Infinite love allows for you to see Good and visa versa. so Absolute Good and Absolute Love, different? Well not in the absolute sense. an absolute good awareness leaves you open to Absolute Love. once you have become aware of the infinitude of love coupled with an experience of the Absolute, you are open to Absolute Love. Am I butchering this?

I'd like to do more thinking on this, but here's a take. The infinite is referring to the continuity of something whereas the absolute is without opposite. I would say the infinite is still within the relative and the absolute houses the relative. Something can be infinite but still limited in other ways. This is why there are levels of infinity. In the article "Absolute and relative infinity" by Henry Carlson, he writes "a line is said to be infinite in length, but it is bound by by the plane in which it exists. That plane, itself, is infinite, but it is two-dimensional and would find itself bound by an infinite three-dimensional space. Being bound is being limited, though within that limit, there remains something which is infinite." Spitballing I'd say they're facets of Absolute Love or Love. I think Love is prior to Goodness. I think they can both be seen independently in an absolute sense, but Love is more encompassing and Goodness is within the faculties of Love despite that they do not need each other. I want to think more to put this into words, but perhaps love is powerful enough for the relative sense and with Goodness in an absolute grounding these are the two feet that absolute love stand on. Contemplating on these distinctions are actually fascinating, mental gymnastics or not. I encourage others with the interest!

I like alot of smaller channels. Johnathan Pageau is awesome. He gives insight on symbolism and talks about mythological structures encompassing reality. also insights from a Christian lense. Integral life/integral live of course, with Ken Wilber, Jeff Salzman, Corey Devo's, Keith Witt etc great personalities within the integral community. I AM - David Long an integral philosopher as well, gives interesting critiques of Ken Wilber and has a pretty unbiased synthesis minus a little materialism. Matt D'Avella A blogger that does self help 30 day challenges and stuff, pretty fun. Charisma on command is nice, talks about basic social skills, understanding body language etc that is pretty accurate. The Nemeton talks about alchemy/hermeticism and the occult, pretty good writer.

@ The new video on Authority

And just a symbol.

@Serotoninluv thank you

@Keyhole Thank you! wonder how he'd say it a second time.

dare you make another? ?

I'm curious to hear others articulate how constructing requires deconstruction. I feel like deconstruction is a facet in the very nature of thought structures. We act as so rarity creates value (desire aside) and in this way marginalized aspects of thought have always been valued. Discovering basic logic structures requires a certain turning over for testing. I mean really, anything we want to construct comes from a feeling of something being left out or something more to be. When we give advice, we think of what's being neglected. Or we think "what of this understanding are we leaving out?"

My questions don't get responseeeeeeessss

Then what is outside of mind and language and why aren't you doubting your doubt? Very simply, in all good and bad, call suffering all the bad. Can any good exist without the bad? Can we even experience love without hate? That's existing. Suffering is existing. Avoiding suffering fails, like hedonism. Ending suffering is not avoiding it. Awareness is language. Awareness is limitation. Awareness is suffering. We are the language that is suffering and it's a damn good thing, its confusing because we need to help others from a lower conscious suffering to a more conscious suffering

Type in "actualized suffering" on YouTube and those first 5 videos are a good start. They're shorter ones too. Then videos about life purpose, and then about ego

Taking on that perspective, 'nothing gained or lost', you have to take that language full circle. Duality is Nonduality. We aren't here to avoid dualities. Do you still brush your teeth? Why don't you go hurt someone? There's no freedom without law. A little further, outside of gain and loss, maybe we just do things because we have the choice.

I feel like he finds real objections to schools of thought but inflates them to all of spirituality. Leo's said before spirituality is nihlism actualized. Solipsism, pantheism, and many things that show certain aspects of the universe but still falls under their own limitations. He doesn't really integrate the nature of things but attributes a concept as a tell-all. Valid behind his efforts to debunk.

I think I heard Leo say something like this before, I've been trying to remember and I think I got it. Agnosticism is knowing that you don't know and spirituality is knowing is not knowing. Thoughts?

I'm not asking existentially.

I'm curious if all concepts of dualism can be attributed to Nonduality? In any sense of the word. I also feel like certain occult mysticism that talks about the dual nature of things infers to Nonduality, but tries to stick to it's nature of not speaking for it.

sounds best to vary between preparations but if I ate them a certain way more often how would that be? I know in Leos smoothie he says to go raw, but alot of sources say kale and spinach is healthier cooked.

What about that judgement of suffering? Does that cause suffering? I saw a definition of judgement as "opinion or conclusion". opinion~concept~ego it must be understood that we are bounded to rationality/ego in language and thought itself. The existence of ego must be reconciled. Maybe we can say suffering is aspects of ego (not no ego) but you're best off with Suffering = Suffering. And conclusions? things conclude. But the best ones leave room for more. Rationality limits itself but that does not mean there is no need for rationality, we need it to understand it's limits.

So we can run around asking why about everything else, it's awesome

Start inward. Check your Dynamics, Watch Leo's moralizing video about Should statements. Being green alone cannot fully help orange out, as we see commonly clash. Work all of yellow and below, let the glimpse's onward speak for themselves. God's in everything. Yellow will help you teach. Green VERSUS orange approach will look like some arbitrary rules said to give value. Not smoking and playing video games are not the key and that's what you need to see. Develop and assess yours and their stage orange. On your end understand that your not supposed to "get out" of orange but develop and utilize the aspects you are inevitably grounded in. Rationality is orange and has its pitfalls but is not useless. establish that you all want improvement but out of a love for life and going beyond gain. Gain for no gain. Paradoxes use rationality to transcend itself. They're also a good way of motivating that there's so much more to understand outside of understanding. Cultivate the mutual value to learn and love. Explain ego work and it's value and get them to grow an interest in recognizing their resistance to maintain identifications. Seeing that the roles and rules we adopt are limiting can be empowering. With some established principles they might want to gravitate towards things good for them. Health and detachment alone can easily keep you busy for the rest of your life so you don't need many concepts for this. Ask me questions because I think I left out things I wanted to say after this tangent. For the sake of practicality, you can still spend your time very valuably when you smoke weed. But as for all habits, whatever you do when your high determines how you want to spend your time. You could easily get high and read books all day, or do your homework at more or less equal quality. Honestly I see people all the time thinking when they quit smoking they are going to magically improve all other areas of their life, weeds role is interestingly arbitrary. However, down the spiritual path you will eventually want a detached relationship with weed. Silly to say there's never any benefit, but yeah the detached path won't have moments to or not to smoke, but they will be quite more spread out with no definite pattern. Detached isn't nonparticipant.

I really did need to hear that. Thank you. It is very different. often I like to see my interests towards learning very similar with my spirituality. I guess one comes from love and one is love.

Vulnerability is a beautiful thing. What might set a tone is an idea I had; Becoming better doesn't feel better because it means recognizing your faults more. I think a person is taken advantage of if those things pose a disadvantage to that person. I feel like from a spiritual perspective vulnerability could be nearly always positive, but my arational world tells me that is not fully the case. We could rationally think of this in many of ways. Yes, you don't want vulnerability to death etc. To what means does recontextualizing begin to get in the way of inquiry?

@ajasatya Wow, perfect thing to surface. In the back of my mind I knew I was asking the deepest question in a certain form. Kind of like asking how do you do ego work. I think I'm trying to make something practical in different ways than it should be. Nonetheless there is use in contemplating vulnerability

The devil is apart of us because God cannot otherwise be expressed. The ego is to be tempered, but also the inevitable tool.